PDA

View Full Version : Childress sticks up for AD in AD vs.LT debate



snowinapril
09-03-2009, 01:33 PM
Vikings' Childress sticks up for his guy in Peterson-vs.-Tomlinson debate (http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8125559b&template=without-video-with-comments&confirm=true)

Septemper 3rd, 2009

Associated Press


EDEN PRAIRIE, Minn. -- In the debate over who's the best running back in the NFL, Minnesota Vikings coach Brad Childress agrees with Jim Brown, not LaDainian Tomlinson.

Childress came to Adrian Peterson's defense Wednesday after Tomlinson took a few shots at the Vikings' running back in a recent Los Angeles Times story.

When asked about it at practice Wednesday, an unusually emphatic Childress said he has seen Peterson improve "by leaps and bounds" in all phases of the game since he entered the league in 2007.

snowinapril
09-03-2009, 01:38 PM
L.T., the truth hurts: Peterson clearly is the best running back in the NFL (http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d81255478&template=without-video-with-comments&confirm=true)

Septemper 3rd, 2009

By Vic Carucci
|
NFL.com
Senior Columnist


Sorry, LaDainian Tomlinson, but you've got it wrong.

Adrian Peterson is, in fact, the best running back in the NFL. You're not.

At one time, you held that distinction. At one time, the comparisons between you and Jim Brown, the all-time gold standard for the position, were legitimate. At one time, you carried both the football and the fortunes of the San Diego Chargers

battleaxe4cheese
09-03-2009, 01:44 PM
The best in the business, no doubt about it. The bane of linebackers.

triedandtruevikesfan
09-03-2009, 01:49 PM
haha, thats is actually a pretty funny article.
I need to show that to the Bears fans that think that Forte is the best back in the league.

idahovikefan7
09-03-2009, 01:50 PM
Ya LT is just jealous and flat out delusional.....

tarkenton10
09-03-2009, 01:52 PM
That is a shame that LT would do that.
Now he looks jealous and Egotistical.
He should let others speak for him and if his name does not come up then it might be that AP is the best.

Prophet
09-03-2009, 01:56 PM
I think Childress is retarded for getting sucked into the discussion.
AD cannot hold a candle to LT until he learns to block effectivley and catch passes out of the backfield.

I like AD's response:


"The only thing I try to do is try to be the best, most complete player that I can be. And that means during the offseason if there's things that I can improve on, that make my game better, that will help the team, then those are things that I do. So that's what I'm going to continue to focus on and continue to do, and I'll let everyone else voice their opinion."

Zeus
09-03-2009, 01:57 PM
"idahovikefan7" wrote:


Ya LT is just jealous and flat out delusional.....


What part is delusional?
The part where he speaks about how the Vikings have to take AD off the field on 3rd downs?
How he's not yet there on his route running?

LOL.


Hey, I think AD is the best RB in the league.
But LT is correct in his observations.


=Z=

battleaxe4cheese
09-03-2009, 01:57 PM
"tarkenton10" wrote:


That is a shame that LT would do that.
Now he looks jealous and Egotistical.
himHe should let others speak for and if his name does not come up then it might be that AP is the best.





Best thing one can do is check ego at the door. ;)

snowinapril
09-03-2009, 01:57 PM
AD's comments in the article were like....... this isn't about me, I just do what I can to get better and make MY TEAM better.

Stay classy SanDiego!
;)

battleaxe4cheese
09-03-2009, 01:59 PM
That's one thing I really like about AP, he's humble and he let's his actions speak for him. He does set lofty goals for himself, but that's not bragging or being arrogant, it's just setting your sights high and going for it. Big difference. :o

Freakout
09-03-2009, 02:05 PM
LT may be able to do more things.....

Take the NBA from 2000-2003 (for those that watch it) as an example.
During those years you had players with very diverse games (Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, etc..) but none of them was better than Shaquille O'neal.
Shaq didn't have many moves.
He wasn't going to shoot jumpers against you and would often air ball a free throw.
However, what he did do he was flat out dominate at it and would make an opponent focus their entire defense around stopping him.

That is how I look at AD.

He can no doubt still improve but right now it takes 8-9 guys in the box just to slow him down.
Like I said during the last preseason game.
Tackling him is like trying to bring down a horse.
You cannot hit him high and tackle him.
Your only chance is to go low.

snowinapril
09-03-2009, 02:11 PM
The key in this debate is that LT has multiple seasons to back him up...
when AD has as many season, then we can compare.

1.) Career so far
2.) Age
3.) health
4.) Career at their respective ends


If this debate is about the here and now, then AD wins.

Freya
09-03-2009, 02:36 PM
"snowinapril" wrote:


L.T., the truth hurts: Peterson clearly is the best running back in the NFL (http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d81255478&template=without-video-with-comments&confirm=true)

Septemper 3rd, 2009

By Vic Carucci
|
NFL.com
Senior Columnist


Sorry, LaDainian Tomlinson, but you've got it wrong.

Adrian Peterson is, in fact, the best running back in the NFL. You're not.

At one time, you held that distinction. At one time, the comparisons between you and Jim Brown, the all-time gold standard for the position, were legitimate. At one time, you carried both the football and the fortunes of the San Diego Chargers


Wow. How things change in a matter of a couple of years, in the NFL.

My condolences to LaDainian.
:D

BleedinPandG
09-03-2009, 02:36 PM
"Prophet" wrote:


I think Childress is Challenged Hillbilly Lover'd for getting sucked into the discussion.
AD cannot hold a candle to LT until he learns to block effectivley and catch passes out of the backfield.

I like AD's response:


"The only thing I try to do is try to be the best, most complete player that I can be. And that means during the offseason if there's things that I can improve on, that make my game better, that will help the team, then those are things that I do. So that's what I'm going to continue to focus on and continue to do, and I'll let everyone else voice their opinion."




I was in the same boat as you but then I re-read it... it was almost like Chilly was saying "duh, I'm going to say my football player is best".
I'm not sure he was directly saying AD was better than LT... I think he was just saying "of course I'm going to think my player is the best".
Maybe I misread it but I got the impression the author was twisting a bit for effect.

Prophet
09-03-2009, 02:39 PM
"BleedinPandG" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


I think Childress is Challenged Hillbilly Lover'd for getting sucked into the discussion.
AD cannot hold a candle to LT until he learns to block effectivley and catch passes out of the backfield.

I like AD's response:


"The only thing I try to do is try to be the best, most complete player that I can be. And that means during the offseason if there's things that I can improve on, that make my game better, that will help the team, then those are things that I do. So that's what I'm going to continue to focus on and continue to do, and I'll let everyone else voice their opinion."




I was in the same boat as you but then I re-read it... it was almost like Chilly was saying "duh, I'm going to say my football player is best".
I'm not sure he was directly saying AD was better than LT... I think he was just saying "of course I'm going to think my player is the best".
Maybe I misread it but I got the impression the author was twisting a bit for effect.


Probably true.
Your explanation of Childress' response is more plausible.

Sponge Bob Square Pants - Patrick finds his head (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MSjnqmt19k#)

Freya
09-03-2009, 02:40 PM
"Prophet" wrote:


I think Childress is Challenged Hillbilly Lover'd for getting sucked into the discussion.
AD cannot hold a candle to LT until he learns to block effectivley and catch passes out of the backfield.

I like AD's response:


"The only thing I try to do is try to be the best, most complete player that I can be. And that means during the offseason if there's things that I can improve on, that make my game better, that will help the team, then those are things that I do. So that's what I'm going to continue to focus on and continue to do, and I'll let everyone else voice their opinion."




Yes, I like that response too.
It sounded kinda similar to TJacks comments on that other thread. Humble, not braggish.
;D

Prophet
09-03-2009, 02:50 PM
"Freya" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


I think Childress is Challenged Hillbilly Lover'd for getting sucked into the discussion.
AD cannot hold a candle to LT until he learns to block effectivley and catch passes out of the backfield.

I like AD's response:


"The only thing I try to do is try to be the best, most complete player that I can be. And that means during the offseason if there's things that I can improve on, that make my game better, that will help the team, then those are things that I do. So that's what I'm going to continue to focus on and continue to do, and I'll let everyone else voice their opinion."




Yes, I like that response too.
It sounded kinda similar to TJacks comments on that other thread. Humble, not braggish.
;D



Yes, both seem humble.
One has something to be humble about and the other does not.

BleedinPandG
09-03-2009, 02:57 PM
"Prophet" wrote:


"Freya" wrote:


"Prophet" wrote:


I think Childress is Challenged Hillbilly Lover'd for getting sucked into the discussion.
AD cannot hold a candle to LT until he learns to block effectivley and catch passes out of the backfield.

I like AD's response:


"The only thing I try to do is try to be the best, most complete player that I can be. And that means during the offseason if there's things that I can improve on, that make my game better, that will help the team, then those are things that I do. So that's what I'm going to continue to focus on and continue to do, and I'll let everyone else voice their opinion."




Yes, I like that response too.
It sounded kinda similar to TJacks comments on that other thread. Humble, not braggish.
;D



Yes, both seem humble.
One has something to be humble about and the other does not.


Until he stops fumbling, learns to pass block, and can route great routes and catch the ball he has plenty to be humble about... Peterson may be the best NFL player in the league with the ball in his hands but when it's not, he has some things to improve on.

i_bleed_purple
09-03-2009, 02:58 PM
lol, it was my understanding that its not even AD vs. LT anymore, its more AD vs. Portis, Deangelo, etc.
LT's way down everyones list now.

PackSux!
09-03-2009, 06:16 PM
LT is just jealous.
I guess I would be also when a rookie runs for 296 against your team.


The way the article is worded is what I find Funny.
LT WAS the best back in the league but not anymore, actually LT better be worried about his own job since you see Sproles come in on third down alot for LT.

vikinggreg
09-03-2009, 08:10 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"idahovikefan7" wrote:


Ya LT is just jealous and flat out delusional.....


What part is delusional?
The part where he speaks about how the Vikings have to take AD off the field on 3rd downs?
How he's not yet there on his route running?

LOL.


Hey, I think AD is the best RB in the league.
But LT is correct in his observations.


=Z=


IMHO the part were he doesn't recognize he hasn't stayed healthy, his team uses the franchise tag on Sproles because they are concerned about his health and declining numbers, and he's spouting off about someone else.
If your not healthy you ain't doin nothin, like in the playoffs against Pittsburgh.

Ranger
09-03-2009, 10:28 PM
When healthy, LT is a better back.
Doesn't cough the ball up as much, better hands out of the backfield, blocks better, etc.
He's right about that.

The difference is that AD is already a better runner than LT2 ever was (which most people, even Vikes fans, don't appreciate...because Tomlinson was AMAZING) and is still a baby.
He'll learn to pass block and catch out of the backfield.

Personally, I think Tomlinson is an amazing, great player and a better all around back right now.


Still, Peterson is a once in a franchise kind of back.
He has the record for most yards in a game and he's still a baby.
It's amazing.

soonerbornNbred
09-04-2009, 02:22 AM
As of today single game record is held by a certain player in purple....he can set more every time he steps on the field, He is hands down the best RB in the NFL, others might be more complete backs....but if we are talking Runningback hes the man...if your talking blocking back not so much, receiving back would like to see more....it is great to see his coach have his back
LT looks pathetic in this situation, really thought he was better than this :'(

Articnv
09-04-2009, 03:25 AM
Just rember AP had 8 to 10 men in the box
when he got the rushing crown,
how many times did LT
face that
many men in the box?

Sajid28
09-04-2009, 07:59 AM
ap is the best hands down. i luv APs response to all of this. it shows this guy is modest but also has class.

Chazz
09-04-2009, 10:49 PM
"Articnv" wrote:


Just rember AP had 8 to 10 men in the box

when he got the rushing crown,
how many times did LT
face that
many men in the box?


Seriously? Really? You are really trying to say that LT wasn't the main focus of all defenses for most of his career...huh...I like AD as much as anyone, and think he is the best RB right now, but to think LT was a product of a team or system is simply laughable.

