Who else should join Aaron Donald as a lock for Rams Mount Rushmore?

Who else should join Aaron Donald as a lock for Rams Mount Rushmore?

There are too many all-time greats in the history of the Rams for “The Search for Mount Ramsmore” to not be a series, instead of just one or two articles. In the first edition of the series, 99% of you voted that “YES” Aaron Donald should be on Rams Mount Rushmore.

Makes sense.

Not only is Donald arguably the greatest defensive tackle in the history of the sport, he’s also benefiting from timing and proximity to now. You’ve all watched Donald in real time and most of you have seen every game he’s ever played in. Proximity is hugely beneficial to Mount Rushmore, if not being the most important variable of all!

It’s easy to say that Jim Brown would be on the Browns Mount Rushmore, even though he played 60-70 years ago, because he remained a part of American culture and pop culture for the remainder of his life until last May. And because the Browns don’t have many other candidates.

But what about Norm Van Brocklin?

For any of you to have watched Van Brocklin play for the Rams from 1950-1957, making six straight Pro Bowls and leading the NFL in yards per attempt four times, you would need to be at least 70-80 years old. And some of you are and I would love to hear anything you have to say about the ‘50s Rams.

However, there are still a lot of factors weighing against fairly judging Van Brocklin’s career, even if you did watch him play:

• The sands of time and fading memories
• The context of having to compare the quarterback position in 1955 vs. comparing how to play the position in 2023, and the evolution of the sport itself
• Trying to convince others that what you saw from Van Brocklin was more impressive than what you saw from Kurt Warner...or even Marc Bulger...because again, the sport is so much different now

Finally, is there anything more relevant to this conversation than the lack of available media resources in Van Brocklin’s era compared to the 80s, 90s, 00s, 10s, and 20s?

If I told you to do a research paper on Adam Archuleta, you could probably watch most, if not all of the games he ever played in. Which wasn’t that many games.

Even if you were 10 years old in 1952, did you have a good view of Norm Van Brocklin? How many games did you actually see yourself? How many did you see in person and how many did you see on TV? Was the TV footage high quality? Were there replays? Close ups? Different angles?

You’ve seen Aaron Donald’s career from so many different angles that you could probably watch his entire career from one side, then do it again from another, then another, then another. That’s like...4 different ways to watch Aaron Donald’s career because of the era he played in.

In 70 years, will Aaron Donald’s accomplishments from today appear as minimized as the NFL’s best players from the 50s feel right now?

So that’s one reason that I don’t expect very many of you to put Van Brocklin or Bob Waterfield, both Hall of Fame quarterbacks, on your Rams Mount Rushmore. I expect Kurt Warner (53 career games with the Rams) to get way more votes than Van Brocklin (104 career games with the Rams) and Waterfield (91 career games with the Rams). And in the first post of this series, that was evident:

In another poll, 41% of you said that Warner was the most deserving member of the GSOT to be on the Rams Mount Rushmore.

That was followed by Isaac Bruce at 20%, Marshall Faulk at 19%, and Orlando Pace at 14%. Which is interesting too, given that 68% of you voted that Faulk deserves to be on the Rushmore. So by one process, it would seem like fans want Warner, Faulk, and Bruce to all be on the Mount Rushmore.

Except that you only get four and that would seemingly not be everyone’s top-4: What about Deacon Jones? Orlando Pace? Sean McVay? (44% of you voted yes for McVay)

Eric Dickerson? Jackie Slater? Merlin Olsen? Jack Youngblood? Cooper Kupp? Matthew Stafford?

Let’s go back to the GSOT

So you’ve already kind of voted that Kurt Warner should be on the Mount Rushmore because if he can get more votes than every other member of the GSOT, does that say all it needs to say? Not more votes—TWICE AS MANY VOTES.

Yet in the comments of the article, Kurt Warner appeared often, but hardly close to 100% of the time.

You know who else did? Deacon Jones.

So let’s put it to a vote because I think that Warner vs. Deacon is going to be a better showdown than Kurt vs. anyone in the GSOT.