Underachievers or Lords of the Rings?
By Rams Nation's Don Ackerman
Underachievers or Lords of the Rings? 2003 Will Tell
2003 will determine if Kurt Warner and Marshall Faulk are all-time underachievers
or champions. With one ring on his finger, is Kurt Warner another Tom Brady?
Is Marshall Faulk another Jamal Lewis? Since 1999, the Rams have been called
"The Greatest Show on Turf" but they have not lived up to the moniker.
Though they have been to two Super Bowls, they have one ring. 2003 might change
all that.
With two MVPs in Warner and Faulk and a good supporting cast, the 2003 Rams
can make a run for glory or drop to NFL footnotes. There's no doubt that Marshall
Faulk will go down in history as one of the better backs in NFL history. Today,
Kurt Warner is a great story for the children but is not an NFL example of a
super QB. However, the Rams' place in history is unfinished, unwritten. Thus
far, they had their surprise season, their setback (2000 and 2002), and their
heartbreak (2001). After all that, they are not feared and not renowned for
more than one year of their glory.
History is a coy mistress, you don't know what she thinks of you today but
when it's too late, your place will well be known. I can't help but wonder about
the 2003 Rams. If they falter and cannot recapture the Lombardi Trophy, will
they be known as underachievers? With the NFL dynasties in exile, the opportunity
is there. The Throne has never been so poorly guarded: the NFL crown never so
easy to capture. With Lord of the Rings coming out on DVD tomorrow, I can't
help but think of how the ring of NFL power is there. It's right there! Well
within grasp are the power and the glory. It's so attainable!!
Saint Louis fans know the time is right. The Buccaneers are worthy defenders
of the title but they are not invincible. The AFC has its share of contenders
and pretenders. The NFC is full of teams who could be up-and-coming (Eagles,
49ers, Packers) or those same clubs could be off-and-going. Only two thousand
and three will tell.
Are the Rams a dynasty? Another title will make them the 2000 edition of an
NFL dynasty. Another championship-less season makes them no more historical
than the New England Patriots or the Baltimore Ravens. More than likely those
clubs will be as heralded as Super Bowl V's Baltimore Colts or Super Bowl XI's
New York Giants.
I'm guessing one asterisk next to their names is not enough. No, I bet Kurt
hopes for glory beyond 1999, for the sweet taste of victory in the 2000's. I'm
sure Marshall wants one more ring in his jewelry box.
Maybe 2003 is the year. Maybe this is the season that the Rams join their annals
of greatness. If not, they will likely be known as all-time underachievers.
Ram on,
Don