When AD stops fumbling, and becomes a threat in the passing game, then he will be a better back then LT in his prime. Until then...well....

soonerbornNbred
09-04-2009, 11:27 PM
Today, tomorrow, next week, next year.....you have 1 spot on your team to start a RB if you have anyone in the HISTORY of the NFL to select LT included

Ill take AD, pretty sure Zygi and Bradley would too....the best thing for them he was had at a bargain

Jim Brown and Emmit Smith would take AD also now thats sayin somethin

vegasvike
09-05-2009, 03:45 AM
"Chazz" wrote:


"Articnv" wrote:


Just rember AP had 8 to 10 men in the box

when he got the rushing crown,
how many times did LT
face that
many men in the box?


Seriously? Really? You are really trying to say that LT wasn't the main focus of all defenses for most of his career...huh...I like AD as much as anyone, and think he is the best RB right now, but to think LT was a product of a team or system is simply laughable.
When AD stops fumbling, and becomes a threat in the passing game, then he will be a better back then LT in his prime. Until then...well....


Agreed. LT has been the man for SD seems like forever I mean even with Gates there it seems like he has always had the target on his back.
But as far as PURE runners AD has it, LT may be one of the most complete in history tho.
IMHO

StillPurple
09-11-2009, 01:45 PM
Ok, I hope you all take this the right way. Don't get me wrong, I love Adrian Peterson. He is the "Man" ! He went to Oklahama, having grown up in Texas and wanting to go to Texas and then be a Cowboy
:P, because his dad was in prison in Oklahoma, and the only games they showed on TV in Oklahoma prison were OU games, so "All Day" went to OU. I have a ton of respect for that. I love the guy...

... and yet...

Some lingering questions:
a. Can you be the nr. 1 running back in the NFL, if you sit on 3rd down, and who block well and catch very well
?
b. If you can't catch or block well, can you be nr. 1 ?

Is Peterson better than backs like Jones-Drew and Tomlinson and Forte, who are in on 3rd down ?

Please don't kill me for posting this. If you prove I am wrong, I will gladly admit it...

gagarr
09-11-2009, 01:47 PM
Yes

DiehardVikesFan
09-11-2009, 01:49 PM
"StillPurple" wrote:


Ok, I hope you all take this the right way. Don't get me wrong, I love Adrian Peterson. He is the "Man" ! He went to Oklahama, having grown up in Texas and wanting to go to Texas and then be a Cowboy
:P, because his dad was in prison in Oklahoma, and the only games they showed on TV in Oklahoma prison were OU games, so "All Day" went to OU. I have a ton of respect for that. I love the guy...

... and yet...

Some lingering questions:
a. Can you be the nr. 1 running back in the NFL, if you sit on 3rd down, and who block well and catch very well
?
b. If you can't catch or block well, can you be nr. 1 ?

Is Peterson better than backs like Jones-Drew and Tomlinson and Forte, who are in on 3rd down ?

Please don't kill me for posting this. If you prove I am wrong, I will gladly admit it...


If you could pick one running back who would you pick?

Minniman
09-11-2009, 01:56 PM
Not yet.

Does it really matter how someone ranks Peterson?
Does the hype win games?
Did Earl Campbell and Eric Dickerson win Superbowls?

The best back this year isn't the best back from two years ago, and he won't likely be the best back two seasons from now.
It's a hard game.

Mr Anderson
09-11-2009, 02:06 PM
Nr is not an abbreviation for number. It would be #1 or No. 1. Sorry to be a grammar nazi about that, I think I've been good about it lately it's just that one got to me for some reason.


And I think his skills as a runner are strong enough to make up for his supposed lack of hands(not that he's had much opportunity to catch the ball) and other faults.

Zeus
09-11-2009, 02:07 PM
"StillPurple" wrote:


Please don't kill me for posting this. If you prove I am wrong, I will gladly admit it...


According to my chest, he's #28.

=Z=

StillPurple
09-11-2009, 03:07 PM
Put it this way, you are a defense, and it is the final drive, and you have to stop their RB. Who would you least like to play against in that situation ? I can think of a few running backs: Westbrook, Brandon Jacobs, Jones-Drew, Turner, Forte, Marion Barber. Peterson would also be hard to stop, but I think he is easier to take out of his game than the others.

Of course, I also think that that will change with Favre in purple, becuase to be fair to Peterson, defenses last year just stacked the box against us.

oaklandzoo24
09-11-2009, 03:14 PM
YES!!!

He is without a doubt the #1 back.
He is in a league of his own the way he runs.
Nobody today compares at all, and the only player who ever ran with as much shear power was Earl Campbell who did not have nearly as much speed and elusiveness.

As for catching, I think he's just fine, especially for a RB.


Blocking...he could be better but he is improving.
And the way he runs, does plenty to make up for it.
He is a PHENOM.


Answer this simple question... Would you trade AD for any RB in this league?
The answer is without a doubt...no.

ultravikingfan
09-11-2009, 03:17 PM
So, if you sit on 3rd sometimes...you are not #1?

Please watch more football and other teams this year.
Then come back and ask the same question.

BloodyHorns82
09-11-2009, 05:35 PM
"Mr" wrote:


Nr is not an abbreviation for number. It would be #1 or No. 1. Sorry to be a grammar nazi about that, I think I've been good about it lately it's just that one got to me for some reason.


And I think his skills as a runner are strong enough to make up for his supposed lack of hands(not that he's had much opportunity to catch the ball) and other faults.


You should have had a space before the first parenthesis.
If you're going to pick on somebody, you better have an absolutely perfect post.
:P
;D

battleaxe4cheese
09-11-2009, 05:50 PM
I think this question is best suited for Al Harris. I think you should ask him. He's the best player in the NFL. It's not even debatable.

dfosterf
09-11-2009, 06:02 PM
(Not mentioning who won that game that 8000 + - PPO members gleefully reveled in the mow-down AD put on Al to the exclusion of the score itself)

Yes.
AD #1 back in NFL. No one close, imo.

Man, I can't stand that guy.
;D

battleaxe4cheese
09-11-2009, 06:06 PM
"dfosterf" wrote:


(Not mentioning who won that game that 8000 + - PPO members gleefully reveled in the mow-down AD put on Al to the exclusion of the score itself)

Yes.
AD #1 back in NFL. No one close, imo.

Man, I can't stand that guy.

;D






come on man, you gotta admit that was a entertaining hit ;)

dfosterf
09-11-2009, 06:10 PM
"battleaxe4cheese" wrote:


"dfosterf" wrote:


(Not mentioning who won that game that 8000 + - PPO members gleefully reveled in the mow-down AD put on Al to the exclusion of the score itself)

Yes.
AD #1 back in NFL. No one close, imo.

Man, I can't stand that guy.

;D






come on man, you gotta admit that was a entertaining hit ;)


I admit nothing.
...Small revision.
I admit that I understand why everyone here liked it so much, and further admit that I can see why you found it entertaining.
That's the best I can do...I'm trying to be helpful. :D

battleaxe4cheese
09-11-2009, 06:14 PM
+1 :)

Articnv
09-11-2009, 06:16 PM
the running back main rsponsibility is to the run the ball .
AD is the best at
bar none.
He is the number 1 back.

ItalianStallion
09-11-2009, 06:20 PM
Peterson only come off on third down because we have an excellent pass-catching/pass-blocking RB in Chester Taylor.
If he wasn't on the roster I'm sure Peterson would play every down.

dfosterf
09-11-2009, 06:24 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


Peterson only come off on first down because we have an excellent pass-catching/pass-blocking RB in Chester Taylor.
If he wasn't on the roster I'm sure Peterson would play every down.


...not particularly fond of him either.

battleaxe4cheese
09-11-2009, 06:26 PM
"dfosterf" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


Peterson only come off on first down because we have an excellent pass-catching/pass-blocking RB in Chester Taylor.
If he wasn't on the roster I'm sure Peterson would play every down.


...not particularly fond of him either.





For a packer fan your alright. ;)

StillPurple
09-11-2009, 06:38 PM
I make the distinction between "pure runner" and "running back". Tomlinson is a running back because he catches and blocks. Westbrook is a running back, and so is Jones-Drew. Larry Johnson is a runner, and so is Peterson.

On the other hand, I do remember hearing Tampa Bay D-coordinator Monte Kiffin, one of the best defensive coordinators of the past 20 years, say last year that Peterson was the best running back he had ever seen, and that is saying something !

tastywaves
09-11-2009, 06:54 PM
"StillPurple" wrote:


Put it this way, you are a defense, and it is the final drive, and you have to stop their RB. Who would you least like to play against in that situation ? I can think of a few running backs: Westbrook, Brandon Jacobs, Jones-Drew, Turner, Forte, Marion Barber. Peterson would also be hard to stop, but I think he is easier to take out of his game than the others.

Of course, I also think that that will change with Favre in purple, becuase to be fair to Peterson, defenses last year just stacked the box against us.


Put it this way, if you're putting together a team and you could pick any RB in the league who would
you take?
I sure as hell wouldn't take Westbrook, Jacobs, Jones-Drew, Turner, Forte or Barber over AD.
AD hands down is the first guy I pick for RB and the first player I take to start my team.

ejmat
09-11-2009, 07:17 PM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"StillPurple" wrote:


Put it this way, you are a defense, and it is the final drive, and you have to stop their RB. Who would you least like to play against in that situation ? I can think of a few running backs: Westbrook, Brandon Jacobs, Jones-Drew, Turner, Forte, Marion Barber. Peterson would also be hard to stop, but I think he is easier to take out of his game than the others.

Of course, I also think that that will change with Favre in purple, becuase to be fair to Peterson, defenses last year just stacked the box against us.


Put it this way, if you're putting together a team and you could pick any RB in the league who would
you take?
I sure as hell wouldn't take Westbrook, Jacobs, Jones-Drew, Turner, Forte or Barber over AD.
AD hands down is the first guy I pick for RB and the first player I take to start my team.


We would pick AP because we love the guy.
Just like Atlanta would pick Turner or Carolina may pick Williams.
I love Peterson and think he is amazing.
He is the most explosive back in football imo.
However a RB has more duties than just running.
A RB should be successful at picking up blitzes and blocking for his QB.
AP hasn't proven he can do that consistently yet.
He also hasn't proven he can be a big threat on screens yet.
I am optimistic he can be better because in game 3 of preseason he looked good coming out of the backfield.
I can't in good conscious say he is the #1 RB in the NFL because others do better at blocking and coming out of the backfield.
Some of that may be because of the 8 and 9 man fronts the Vikings have seen so once that stops I think I could be a better judge.

However, if he does get better at catching screens AP would be by far the #1 back in the NFL.
For right now I think he has competition with being the best back on the team.
Chester Taylor is better at 2 out of the main 3 categories of a RB.
Taylor is also a great back. He's not as explosive as AP but definitely holds his own.
I think AP is the better pure runner but as far as RB I think it's debatable.

Purple Floyd
09-11-2009, 07:26 PM
Yes

tastywaves
09-11-2009, 07:31 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"StillPurple" wrote:


Put it this way, you are a defense, and it is the final drive, and you have to stop their RB. Who would you least like to play against in that situation ? I can think of a few running backs: Westbrook, Brandon Jacobs, Jones-Drew, Turner, Forte, Marion Barber. Peterson would also be hard to stop, but I think he is easier to take out of his game than the others.

Of course, I also think that that will change with Favre in purple, becuase to be fair to Peterson, defenses last year just stacked the box against us.


Put it this way, if you're putting together a team and you could pick any RB in the league who would
you take?
I sure as hell wouldn't take Westbrook, Jacobs, Jones-Drew, Turner, Forte or Barber over AD.
AD hands down is the first guy I pick for RB and the first player I take to start my team.


We would pick AP because we love the guy.
Just like Atlanta would pick Turner or Carolina may pick Williams.
I love Peterson and think he is amazing.
He is the most explosive back in football imo.
However a RB has more duties than just running.
A RB should be successful at picking up blitzes and blocking for his QB.
AP hasn't proven he can do that consistently yet.
He also hasn't proven he can be a big threat on screens yet.
I am optimistic he can be better because in game 3 of preseason he looked good coming out of the backfield.
I can't in good conscious say he is the #1 RB in the NFL because others do better at blocking and coming out of the backfield.
Some of that may be because of the 8 and 9 man fronts the Vikings have seen so once that stops I think I could be a better judge.

However, if he does get better at catching screens AP would be by far the #1 back in the NFL.
For right now I think he has competition with being the best back on the team.
Chester Taylor is better at 2 out of the main 3 categories of a RB.
Taylor is also a great back. He's not as explosive as AP but definitely holds his own.
I think AP is the better pure runner but as far as RB I think it's debatable.


He has the biggest impact on the game of any of the RB's in the league.
Are you saying you wouldn't take him above the others...purple shades aside?
Does he have weaknesses?
Sure, but his ability to change the game on any given play along with the respect he gets from defenses is far and beyond what the other backs recieve.
If I can't have AD, I would be just as happy with Chester as I would with Jones-Drew, Williams or Forte.

I would also say that most of the NFL world would agree that AD is the best back in football right now.

Purple Floyd
09-11-2009, 07:35 PM
I could name 296 reasons why he is the best..

ejmat
09-11-2009, 08:23 PM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"StillPurple" wrote:


Put it this way, you are a defense, and it is the final drive, and you have to stop their RB. Who would you least like to play against in that situation ? I can think of a few running backs: Westbrook, Brandon Jacobs, Jones-Drew, Turner, Forte, Marion Barber. Peterson would also be hard to stop, but I think he is easier to take out of his game than the others.

Of course, I also think that that will change with Favre in purple, becuase to be fair to Peterson, defenses last year just stacked the box against us.


Put it this way, if you're putting together a team and you could pick any RB in the league who would
you take?
I sure as hell wouldn't take Westbrook, Jacobs, Jones-Drew, Turner, Forte or Barber over AD.
AD hands down is the first guy I pick for RB and the first player I take to start my team.


We would pick AP because we love the guy.
Just like Atlanta would pick Turner or Carolina may pick Williams.
I love Peterson and think he is amazing.
He is the most explosive back in football imo.
However a RB has more duties than just running.
A RB should be successful at picking up blitzes and blocking for his QB.
AP hasn't proven he can do that consistently yet.
He also hasn't proven he can be a big threat on screens yet.
I am optimistic he can be better because in game 3 of preseason he looked good coming out of the backfield.
I can't in good conscious say he is the #1 RB in the NFL because others do better at blocking and coming out of the backfield.
Some of that may be because of the 8 and 9 man fronts the Vikings have seen so once that stops I think I could be a better judge.

However, if he does get better at catching screens AP would be by far the #1 back in the NFL.
For right now I think he has competition with being the best back on the team.
Chester Taylor is better at 2 out of the main 3 categories of a RB.
Taylor is also a great back. He's not as explosive as AP but definitely holds his own.
I think AP is the better pure runner but as far as RB I think it's debatable.


He has the biggest impact on the game of any of the RB's in the league.
Are you saying you wouldn't take him above the others...purple shades aside?
Does he have weaknesses?
Sure, but his ability to change the game on any given play along with the respect he gets from defenses is far and beyond what the other backs recieve.

If I can't have AD, I would be just as happy with Chester as I would with Jones-Drew, Williams or Forte.

I would also say that most of the NFL world would agree that AD is the best back in football right now.


This is a difficult topic to put purple shades aside.
All I'm saying is AP still has some maturing to do as a rounded RB.
Yes he is explosive and I was and still am happy as hell the Vikings drafted him.
However, I'm also a realist.
There is more to a RB than just pure running.
Everything you say is true about how he can change a game and the respect he has from defenses.
There are plenty of RBs in the league that has the respect of the defenses.
Let me talk about his flaws.
He hasn't been able to block consistently.
He hasn't proven to be a big threat out of the backfield.
He also put the ball on the turf 9 times last year not counting 2 he got away with because the replays were inconclusive and not counting the one that went against TJ.


I am in no way saying the guy is a bad RB.
He is great!
He is the most explosive back in the NFL.
However, he still has some maturing to do.
You can compare backs and I will say AP is the best pur runner out of all of them.
But look at other characteristics.
Matt Forte can block, catch screens.
Mike Turner can block and catch screens.
Brandon Jacobs is a great blocker and catches screens.
They may not be as explosive as AP but they definitely get the job done.
If you talk about all around backs, AP is not the best in the league and to me it is debatable if he is the best on the team.

That being said, I love the fact the Vikings have AP.
I wouldn't want to give him up because I know he can still earn to be an effective blocker and pass catcher.
But until then it is difficult for me to say he is the #1 RB in the NFL.

Redmption
09-11-2009, 08:59 PM
All I know is that Nike Combat gear commercial is bad a$$!!

soonerbornNbred
09-11-2009, 10:20 PM
Whats funny is all these website posters sayin AD needs to work on screens and blocking....but Jim Brown, Emmit Smith "Guys that were in the game" say he is special...heck if you DONT see that, not sure what your watchin....the 296 was somethin special it wasnt a one time thing....if he woulda had a decent QB those 1st 2 years no tellin
I guarantee chester is as good as the others your talkin about
MT MJD
but they would be ridding the pine behind AD also...all this crap about him not catchin passes,
if they give him a try poor CT may never get off the bench...and CT is a very very good RB
Heres to AD staying healthy so he can fulfill his wants, because his needs are met

Its nice to have what you want, but want what you have

ejmat
09-11-2009, 10:53 PM
"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


Whats funny is all these website posters sayin AD needs to work on screens and blocking....but Jim Brown, Emmit Smith "Guys that were in the game" say he is special...heck if you DONT see that, not sure what your watchin....the 296 was somethin special it wasnt a one time thing....if he woulda had a decent QB those 1st 2 years no tellin
I guarantee chester is as good as the others your talkin about
MT MJD
but they would be ridding the pine behind AD also...all this crap about him not catchin passes,
if they give him a try poor CT may never get off the bench...and CT is a very very good RB
Heres to AD staying healthy so he can fulfill his wants, because his needs are met

Its nice to have what you want, but want what you have


Not sure where I stated he wasn't special.
In fact I stated he's downright amazing.
But take your shades off for a second and see that he isn't perfect.
He is a great freaking back.
I didn't say he wasn't.
But he still has maturing to do.
If you can't see that than you don't see it.
I do see it and I call it as I see it.
Just because he's a Viking and he's a great player doesn't mean he doesn't have flaws.
Right now his flaws are blocking, catching out of the backfield and fumbling.
Am I wrong?

Sajid28
09-11-2009, 11:23 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


Whats funny is all these website posters sayin AD needs to work on screens and blocking....but Jim Brown, Emmit Smith "Guys that were in the game" say he is special...heck if you DONT see that, not sure what your watchin....the 296 was somethin special it wasnt a one time thing....if he woulda had a decent QB those 1st 2 years no tellin
I guarantee chester is as good as the others your talkin about
MT MJD
but they would be ridding the pine behind AD also...all this crap about him not catchin passes,
if they give him a try poor CT may never get off the bench...and CT is a very very good RB
Heres to AD staying healthy so he can fulfill his wants, because his needs are met

Its nice to have what you want, but want what you have


Not sure where I stated he wasn't special.
In fact I stated he's downright amazing.
But take your shades off for a second and see that he isn't perfect.
He is a great freaking back.
I didn't say he wasn't.
But he still has maturing to do.
If you can't see that than you don't see it.
I do see it and I call it as I see it.
Just because he's a Viking and he's a great player doesn't mean he doesn't have flaws.
Right now his flaws are blocking, catching out of the backfield and fumbling.
Am I wrong?


very good point.. but i think the questions you should be asking is, compare AP to all those other backs. Would you chose those other backs over AP? Would you rather have AP or Burner Turner, MJD, LT, Forte?that should answer the question if he is the best back in the NFL.

tastywaves
09-11-2009, 11:37 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


Whats funny is all these website posters sayin AD needs to work on screens and blocking....but Jim Brown, Emmit Smith "Guys that were in the game" say he is special...heck if you DONT see that, not sure what your watchin....the 296 was somethin special it wasnt a one time thing....if he woulda had a decent QB those 1st 2 years no tellin
I guarantee chester is as good as the others your talkin about
MT MJD
but they would be ridding the pine behind AD also...all this crap about him not catchin passes,
if they give him a try poor CT may never get off the bench...and CT is a very very good RB
Heres to AD staying healthy so he can fulfill his wants, because his needs are met

Its nice to have what you want, but want what you have


Not sure where I stated he wasn't special.
In fact I stated he's downright amazing.
But take your shades off for a second and see that he isn't perfect.
He is a great freaking back.
I didn't say he wasn't.
But he still has maturing to do.
If you can't see that than you don't see it.
I do see it and I call it as I see it.
Just because he's a Viking and he's a great player doesn't mean he doesn't have flaws.
Right now his flaws are blocking, catching out of the backfield and fumbling.
Am I wrong?


He's not perfect, but he is the best.
That was the question.


Are you saying that you would prefer Forte or one of the other's over AD?
If not, then just agree that he is the best, or say that you think one of the other guys is better.
Being a jack of all trades is great, but being a true game changer is better.
You'll have a hard time convincing me that anybody gets the same respect by defenses as Peterson.
LT you could argue a few years ago, but the rest of these guys not so much.

Can AD get better?
Sure.
Does he have faults?
Sure.
But that's a different question.

ultravikingfan
09-11-2009, 11:45 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


Peterson only come off on third down because we have an excellent pass-catching/pass-blocking RB in Chester Taylor.
If he wasn't on the roster I'm sure Peterson would play every down.


Good point.

But the originator of this post fails to realize this.


I am sorry, but this a thread that is really going nowhere.
The premise is aweful and not much thought was put into this at all.

snowinapril
09-12-2009, 12:04 AM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


Peterson only come off on third down because we have an excellent pass-catching/pass-blocking RB in Chester Taylor.
If he wasn't on the roster I'm sure Peterson would play every down.


Good point.

But the originator of this post fails to realize this.


I am sorry, but this a thread that is really going nowhere.
The premise is aweful and not much thought was put into this at all.


This is just the same thread as the article thread about LT saying that AD was overrated.

We should tell this to LT......
"The only reason we don't have AD out there on 3rd down is because of CT, and you are just lucky that Sproles isn't as good as CT or you would be sitting on 3rd down too."

kevoncox
09-12-2009, 01:07 AM
"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


Peterson only come off on third down because we have an excellent pass-catching/pass-blocking RB in Chester Taylor.
If he wasn't on the roster I'm sure Peterson would play every down.


Good point.

But the originator of this post fails to realize this.


I am sorry, but this a thread that is really going nowhere.
The premise is aweful and not much thought was put into this at all.


What does that have to do with that LT was saying...
If AD > than CT in pass catching skills he would be on the field.
LT is > CT in pass catching skills.

ejmat
09-12-2009, 10:14 AM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


Whats funny is all these website posters sayin AD needs to work on screens and blocking....but Jim Brown, Emmit Smith "Guys that were in the game" say he is special...heck if you DONT see that, not sure what your watchin....the 296 was somethin special it wasnt a one time thing....if he woulda had a decent QB those 1st 2 years no tellin
I guarantee chester is as good as the others your talkin about
MT MJD
but they would be ridding the pine behind AD also...all this crap about him not catchin passes,
if they give him a try poor CT may never get off the bench...and CT is a very very good RB
Heres to AD staying healthy so he can fulfill his wants, because his needs are met

Its nice to have what you want, but want what you have


Not sure where I stated he wasn't special.
In fact I stated he's downright amazing.
But take your shades off for a second and see that he isn't perfect.
He is a great freaking back.
I didn't say he wasn't.
But he still has maturing to do.
If you can't see that than you don't see it.
I do see it and I call it as I see it.
Just because he's a Viking and he's a great player doesn't mean he doesn't have flaws.
Right now his flaws are blocking, catching out of the backfield and fumbling.
Am I wrong?


He's not perfect, but he is the best.
That was the question.



Are you saying that you would prefer Forte or one of the other's over AD?
If not, then just agree that he is the best, or say that you think one of the other guys is better.
Being a jack of all trades is great, but being a true game changer is better.
You'll have a hard time convincing me that anybody gets the same respect by defenses as Peterson.
LT you could argue a few years ago, but the rest of these guys not so much.

Can AD get better?
Sure.
Does he have faults?
Sure.
But that's a different question.




How is that a different question?
Don't you think these questions tie into it?
These questions are ALL part of being a RB.
A RB is not just about running the ball.
They have other duties.
Yes he is the best pure runner and most explosive.
That in itself does not make him the best RB in football.
If people want me to answer the question of would I pick someone else.
I would give major consideration to picking Michael Turner over Peterson.
He has proven to be more proven in every RB category there is than AP at this point.
However I do think AP will mature at the other categories and at that time I will have no problem labeling him as the best back.
Until then knowing what I know about the position since I played there for several years he still has maturing to do where others do not.

Do you think Turner gets respect?
Do you think Jacobs gets respect?
Do you think Williams gets respect?
They all do.


It doesn't mean I hate AP.
I love having the guy as a Viking.
However, purple shades aside, he has faults which prevents me from labeling him as the #1 back in football when others are better at the all around RB position.

ultravikingfan
09-12-2009, 11:15 AM
"kevoncox" wrote:


"ultravikingfan" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


Peterson only come off on third down because we have an excellent pass-catching/pass-blocking RB in Chester Taylor.
If he wasn't on the roster I'm sure Peterson would play every down.


Good point.

But the originator of this post fails to realize this.


I am sorry, but this a thread that is really going nowhere.
The premise is aweful and not much thought was put into this at all.


What does that have to do with that LT was saying...
If AD > than CT in pass catching skills he would be on the field.
LT is > CT in pass catching skills.



Quote his post if you are referring to his.


Don't quote mine.

It's Forum Posting 101.

Mr Anderson
09-12-2009, 11:34 AM
Why does LT feel the need to actually comment on that? Just say "That's not up to me to decide."

It should be coaches, teammates, and fans commenting on this. Not the players themselves.

singersp
09-12-2009, 11:42 AM
I'm guessing when Childress is sticking up for a player this time, it's not being labeled as damage control?

Am I right?

dfosterf
09-12-2009, 03:34 PM
"singersp" wrote:


I'm guessing when Childress is sticking up for a player this time, it's not being labeled as damage control?

Am I right?


Yes, but it could have been an accident.
:P

Sorry.

I'll go back to the Puker board now.
;D

tastywaves
09-12-2009, 03:39 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


Whats funny is all these website posters sayin AD needs to work on screens and blocking....but Jim Brown, Emmit Smith "Guys that were in the game" say he is special...heck if you DONT see that, not sure what your watchin....the 296 was somethin special it wasnt a one time thing....if he woulda had a decent QB those 1st 2 years no tellin
I guarantee chester is as good as the others your talkin about
MT MJD
but they would be ridding the pine behind AD also...all this crap about him not catchin passes,
if they give him a try poor CT may never get off the bench...and CT is a very very good RB
Heres to AD staying healthy so he can fulfill his wants, because his needs are met

Its nice to have what you want, but want what you have


Not sure where I stated he wasn't special.
In fact I stated he's downright amazing.
But take your shades off for a second and see that he isn't perfect.
He is a great freaking back.
I didn't say he wasn't.
But he still has maturing to do.
If you can't see that than you don't see it.
I do see it and I call it as I see it.
Just because he's a Viking and he's a great player doesn't mean he doesn't have flaws.
Right now his flaws are blocking, catching out of the backfield and fumbling.
Am I wrong?


He's not perfect, but he is the best.
That was the question.



Are you saying that you would prefer Forte or one of the other's over AD?
If not, then just agree that he is the best, or say that you think one of the other guys is better.
Being a jack of all trades is great, but being a true game changer is better.
You'll have a hard time convincing me that anybody gets the same respect by defenses as Peterson.
LT you could argue a few years ago, but the rest of these guys not so much.

Can AD get better?
Sure.
Does he have faults?
Sure.
But that's a different question.




How is that a different question?
Don't you think these questions tie into it?
These questions are ALL part of being a RB.
A RB is not just about running the ball.
They have other duties.
Yes he is the best pure runner and most explosive.
That in itself does not make him the best RB in football.
If people want me to answer the question of would I pick someone else.
I would give major consideration to picking Michael Turner over Peterson.
He has proven to be more proven in every RB category there is than AP at this point.
However I do think AP will mature at the other categories and at that time I will have no problem labeling him as the best back.
Until then knowing what I know about the position since I played there for several years he still has maturing to do where others do not.

Do you think Turner gets respect?
Do you think Jacobs gets respect?
Do you think Williams gets respect?
They all do.


It doesn't mean I hate AP.
I love having the guy as a Viking.
However, purple shades aside, he has faults which prevents me from labeling him as the #1 back in football when others are better at the all around RB position.


EJ, I'm not trying to rile you up.
The question was simply is Peterson the #1 back in the NFL.
I say yes he is.
You say he needs to improve on his all around game, but you don't say whether you think he is the #1 back or not in the NFL.
If you think Turner is the better back right now, then its okay to say it.
I disagree with you, but it doesn't mean I'm right.
I personally don't think AD's pass catching is that bad but he can definitely improve on his pass blocking and fumbling.
If I'm running an offense, the first guy I pick for my team is AD, not Turner.
If AD is gone, then maybe I go Turner next.

Nobody is calling you a hater or an AD non believer.
Nobody is saying that Williams, Jacobs or Turner don't demand respect.
I just don't think they get as much attention as AD.
Part of that may be because we have been so weak in the passing game, but in a lot of ways, that only makes AD's accomplishments even greater.

ejmat
09-12-2009, 04:04 PM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


Whats funny is all these website posters sayin AD needs to work on screens and blocking....but Jim Brown, Emmit Smith "Guys that were in the game" say he is special...heck if you DONT see that, not sure what your watchin....the 296 was somethin special it wasnt a one time thing....if he woulda had a decent QB those 1st 2 years no tellin
I guarantee chester is as good as the others your talkin about
MT MJD
but they would be ridding the pine behind AD also...all this crap about him not catchin passes,
if they give him a try poor CT may never get off the bench...and CT is a very very good RB
Heres to AD staying healthy so he can fulfill his wants, because his needs are met

Its nice to have what you want, but want what you have


Not sure where I stated he wasn't special.
In fact I stated he's downright amazing.
But take your shades off for a second and see that he isn't perfect.
He is a great freaking back.
I didn't say he wasn't.
But he still has maturing to do.
If you can't see that than you don't see it.
I do see it and I call it as I see it.
Just because he's a Viking and he's a great player doesn't mean he doesn't have flaws.
Right now his flaws are blocking, catching out of the backfield and fumbling.
Am I wrong?


He's not perfect, but he is the best.
That was the question.



Are you saying that you would prefer Forte or one of the other's over AD?
If not, then just agree that he is the best, or say that you think one of the other guys is better.
Being a jack of all trades is great, but being a true game changer is better.
You'll have a hard time convincing me that anybody gets the same respect by defenses as Peterson.
LT you could argue a few years ago, but the rest of these guys not so much.

Can AD get better?
Sure.
Does he have faults?
Sure.
But that's a different question.




How is that a different question?
Don't you think these questions tie into it?
These questions are ALL part of being a RB.
A RB is not just about running the ball.
They have other duties.
Yes he is the best pure runner and most explosive.
That in itself does not make him the best RB in football.
If people want me to answer the question of would I pick someone else.
I would give major consideration to picking Michael Turner over Peterson.
He has proven to be more proven in every RB category there is than AP at this point.
However I do think AP will mature at the other categories and at that time I will have no problem labeling him as the best back.
Until then knowing what I know about the position since I played there for several years he still has maturing to do where others do not.

Do you think Turner gets respect?
Do you think Jacobs gets respect?
Do you think Williams gets respect?
They all do.


It doesn't mean I hate AP.
I love having the guy as a Viking.
However, purple shades aside, he has faults which prevents me from labeling him as the #1 back in football when others are better at the all around RB position.


EJ, I'm not trying to rile you up.
The question was simply is Peterson the #1 back in the NFL.
I say yes he is.
You say he needs to improve on his all around game, but you don't say whether you think he is the #1 back or not in the NFL.
If you think Turner is the better back right now, then its okay to say it.
I disagree with you, but it doesn't mean I'm right.
I personally don't think AD's pass catching is that bad but he can definitely improve on his pass blocking and fumbling.
If I'm running an offense, the first guy I pick for my team is AD, not Turner.
If AD is gone, then maybe I go Turner next.

Nobody is calling you a hater or an AD non believer.
Nobody is saying that Williams, Jacobs or Turner don't demand respect.
I just don't think they get as much attention as AD.
Part of that may be because we have been so weak in the passing game, but in a lot of ways, that only makes AD's accomplishments even greater.




Thanks for the clarification.
If you look at the last statement in my previous post I think that sums up the fact that I don't believe he is the best RB in the NFL.
Will he be?
I believe he will be.
But before I can in good conscious label him as such he needs to mature in those other categories of a RBs duties (screens, blocking and holding onto the football).
He is a great back.
He is explosive and a game changer.
He just needs to improve on those other RB duties before I can deem him as the best RB in the NFL.
As of right now a RB like Michael Turner has proven to be the more reliable back.
There's nothing against AP at all.
When I compare, I like to look at the entire picture.
Not just one aspect.
Is he the best RB in the NFL?
I don't think he is right now.
Is he good?
No.
He is great!
But he is not the best imo when yo look at all aspects of a RB.
I thought I have been pretty clear on that since this thread started.

It is okay to disagree.
That's what's great about these threads.
There is a lot of intelligent banter on what we all believe.
To be honest I thought I was answering the question but people kept saying I wasn't.
I apologize for any miscommunications.

KrackerJack
09-12-2009, 04:54 PM
AD is a better pure runner, LT is more complete overall, there's not much else to it.
He's absolutely right when he says AD's pass blocking & receiving aren't as good as his.
They're both great backs in their own way, besides that, who cares?
This is a team sport.

hx38596
09-12-2009, 07:41 PM
"StillPurple" wrote:


Ok, I hope you all take this the right way. Don't get me wrong, I love Adrian Peterson. He is the "Man" ! He went to Oklahama, having grown up in Texas and wanting to go to Texas and then be a Cowboy
:P, because his dad was in prison in Oklahoma, and the only games they showed on TV in Oklahoma prison were OU games, so "All Day" went to OU. I have a ton of respect for that. I love the guy...

... and yet...

Some lingering questions:
a. Can you be the nr. 1 running back in the NFL, if you sit on 3rd down, and who block well and catch very well
?
b. If you can't catch or block well, can you be nr. 1 ?

Is Peterson better than backs like Jones-Drew and Tomlinson and Forte, who are in on 3rd down ?

Please don't kill me for posting this. If you prove I am wrong, I will gladly admit it...


I think it has more to do with CT needing carries/catches and resting AD.
Why not do it on 3rd down when you have an excellent recieving and blocking back in CT.

Who by the way is making more money than AD.
What happened to AD holding out this year whining and demanding a new contract?

tastywaves
09-13-2009, 03:47 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:




Whats funny is all these website posters sayin AD needs to work on screens and blocking....but Jim Brown, Emmit Smith "Guys that were in the game" say he is special...heck if you DONT see that, not sure what your watchin....the 296 was somethin special it wasnt a one time thing....if he woulda had a decent QB those 1st 2 years no tellin
I guarantee chester is as good as the others your talkin about
MT MJD
but they would be ridding the pine behind AD also...all this crap about him not catchin passes,
if they give him a try poor CT may never get off the bench...and CT is a very very good RB
Heres to AD staying healthy so he can fulfill his wants, because his needs are met

Its nice to have what you want, but want what you have


Not sure where I stated he wasn't special.
In fact I stated he's downright amazing.
But take your shades off for a second and see that he isn't perfect.
He is a great freaking back.
I didn't say he wasn't.
But he still has maturing to do.
If you can't see that than you don't see it.
I do see it and I call it as I see it.
Just because he's a Viking and he's a great player doesn't mean he doesn't have flaws.
Right now his flaws are blocking, catching out of the backfield and fumbling.
Am I wrong?


He's not perfect, but he is the best.
That was the question.



Are you saying that you would prefer Forte or one of the other's over AD?
If not, then just agree that he is the best, or say that you think one of the other guys is better.
Being a jack of all trades is great, but being a true game changer is better.
You'll have a hard time convincing me that anybody gets the same respect by defenses as Peterson.
LT you could argue a few years ago, but the rest of these guys not so much.

Can AD get better?
Sure.
Does he have faults?
Sure.
But that's a different question.




How is that a different question?
Don't you think these questions tie into it?
These questions are ALL part of being a RB.
A RB is not just about running the ball.
They have other duties.
Yes he is the best pure runner and most explosive.
That in itself does not make him the best RB in football.
If people want me to answer the question of would I pick someone else.
I would give major consideration to picking Michael Turner over Peterson.
He has proven to be more proven in every RB category there is than AP at this point.
However I do think AP will mature at the other categories and at that time I will have no problem labeling him as the best back.
Until then knowing what I know about the position since I played there for several years he still has maturing to do where others do not.

Do you think Turner gets respect?
Do you think Jacobs gets respect?
Do you think Williams gets respect?
They all do.


It doesn't mean I hate AP.
I love having the guy as a Viking.
However, purple shades aside, he has faults which prevents me from labeling him as the #1 back in football when others are better at the all around RB position.


EJ, I'm not trying to rile you up.
The question was simply is Peterson the #1 back in the NFL.
I say yes he is.
You say he needs to improve on his all around game, but you don't say whether you think he is the #1 back or not in the NFL.
If you think Turner is the better back right now, then its okay to say it.
I disagree with you, but it doesn't mean I'm right.
I personally don't think AD's pass catching is that bad but he can definitely improve on his pass blocking and fumbling.
If I'm running an offense, the first guy I pick for my team is AD, not Turner.
If AD is gone, then maybe I go Turner next.

Nobody is calling you a hater or an AD non believer.
Nobody is saying that Williams, Jacobs or Turner don't demand respect.
I just don't think they get as much attention as AD.
Part of that may be because we have been so weak in the passing game, but in a lot of ways, that only makes AD's accomplishments even greater.




Thanks for the clarification.
If you look at the last statement in my previous post I think that sums up the fact that I don't believe he is the best RB in the NFL.
Will he be?
I believe he will be.
But before I can in good conscious label him as such he needs to mature in those other categories of a RBs duties (screens, blocking and holding onto the football).
He is a great back.
He is explosive and a game changer.
He just needs to improve on those other RB duties before I can deem him as the best RB in the NFL.
As of right now a RB like Michael Turner has proven to be the more reliable back.
There's nothing against AP at all.
When I compare, I like to look at the entire picture.
Not just one aspect.
Is he the best RB in the NFL?
I don't think he is right now.
Is he good?
No.
He is great!
But he is not the best imo when yo look at all aspects of a RB.
I thought I have been pretty clear on that since this thread started.

It is okay to disagree.
That's what's great about these threads.
There is a lot of intelligent banter on what we all believe.
To be honest I thought I was answering the question but people kept saying I wasn't.
I apologize for any miscommunications.


Care to reconsider?
;)

soonerbornNbred
09-13-2009, 03:51 PM
Take AD over any back in the past 10 years

Purple Floyd
09-13-2009, 04:02 PM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:






Whats funny is all these website posters sayin AD needs to work on screens and blocking....but Jim Brown, Emmit Smith "Guys that were in the game" say he is special...heck if you DONT see that, not sure what your watchin....the 296 was somethin special it wasnt a one time thing....if he woulda had a decent QB those 1st 2 years no tellin
I guarantee chester is as good as the others your talkin about
MT MJD
but they would be ridding the pine behind AD also...all this crap about him not catchin passes,
if they give him a try poor CT may never get off the bench...and CT is a very very good RB
Heres to AD staying healthy so he can fulfill his wants, because his needs are met

Its nice to have what you want, but want what you have


Not sure where I stated he wasn't special.
In fact I stated he's downright amazing.
But take your shades off for a second and see that he isn't perfect.
He is a great freaking back.
I didn't say he wasn't.
But he still has maturing to do.
If you can't see that than you don't see it.
I do see it and I call it as I see it.
Just because he's a Viking and he's a great player doesn't mean he doesn't have flaws.
Right now his flaws are blocking, catching out of the backfield and fumbling.
Am I wrong?


He's not perfect, but he is the best.
That was the question.


Are you saying that you would prefer Forte or one of the other's over AD?
If not, then just agree that he is the best, or say that you think one of the other guys is better.
Being a jack of all trades is great, but being a true game changer is better.
You'll have a hard time convincing me that anybody gets the same respect by defenses as Peterson.
LT you could argue a few years ago, but the rest of these guys not so much.

Can AD get better?
Sure.
Does he have faults?
Sure.
But that's a different question.




How is that a different question?
Don't you think these questions tie into it?
These questions are ALL part of being a RB.
A RB is not just about running the ball.
They have other duties.
Yes he is the best pure runner and most explosive.
That in itself does not make him the best RB in football.
If people want me to answer the question of would I pick someone else.
I would give major consideration to picking Michael Turner over Peterson.
He has proven to be more proven in every RB category there is than AP at this point.
However I do think AP will mature at the other categories and at that time I will have no problem labeling him as the best back.
Until then knowing what I know about the position since I played there for several years he still has maturing to do where others do not.

Do you think Turner gets respect?
Do you think Jacobs gets respect?
Do you think Williams gets respect?
They all do.


It doesn't mean I hate AP.
I love having the guy as a Viking.
However, purple shades aside, he has faults which prevents me from labeling him as the #1 back in football when others are better at the all around RB position.


EJ, I'm not trying to rile you up.
The question was simply is Peterson the #1 back in the NFL.
I say yes he is.
You say he needs to improve on his all around game, but you don't say whether you think he is the #1 back or not in the NFL.
If you think Turner is the better back right now, then its okay to say it.
I disagree with you, but it doesn't mean I'm right.
I personally don't think AD's pass catching is that bad but he can definitely improve on his pass blocking and fumbling.
If I'm running an offense, the first guy I pick for my team is AD, not Turner.
If AD is gone, then maybe I go Turner next.

Nobody is calling you a hater or an AD non believer.
Nobody is saying that Williams, Jacobs or Turner don't demand respect.
I just don't think they get as much attention as AD.
Part of that may be because we have been so weak in the passing game, but in a lot of ways, that only makes AD's accomplishments even greater.




Thanks for the clarification.
If you look at the last statement in my previous post I think that sums up the fact that I don't believe he is the best RB in the NFL.
Will he be?
I believe he will be.
But before I can in good conscious label him as such he needs to mature in those other categories of a RBs duties (screens, blocking and holding onto the football).
He is a great back.
He is explosive and a game changer.
He just needs to improve on those other RB duties before I can deem him as the best RB in the NFL.
As of right now a RB like Michael Turner has proven to be the more reliable back.
There's nothing against AP at all.
When I compare, I like to look at the entire picture.
Not just one aspect.
Is he the best RB in the NFL?
I don't think he is right now.
Is he good?
No.
He is great!
But he is not the best imo when yo look at all aspects of a RB.
I thought I have been pretty clear on that since this thread started.

It is okay to disagree.
That's what's great about these threads.
There is a lot of intelligent banter on what we all believe.
To be honest I thought I was answering the question but people kept saying I wasn't.
I apologize for any miscommunications.


Care to reconsider?
;)


That was quite an exclamation mark he put on the second half.

tastywaves
09-13-2009, 04:05 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:








Whats funny is all these website posters sayin AD needs to work on screens and blocking....but Jim Brown, Emmit Smith "Guys that were in the game" say he is special...heck if you DONT see that, not sure what your watchin....the 296 was somethin special it wasnt a one time thing....if he woulda had a decent QB those 1st 2 years no tellin
I guarantee chester is as good as the others your talkin about
MT MJD
but they would be ridding the pine behind AD also...all this crap about him not catchin passes,
if they give him a try poor CT may never get off the bench...and CT is a very very good RB
Heres to AD staying healthy so he can fulfill his wants, because his needs are met

Its nice to have what you want, but want what you have


Not sure where I stated he wasn't special.
In fact I stated he's downright amazing.
But take your shades off for a second and see that he isn't perfect.
He is a great freaking back.
I didn't say he wasn't.
But he still has maturing to do.
If you can't see that than you don't see it.
I do see it and I call it as I see it.
Just because he's a Viking and he's a great player doesn't mean he doesn't have flaws.
Right now his flaws are blocking, catching out of the backfield and fumbling.
Am I wrong?


He's not perfect, but he is the best.
That was the question.



Are you saying that you would prefer Forte or one of the other's over AD?
If not, then just agree that he is the best, or say that you think one of the other guys is better.
Being a jack of all trades is great, but being a true game changer is better.
You'll have a hard time convincing me that anybody gets the same respect by defenses as Peterson.
LT you could argue a few years ago, but the rest of these guys not so much.

Can AD get better?
Sure.
Does he have faults?
Sure.
But that's a different question.




How is that a different question?
Don't you think these questions tie into it?
These questions are ALL part of being a RB.
A RB is not just about running the ball.
They have other duties.
Yes he is the best pure runner and most explosive.
That in itself does not make him the best RB in football.
If people want me to answer the question of would I pick someone else.
I would give major consideration to picking Michael Turner over Peterson.
He has proven to be more proven in every RB category there is than AP at this point.
However I do think AP will mature at the other categories and at that time I will have no problem labeling him as the best back.
Until then knowing what I know about the position since I played there for several years he still has maturing to do where others do not.

Do you think Turner gets respect?
Do you think Jacobs gets respect?
Do you think Williams gets respect?
They all do.


It doesn't mean I hate AP.
I love having the guy as a Viking.
However, purple shades aside, he has faults which prevents me from labeling him as the #1 back in football when others are better at the all around RB position.


EJ, I'm not trying to rile you up.
The question was simply is Peterson the #1 back in the NFL.
I say yes he is.
You say he needs to improve on his all around game, but you don't say whether you think he is the #1 back or not in the NFL.
If you think Turner is the better back right now, then its okay to say it.
I disagree with you, but it doesn't mean I'm right.
I personally don't think AD's pass catching is that bad but he can definitely improve on his pass blocking and fumbling.
If I'm running an offense, the first guy I pick for my team is AD, not Turner.
If AD is gone, then maybe I go Turner next.

Nobody is calling you a hater or an AD non believer.
Nobody is saying that Williams, Jacobs or Turner don't demand respect.
I just don't think they get as much attention as AD.
Part of that may be because we have been so weak in the passing game, but in a lot of ways, that only makes AD's accomplishments even greater.




Thanks for the clarification.
If you look at the last statement in my previous post I think that sums up the fact that I don't believe he is the best RB in the NFL.
Will he be?
I believe he will be.
But before I can in good conscious label him as such he needs to mature in those other categories of a RBs duties (screens, blocking and holding onto the football).
He is a great back.
He is explosive and a game changer.
He just needs to improve on those other RB duties before I can deem him as the best RB in the NFL.
As of right now a RB like Michael Turner has proven to be the more reliable back.
There's nothing against AP at all.
When I compare, I like to look at the entire picture.
Not just one aspect.
Is he the best RB in the NFL?
I don't think he is right now.
Is he good?
No.
He is great!
But he is not the best imo when yo look at all aspects of a RB.
I thought I have been pretty clear on that since this thread started.

It is okay to disagree.
That's what's great about these threads.
There is a lot of intelligent banter on what we all believe.
To be honest I thought I was answering the question but people kept saying I wasn't.
I apologize for any miscommunications.


Care to reconsider?

;)


That was quite an exclamation mark he put on the second half.


Never ceases to amaze me.
He looked like Chuck Norris taken on a pack of ninjas.

C Mac D
09-13-2009, 05:58 PM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:






Whats funny is all these website posters sayin AD needs to work on screens and blocking....but Jim Brown, Emmit Smith "Guys that were in the game" say he is special...heck if you DONT see that, not sure what your watchin....the 296 was somethin special it wasnt a one time thing....if he woulda had a decent QB those 1st 2 years no tellin
I guarantee chester is as good as the others your talkin about
MT MJD
but they would be ridding the pine behind AD also...all this crap about him not catchin passes,
if they give him a try poor CT may never get off the bench...and CT is a very very good RB
Heres to AD staying healthy so he can fulfill his wants, because his needs are met

Its nice to have what you want, but want what you have


Not sure where I stated he wasn't special.
In fact I stated he's downright amazing.
But take your shades off for a second and see that he isn't perfect.
He is a great freaking back.
I didn't say he wasn't.
But he still has maturing to do.
If you can't see that than you don't see it.
I do see it and I call it as I see it.
Just because he's a Viking and he's a great player doesn't mean he doesn't have flaws.
Right now his flaws are blocking, catching out of the backfield and fumbling.
Am I wrong?


He's not perfect, but he is the best.
That was the question.



Are you saying that you would prefer Forte or one of the other's over AD?
If not, then just agree that he is the best, or say that you think one of the other guys is better.
Being a jack of all trades is great, but being a true game changer is better.
You'll have a hard time convincing me that anybody gets the same respect by defenses as Peterson.
LT you could argue a few years ago, but the rest of these guys not so much.

Can AD get better?
Sure.
Does he have faults?
Sure.
But that's a different question.




How is that a different question?
Don't you think these questions tie into it?
These questions are ALL part of being a RB.
A RB is not just about running the ball.
They have other duties.
Yes he is the best pure runner and most explosive.
That in itself does not make him the best RB in football.
If people want me to answer the question of would I pick someone else.
I would give major consideration to picking Michael Turner over Peterson.
He has proven to be more proven in every RB category there is than AP at this point.
However I do think AP will mature at the other categories and at that time I will have no problem labeling him as the best back.
Until then knowing what I know about the position since I played there for several years he still has maturing to do where others do not.

Do you think Turner gets respect?
Do you think Jacobs gets respect?
Do you think Williams gets respect?
They all do.


It doesn't mean I hate AP.
I love having the guy as a Viking.
However, purple shades aside, he has faults which prevents me from labeling him as the #1 back in football when others are better at the all around RB position.


EJ, I'm not trying to rile you up.
The question was simply is Peterson the #1 back in the NFL.
I say yes he is.
You say he needs to improve on his all around game, but you don't say whether you think he is the #1 back or not in the NFL.
If you think Turner is the better back right now, then its okay to say it.
I disagree with you, but it doesn't mean I'm right.
I personally don't think AD's pass catching is that bad but he can definitely improve on his pass blocking and fumbling.
If I'm running an offense, the first guy I pick for my team is AD, not Turner.
If AD is gone, then maybe I go Turner next.

Nobody is calling you a hater or an AD non believer.
Nobody is saying that Williams, Jacobs or Turner don't demand respect.
I just don't think they get as much attention as AD.
Part of that may be because we have been so weak in the passing game, but in a lot of ways, that only makes AD's accomplishments even greater.




Thanks for the clarification.
If you look at the last statement in my previous post I think that sums up the fact that I don't believe he is the best RB in the NFL.
Will he be?
I believe he will be.
But before I can in good conscious label him as such he needs to mature in those other categories of a RBs duties (screens, blocking and holding onto the football).
He is a great back.
He is explosive and a game changer.
He just needs to improve on those other RB duties before I can deem him as the best RB in the NFL.
As of right now a RB like Michael Turner has proven to be the more reliable back.
There's nothing against AP at all.
When I compare, I like to look at the entire picture.
Not just one aspect.
Is he the best RB in the NFL?
I don't think he is right now.
Is he good?
No.
He is great!
But he is not the best imo when yo look at all aspects of a RB.
I thought I have been pretty clear on that since this thread started.

It is okay to disagree.
That's what's great about these threads.
There is a lot of intelligent banter on what we all believe.
To be honest I thought I was answering the question but people kept saying I wasn't.
I apologize for any miscommunications.


Care to reconsider?

;)


lol... AD is the best. No question about it.

ejmat
09-13-2009, 08:25 PM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:






Whats funny is all these website posters sayin AD needs to work on screens and blocking....but Jim Brown, Emmit Smith "Guys that were in the game" say he is special...heck if you DONT see that, not sure what your watchin....the 296 was somethin special it wasnt a one time thing....if he woulda had a decent QB those 1st 2 years no tellin
I guarantee chester is as good as the others your talkin about
MT MJD
but they would be ridding the pine behind AD also...all this crap about him not catchin passes,
if they give him a try poor CT may never get off the bench...and CT is a very very good RB
Heres to AD staying healthy so he can fulfill his wants, because his needs are met

Its nice to have what you want, but want what you have


Not sure where I stated he wasn't special.
In fact I stated he's downright amazing.
But take your shades off for a second and see that he isn't perfect.
He is a great freaking back.
I didn't say he wasn't.
But he still has maturing to do.
If you can't see that than you don't see it.
I do see it and I call it as I see it.
Just because he's a Viking and he's a great player doesn't mean he doesn't have flaws.
Right now his flaws are blocking, catching out of the backfield and fumbling.
Am I wrong?


He's not perfect, but he is the best.
That was the question.



Are you saying that you would prefer Forte or one of the other's over AD?
If not, then just agree that he is the best, or say that you think one of the other guys is better.
Being a jack of all trades is great, but being a true game changer is better.
You'll have a hard time convincing me that anybody gets the same respect by defenses as Peterson.
LT you could argue a few years ago, but the rest of these guys not so much.

Can AD get better?
Sure.
Does he have faults?
Sure.
But that's a different question.




How is that a different question?
Don't you think these questions tie into it?
These questions are ALL part of being a RB.
A RB is not just about running the ball.
They have other duties.
Yes he is the best pure runner and most explosive.
That in itself does not make him the best RB in football.
If people want me to answer the question of would I pick someone else.
I would give major consideration to picking Michael Turner over Peterson.
He has proven to be more proven in every RB category there is than AP at this point.
However I do think AP will mature at the other categories and at that time I will have no problem labeling him as the best back.
Until then knowing what I know about the position since I played there for several years he still has maturing to do where others do not.

Do you think Turner gets respect?
Do you think Jacobs gets respect?
Do you think Williams gets respect?
They all do.


It doesn't mean I hate AP.
I love having the guy as a Viking.
However, purple shades aside, he has faults which prevents me from labeling him as the #1 back in football when others are better at the all around RB position.


EJ, I'm not trying to rile you up.
The question was simply is Peterson the #1 back in the NFL.
I say yes he is.
You say he needs to improve on his all around game, but you don't say whether you think he is the #1 back or not in the NFL.
If you think Turner is the better back right now, then its okay to say it.
I disagree with you, but it doesn't mean I'm right.
I personally don't think AD's pass catching is that bad but he can definitely improve on his pass blocking and fumbling.
If I'm running an offense, the first guy I pick for my team is AD, not Turner.
If AD is gone, then maybe I go Turner next.

Nobody is calling you a hater or an AD non believer.
Nobody is saying that Williams, Jacobs or Turner don't demand respect.
I just don't think they get as much attention as AD.
Part of that may be because we have been so weak in the passing game, but in a lot of ways, that only makes AD's accomplishments even greater.




Thanks for the clarification.
If you look at the last statement in my previous post I think that sums up the fact that I don't believe he is the best RB in the NFL.
Will he be?
I believe he will be.
But before I can in good conscious label him as such he needs to mature in those other categories of a RBs duties (screens, blocking and holding onto the football).
He is a great back.
He is explosive and a game changer.
He just needs to improve on those other RB duties before I can deem him as the best RB in the NFL.
As of right now a RB like Michael Turner has proven to be the more reliable back.
There's nothing against AP at all.
When I compare, I like to look at the entire picture.
Not just one aspect.
Is he the best RB in the NFL?
I don't think he is right now.
Is he good?
No.
He is great!
But he is not the best imo when yo look at all aspects of a RB.
I thought I have been pretty clear on that since this thread started.

It is okay to disagree.
That's what's great about these threads.
There is a lot of intelligent banter on what we all believe.
To be honest I thought I was answering the question but people kept saying I wasn't.
I apologize for any miscommunications.


Care to reconsider?

;)


LOL.
Absolutely!
What I liked was the receptions AP had today.
He looked real good.
We already knew what he could do running the ball so I am extremely optimistic seeing he didn't lay the ball on the ground and he came out of the backfield nicely today.


I am not ready to change after one game but I really liked what I saw.
I haven't actually taken a look at his blocking yet.
Can anyone enlighten me on that?

tastywaves
09-13-2009, 08:31 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:








Whats funny is all these website posters sayin AD needs to work on screens and blocking....but Jim Brown, Emmit Smith "Guys that were in the game" say he is special...heck if you DONT see that, not sure what your watchin....the 296 was somethin special it wasnt a one time thing....if he woulda had a decent QB those 1st 2 years no tellin
I guarantee chester is as good as the others your talkin about
MT MJD
but they would be ridding the pine behind AD also...all this crap about him not catchin passes,
if they give him a try poor CT may never get off the bench...and CT is a very very good RB
Heres to AD staying healthy so he can fulfill his wants, because his needs are met

Its nice to have what you want, but want what you have


Not sure where I stated he wasn't special.
In fact I stated he's downright amazing.
But take your shades off for a second and see that he isn't perfect.
He is a great freaking back.
I didn't say he wasn't.
But he still has maturing to do.
If you can't see that than you don't see it.
I do see it and I call it as I see it.
Just because he's a Viking and he's a great player doesn't mean he doesn't have flaws.
Right now his flaws are blocking, catching out of the backfield and fumbling.
Am I wrong?


He's not perfect, but he is the best.
That was the question.



Are you saying that you would prefer Forte or one of the other's over AD?
If not, then just agree that he is the best, or say that you think one of the other guys is better.
Being a jack of all trades is great, but being a true game changer is better.
You'll have a hard time convincing me that anybody gets the same respect by defenses as Peterson.
LT you could argue a few years ago, but the rest of these guys not so much.

Can AD get better?
Sure.
Does he have faults?
Sure.
But that's a different question.




How is that a different question?
Don't you think these questions tie into it?
These questions are ALL part of being a RB.
A RB is not just about running the ball.
They have other duties.
Yes he is the best pure runner and most explosive.
That in itself does not make him the best RB in football.
If people want me to answer the question of would I pick someone else.
I would give major consideration to picking Michael Turner over Peterson.
He has proven to be more proven in every RB category there is than AP at this point.
However I do think AP will mature at the other categories and at that time I will have no problem labeling him as the best back.
Until then knowing what I know about the position since I played there for several years he still has maturing to do where others do not.

Do you think Turner gets respect?
Do you think Jacobs gets respect?
Do you think Williams gets respect?
They all do.


It doesn't mean I hate AP.
I love having the guy as a Viking.
However, purple shades aside, he has faults which prevents me from labeling him as the #1 back in football when others are better at the all around RB position.


EJ, I'm not trying to rile you up.
The question was simply is Peterson the #1 back in the NFL.
I say yes he is.
You say he needs to improve on his all around game, but you don't say whether you think he is the #1 back or not in the NFL.
If you think Turner is the better back right now, then its okay to say it.
I disagree with you, but it doesn't mean I'm right.
I personally don't think AD's pass catching is that bad but he can definitely improve on his pass blocking and fumbling.
If I'm running an offense, the first guy I pick for my team is AD, not Turner.
If AD is gone, then maybe I go Turner next.

Nobody is calling you a hater or an AD non believer.
Nobody is saying that Williams, Jacobs or Turner don't demand respect.
I just don't think they get as much attention as AD.
Part of that may be because we have been so weak in the passing game, but in a lot of ways, that only makes AD's accomplishments even greater.




Thanks for the clarification.
If you look at the last statement in my previous post I think that sums up the fact that I don't believe he is the best RB in the NFL.
Will he be?
I believe he will be.
But before I can in good conscious label him as such he needs to mature in those other categories of a RBs duties (screens, blocking and holding onto the football).
He is a great back.
He is explosive and a game changer.
He just needs to improve on those other RB duties before I can deem him as the best RB in the NFL.
As of right now a RB like Michael Turner has proven to be the more reliable back.
There's nothing against AP at all.
When I compare, I like to look at the entire picture.
Not just one aspect.
Is he the best RB in the NFL?
I don't think he is right now.
Is he good?
No.
He is great!
But he is not the best imo when yo look at all aspects of a RB.
I thought I have been pretty clear on that since this thread started.

It is okay to disagree.
That's what's great about these threads.
There is a lot of intelligent banter on what we all believe.
To be honest I thought I was answering the question but people kept saying I wasn't.
I apologize for any miscommunications.


Care to reconsider?

;)


LOL.
Absolutely!
What I liked was the receptions AP had today.
He looked real good.
We already knew what he could do running the ball so I am extremely optimistic seeing he didn't lay the ball on the ground and he came out of the backfield nicely today.


I am not ready to change after one game but I really liked what I saw.
I haven't actually taken a look at his blocking yet.
Can anyone enlighten me on that?



He made a nice block that helped Harvin bust a nice run.

ejmat
09-13-2009, 08:36 PM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:










Whats funny is all these website posters sayin AD needs to work on screens and blocking....but Jim Brown, Emmit Smith "Guys that were in the game" say he is special...heck if you DONT see that, not sure what your watchin....the 296 was somethin special it wasnt a one time thing....if he woulda had a decent QB those 1st 2 years no tellin
I guarantee chester is as good as the others your talkin about
MT MJD
but they would be ridding the pine behind AD also...all this crap about him not catchin passes,
if they give him a try poor CT may never get off the bench...and CT is a very very good RB
Heres to AD staying healthy so he can fulfill his wants, because his needs are met

Its nice to have what you want, but want what you have


Not sure where I stated he wasn't special.
In fact I stated he's downright amazing.
But take your shades off for a second and see that he isn't perfect.
He is a great freaking back.
I didn't say he wasn't.
But he still has maturing to do.
If you can't see that than you don't see it.
I do see it and I call it as I see it.
Just because he's a Viking and he's a great player doesn't mean he doesn't have flaws.
Right now his flaws are blocking, catching out of the backfield and fumbling.
Am I wrong?


He's not perfect, but he is the best.
That was the question.



Are you saying that you would prefer Forte or one of the other's over AD?
If not, then just agree that he is the best, or say that you think one of the other guys is better.
Being a jack of all trades is great, but being a true game changer is better.
You'll have a hard time convincing me that anybody gets the same respect by defenses as Peterson.
LT you could argue a few years ago, but the rest of these guys not so much.

Can AD get better?
Sure.
Does he have faults?
Sure.
But that's a different question.




How is that a different question?
Don't you think these questions tie into it?
These questions are ALL part of being a RB.
A RB is not just about running the ball.
They have other duties.
Yes he is the best pure runner and most explosive.
That in itself does not make him the best RB in football.
If people want me to answer the question of would I pick someone else.
I would give major consideration to picking Michael Turner over Peterson.
He has proven to be more proven in every RB category there is than AP at this point.
However I do think AP will mature at the other categories and at that time I will have no problem labeling him as the best back.
Until then knowing what I know about the position since I played there for several years he still has maturing to do where others do not.

Do you think Turner gets respect?
Do you think Jacobs gets respect?
Do you think Williams gets respect?
They all do.


It doesn't mean I hate AP.
I love having the guy as a Viking.
However, purple shades aside, he has faults which prevents me from labeling him as the #1 back in football when others are better at the all around RB position.


EJ, I'm not trying to rile you up.
The question was simply is Peterson the #1 back in the NFL.
I say yes he is.
You say he needs to improve on his all around game, but you don't say whether you think he is the #1 back or not in the NFL.
If you think Turner is the better back right now, then its okay to say it.
I disagree with you, but it doesn't mean I'm right.
I personally don't think AD's pass catching is that bad but he can definitely improve on his pass blocking and fumbling.
If I'm running an offense, the first guy I pick for my team is AD, not Turner.
If AD is gone, then maybe I go Turner next.

Nobody is calling you a hater or an AD non believer.
Nobody is saying that Williams, Jacobs or Turner don't demand respect.
I just don't think they get as much attention as AD.
Part of that may be because we have been so weak in the passing game, but in a lot of ways, that only makes AD's accomplishments even greater.




Thanks for the clarification.
If you look at the last statement in my previous post I think that sums up the fact that I don't believe he is the best RB in the NFL.
Will he be?
I believe he will be.
But before I can in good conscious label him as such he needs to mature in those other categories of a RBs duties (screens, blocking and holding onto the football).
He is a great back.
He is explosive and a game changer.
He just needs to improve on those other RB duties before I can deem him as the best RB in the NFL.
As of right now a RB like Michael Turner has proven to be the more reliable back.
There's nothing against AP at all.
When I compare, I like to look at the entire picture.
Not just one aspect.
Is he the best RB in the NFL?
I don't think he is right now.
Is he good?
No.
He is great!
But he is not the best imo when yo look at all aspects of a RB.
I thought I have been pretty clear on that since this thread started.

It is okay to disagree.
That's what's great about these threads.
There is a lot of intelligent banter on what we all believe.
To be honest I thought I was answering the question but people kept saying I wasn't.
I apologize for any miscommunications.


Care to reconsider?

;)


LOL.
Absolutely!
What I liked was the receptions AP had today.
He looked real good.
We already knew what he could do running the ball so I am extremely optimistic seeing he didn't lay the ball on the ground and he came out of the backfield nicely today.


I am not ready to change after one game but I really liked what I saw.
I haven't actually taken a look at his blocking yet.
Can anyone enlighten me on that?



He made a nice block that helped Harvin bust a nice run.


Awesome.
I want to re-watch the game so I can especially look at his blocking.

vikinggreg
09-15-2009, 02:11 AM
LT where were you for your teams last drive?

snowinapril
09-15-2009, 02:13 AM
"vikinggreg" wrote:


LT where were you for your teams last drive?


Was he injured?

vikinggreg
09-15-2009, 02:19 AM
"snowinapril" wrote:


"vikinggreg" wrote:


LT where were you for your teams last drive?


Was he injured?



Nope, don't think so, he was having a bad day and the Bolts went with Sproles and left LT on the bench

Rambro
09-15-2009, 02:26 AM
"vikinggreg" wrote:


LT where were you for your teams last drive?



co-sign, I thought it was amazing how butthurt he got over Jim Browns comments, yet he was no where to be seen on the most important drive of the game while Sproles picked up huge chunks of yards and the game winning TD.

hillshaveeyesPA
09-15-2009, 05:05 AM
LT really proved today who the best was.... He's not elusive anymore and their backup can carry the ball better then most starters. AD! He is a beast.

vegasvike
09-15-2009, 05:23 AM
"vikinggreg" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


"vikinggreg" wrote:


LT where were you for your teams last drive?


Was he injured?



Nope, don't think so, he was having a bad day and the Bolts went with Sproles and left LT on the bench


sucks to be him :D

soonerbornNbred
09-15-2009, 09:18 AM
LT and Kanye have a lot in common...When it comes time for the spotlight, Big in the Mouth, but small in results

ThorSPL
09-15-2009, 11:57 AM
AD still struggles with blitz pick-ups but he IS improving over last year from what I've seen.

V4L
09-15-2009, 11:59 AM
HAHAHAHA

BloodyHorns82
09-15-2009, 12:14 PM
"hillshaveeyesPA" wrote:


LT really proved today who the best was.... He's not elusive anymore and their backup can carry the ball better then most starters. AD! He is a beast.


I heard this morning ont he radio that LT injured his ankle in the first quarter and by the 4th it was extremely sore and stiff.


Probably just an excuse, but might explain why he was riding so much pine.

idahovikefan7
09-15-2009, 12:15 PM
"vikinggreg" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


"vikinggreg" wrote:


LT where were you for your teams last drive?


Was he injured?



Nope, don't think so, he was having a bad day and the Bolts went with Sproles and left LT on the bench


Ya I was LMAO the whole time, and had his comments lingering at the back of my mind for the majority of the game. AD all the way!!!!

ejmat
09-15-2009, 12:17 PM
"idahovikefan7" wrote:


"vikinggreg" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


"vikinggreg" wrote:


LT where were you for your teams last drive?


Was he injured?



Nope, don't think so, he was having a bad day and the Bolts went with Sproles and left LT on the bench


Ya I was LMAO the whole time, and had his comments lingering at the back of my mind for the majority of the game. AD all the way!!!!


Personally, I was happy because the guy I played against in FF had LT.

idahovikefan7
09-15-2009, 12:24 PM
"BloodyHorns82" wrote:


"hillshaveeyesPA" wrote:


LT really proved today who the best was.... He's not elusive anymore and their backup can carry the ball better then most starters. AD! He is a beast.


I heard this morning ont he radio that LT injured his ankle in the first quarter and by the 4th it was extremely sore and stiff.


Probably just an excuse, but might explain why he was riding so much pine.


Yep probably just another cover up excuse. He even asked to see more time on the field for preseason to get more reps in, and looked just fine. I think he's just covering his own ass for what was said. He knows deep down who the number 1 back is....

idahovikefan7
09-15-2009, 12:26 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"idahovikefan7" wrote:


"vikinggreg" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


"vikinggreg" wrote:


LT where were you for your teams last drive?


Was he injured?



Nope, don't think so, he was having a bad day and the Bolts went with Sproles and left LT on the bench


Ya I was LMAO the whole time, and had his comments lingering at the back of my mind for the majority of the game. AD all the way!!!!


Personally, I was happy because the guy I played against in FF had LT.



Haha a reason to be that much more happy

soonerbornNbred
09-15-2009, 12:27 PM
"ThorSPL" wrote:


AD still struggles with blitz pick-ups but he IS improving over last year from what I've seen.

your kidding right ?

ThorSPL
09-15-2009, 01:24 PM
"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:


AD still struggles with blitz pick-ups but he IS improving over last year from what I've seen.

your kidding right ?


Not at all, I have seen him pick more up this year/preseason than the last two years, but he does not seem to see the stunts or LB creeping behind the line to come around.
There are times he may need to block a blitzer on the R side even if he lines up on the left; that is where I still see his struggles.

soonerbornNbred
09-15-2009, 01:54 PM
This right heres what cracks me up about a few on here...No player gives more to the Vikings and Delivers more, yet a "few fans" want to critique one of the best to ever play the game...as if they are some great football mind, its laughable
Jim Brown, Marshall Faulk, Emmit Smith all rave about his abilities but a few on here love to point at their perceived expertize that he falls short...
even after he pukes his guts out to try to get back on the field... Pumps in a IV to get back on the field, bandage him up because hes spewing blood to help this team WIN...and still a few go back and look at replay after replay and say oooo see here he missed this or that. Truly laughable

ejmat
09-15-2009, 02:07 PM
"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


This right heres what cracks me up about a few on here...No player gives more to the Vikings and Delivers more, yet a "few fans" want to critique one of the best to ever play the game...as if they are some great football mind, its laughable
Jim Brown, Marshall Faulk, Emmit Smith all rave about his abilities but a few on here love to point at their perceived expertize that he falls short...
even after he pukes his guts out to try to get back on the field... Pumps in a IV to get back on the field, bandage him up because hes spewing blood to help this team WIN...and still a few go back and look at replay after replay and say oooo see here he missed this or that. Truly laughable


So what you are saying is the guy has absolutely no faults?
Yes, AP is a great player and we all love that he's a Viking.
But sometimes you have to take your purple shades off and realize he still has maturing to do.
Blocking is a major part of his game and his job whether you want to admit it or not.
Why don't you ask TJ or Favre or whatever QB how much missed blocks affect their game.


You are misunderstanding the criticism.
No one is criticizing what a great back he is and how much he contributes to the team.
But the fact remains he still needs to polish up in the blocking game.
He definitely seems to have improved coming out of the backfield for screens which is great.
He hasn't put the ball on the turf yet which is great.
But he has missed a couple of blocks.
It doesn't make him a bad RB at all.
It means he has to polish up one of the major aspects of his position.

ThorSPL
09-15-2009, 02:14 PM
"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


This right heres what cracks me up about a few on here...No player gives more to the Vikings and Delivers more, yet a "few fans" want to critique one of the best to ever play the game...as if they are some great football mind, its laughable
Jim Brown, Marshall Faulk, Emmit Smith all rave about his abilities but a few on here love to point at their perceived expertize that he falls short...
even after he pukes his guts out to try to get back on the field... Pumps in a IV to get back on the field, bandage him up because hes spewing blood to help this team WIN...and still a few go back and look at replay after replay and say oooo see here he missed this or that. Truly laughable


You say my remark about his improving, but not yet good, blocking is so absurd that it must be a joke.
Then you criticize others (myself included) for supporting what we said... THAT is laughable...

There is NO other back I would rather have. Period. End of argument.
I say that in skill alone, let alone the heart and character you point out (and I completely agree with).
However, he is not perfect.
He does not get "100"'s in every Madden category as you seem to feel he should get.
That's just life, he's the best there is at what he does, but he's not perfect.
You need to realize that just having things to work on does not mean one is awful at what they do...
He's a guy with 2 years of experience, he shouldn't be the best at everything.
This is the first level in which he has been asked to do anything other than hang on to the ball and run like hell because he was so amazing at it, nobody needed more from him.
He didn't catch many passes or block as much in college because he didn't have to.
Now he needs to learn; he's making progress - and great progress according to the coaches.

My original statement is as much a testament to his progress and work ethic as it is pointing out he isn't perfect...

snowinapril
09-15-2009, 02:18 PM
"ThorSPL" wrote:


"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


This right heres what cracks me up about a few on here...No player gives more to the Vikings and Delivers more, yet a "few fans" want to critique one of the best to ever play the game...as if they are some great football mind, its laughable
Jim Brown, Marshall Faulk, Emmit Smith all rave about his abilities but a few on here love to point at their perceived expertize that he falls short...
even after he pukes his guts out to try to get back on the field... Pumps in a IV to get back on the field, bandage him up because hes spewing blood to help this team WIN...and still a few go back and look at replay after replay and say oooo see here he missed this or that. Truly laughable


You say my remark about his improving, but not yet good, blocking is so absurd that it must be a joke.
Then you criticize others (myself included) for supporting what we said... THAT is laughable...

There is NO other back I would rather have. Period. End of argument.
I say that in skill alone, let alone the heart and character you point out (and I completely agree with).
However, he is not perfect.
He does not get "100"'s in every Madden category as you seem to feel he should get.
That's just life, he's the best there is at what he does, but he's not perfect.
You need to realize that just having things to work on does not mean one is awful at what they do...
He's a guy with 2 years of experience, he shouldn't be the best at everything.
This is the first level in which he has been asked to do anything other than hang on to the ball and run like hell because he was so amazing at it, nobody needed more from him.
He didn't catch many passes or block as much in college because he didn't have to.
Now he needs to learn; he's making progress - and great progress according to the coaches.

My original statement is as much a testament to his progress and work ethic as it is pointing out he isn't perfect...


Good post Thor!

snowinapril
09-15-2009, 02:22 PM
"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:


AD still struggles with blitz pick-ups but he IS improving over last year from what I've seen.

your kidding right ?


The first sack on Favre was AD's pass protection.

He got one hit on his guy. Him and McKinnie's guy got slid in and collapsed the pocket.

AD could have done better.

tastywaves
09-15-2009, 02:29 PM
"ThorSPL" wrote:


"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


This right heres what cracks me up about a few on here...No player gives more to the Vikings and Delivers more, yet a "few fans" want to critique one of the best to ever play the game...as if they are some great football mind, its laughable
Jim Brown, Marshall Faulk, Emmit Smith all rave about his abilities but a few on here love to point at their perceived expertize that he falls short...
even after he pukes his guts out to try to get back on the field... Pumps in a IV to get back on the field, bandage him up because hes spewing blood to help this team WIN...and still a few go back and look at replay after replay and say oooo see here he missed this or that. Truly laughable


You say my remark about his improving, but not yet good, blocking is so absurd that it must be a joke.
Then you criticize others (myself included) for supporting what we said... THAT is laughable...

There is NO other back I would rather have. Period. End of argument. I say that in skill alone, let alone the heart and character you point out (and I completely agree with).
However, he is not perfect.
He does not get "100"'s in every Madden category as you seem to feel he should get.
That's just life, he's the best there is at what he does, but he's not perfect.
You need to realize that just having things to work on does not mean one is awful at what they do...
He's a guy with 2 years of experience, he shouldn't be the best at everything.
This is the first level in which he has been asked to do anything other than hang on to the ball and run like hell because he was so amazing at it, nobody needed more from him.
He didn't catch many passes or block as much in college because he didn't have to.
Now he needs to learn; he's making progress - and great progress according to the coaches.

My original statement is as much a testament to his progress and work ethic as it is pointing out he isn't perfect...


Very good post Thor.
No doubt there are areas of his game he could improve on, but that takes nothing away from the fact that he is the best RB in the NFL right now and no one I would rather have on our team.
Right EJ?
Or are you still hanging on to Michael Turner?
;)

jmcdon00
09-15-2009, 02:43 PM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:


"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


This right heres what cracks me up about a few on here...No player gives more to the Vikings and Delivers more, yet a "few fans" want to critique one of the best to ever play the game...as if they are some great football mind, its laughable
Jim Brown, Marshall Faulk, Emmit Smith all rave about his abilities but a few on here love to point at their perceived expertize that he falls short...
even after he pukes his guts out to try to get back on the field... Pumps in a IV to get back on the field, bandage him up because hes spewing blood to help this team WIN...and still a few go back and look at replay after replay and say oooo see here he missed this or that. Truly laughable


You say my remark about his improving, but not yet good, blocking is so absurd that it must be a joke.
Then you criticize others (myself included) for supporting what we said... THAT is laughable...

There is NO other back I would rather have. Period. End of argument.
I say that in skill alone, let alone the heart and character you point out (and I completely agree with).
However, he is not perfect.
He does not get "100"'s in every Madden category as you seem to feel he should get.
That's just life, he's the best there is at what he does, but he's not perfect.
You need to realize that just having things to work on does not mean one is awful at what they do...
He's a guy with 2 years of experience, he shouldn't be the best at everything.
This is the first level in which he has been asked to do anything other than hang on to the ball and run like hell because he was so amazing at it, nobody needed more from him.
He didn't catch many passes or block as much in college because he didn't have to.
Now he needs to learn; he's making progress - and great progress according to the coaches.

My original statement is as much a testament to his progress and work ethic as it is pointing out he isn't perfect...


Very good post Thor.
No doubt there are areas of his game he could improve on, but that takes nothing away from the fact that he is the best RB in the NFL right now and no one I would rather have on our team.
Right EJ?
Or are you still hanging on to Michael Turner?

;)

I think the fact that Peterson has so much room for improvement actually makes him a more valuable player. If he ever realizes his full potential in blocking and recieving he will be the best back ever.

ejmat
09-15-2009, 03:12 PM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:


"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


This right heres what cracks me up about a few on here...No player gives more to the Vikings and Delivers more, yet a "few fans" want to critique one of the best to ever play the game...as if they are some great football mind, its laughable
Jim Brown, Marshall Faulk, Emmit Smith all rave about his abilities but a few on here love to point at their perceived expertize that he falls short...
even after he pukes his guts out to try to get back on the field... Pumps in a IV to get back on the field, bandage him up because hes spewing blood to help this team WIN...and still a few go back and look at replay after replay and say oooo see here he missed this or that. Truly laughable


You say my remark about his improving, but not yet good, blocking is so absurd that it must be a joke.
Then you criticize others (myself included) for supporting what we said... THAT is laughable...

There is NO other back I would rather have. Period. End of argument. I say that in skill alone, let alone the heart and character you point out (and I completely agree with).
However, he is not perfect.
He does not get "100"'s in every Madden category as you seem to feel he should get.
That's just life, he's the best there is at what he does, but he's not perfect.
You need to realize that just having things to work on does not mean one is awful at what they do...
He's a guy with 2 years of experience, he shouldn't be the best at everything.
This is the first level in which he has been asked to do anything other than hang on to the ball and run like hell because he was so amazing at it, nobody needed more from him.
He didn't catch many passes or block as much in college because he didn't have to.
Now he needs to learn; he's making progress - and great progress according to the coaches.

My original statement is as much a testament to his progress and work ethic as it is pointing out he isn't perfect...


Very good post Thor.
No doubt there are areas of his game he could improve on, but that takes nothing away from the fact that he is the best RB in the NFL right now and no one I would rather have on our team.
Right EJ?
Or are you still hanging on to Michael Turner?
;)


;D Like I stated I would highly think about it.
I won't change my mind from just one game.
I still think AP is the best pure runner in the NFL.
But I also believe Turner is better at coming out of the backfield and blocking.
Plus he hasn't put the ball on the ground as much.
If APs first game was a sign of things to come then there is no way in hell I would say Turner is a better all around back.
But still it takes more than one game for me to change my mind.
Fair enough?

soonerbornNbred
09-15-2009, 03:39 PM
"ThorSPL" wrote:


"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


This right heres what cracks me up about a few on here...No player gives more to the Vikings and Delivers more, yet a "few fans" want to critique one of the best to ever play the game...as if they are some great football mind, its laughable
Jim Brown, Marshall Faulk, Emmit Smith all rave about his abilities but a few on here love to point at their perceived expertize that he falls short...
even after he pukes his guts out to try to get back on the field... Pumps in a IV to get back on the field, bandage him up because hes spewing blood to help this team WIN...and still a few go back and look at replay after replay and say oooo see here he missed this or that. Truly laughable


You say my remark about his improving, but not yet good, blocking is so absurd that it must be a joke.
Then you criticize others (myself included) for supporting what we said... THAT is laughable...

There is NO other back I would rather have. Period. End of argument.
I say that in skill alone, let alone the heart and character you point out (and I completely agree with).
However, he is not perfect.
He does not get "100"'s in every Madden category as you seem to feel he should get.
That's just life, he's the best there is at what he does, but he's not perfect.
You need to realize that just having things to work on does not mean one is awful at what they do...
He's a guy with 2 years of experience, he shouldn't be the best at everything.
This is the first level in which he has been asked to do anything other than hang on to the ball and run like hell because he was so amazing at it, nobody needed more from him.
He didn't catch many passes or block as much in college because he didn't have to.
Now he needs to learn; he's making progress - and great progress according to the coaches.

My original statement is as much a testament to his progress and work ethic as it is pointing out he isn't perfect...


Ok so Im not going to go back and forth on this as we both seem to agree He is the answer to the RB position...fact I never stated he has no faults or he gets 100s

My Thing is
He Absolutely Lays it on the line everytime he laces up those cleats, and then to see someone pick him apart on a few plays here and there

Never will I say he is the best blocking back
Never will I say he is the best Recieving back, yet I think given the chance he will complete this
But I will say he is the best RunningBack in the National Football League
And he is very fun to watch, been seeing it since he was in HS and he still amazes on every level from pop warner on up
Not saying he walks on water...just that he is #1 and his position and he will work to get better every day

hillshaveeyesPA
09-15-2009, 11:38 PM
In an effort to completely stick up for AD, I have one question. Now I was young when A Mr. Barry Sanders was exploiting the NFL every game, but I can't really bring myself to say he was a blocker. He may have been decent but I just don't recall him being great at it. Now with that said Barry Sanders has my vote for the greatest of all time and I wish we could have seen him run about 3 or 4 more years. AD is the best back in the NFL. He will win games with a team on his shoulders.
The same can't be said about LT. Maybe once but not anymore.

i_bleed_purple
09-16-2009, 12:12 AM
"hillshaveeyesPA" wrote:


In an effort to completely stick up for AD, I have one question. Now I was young when A Mr. Barry Sanders was exploiting the NFL every game, but I can't really bring myself to say he was a blocker. He may have been decent but I just don't recall him being great at it. Now with that said Barry Sanders has my vote for the greatest of all time and I wish we could have seen him run about 3 or 4 more years. AD is the best back in the NFL. He will win games with a team on his shoulders.
The same can't be said about LT. Maybe once but not anymore.


well put.
One of the "best" backs, emmit smith, was a good all-around player.
however, you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who picks Smith ast the best back ever unless they're a cowboys fan or a bitter lions fan.
Peterson does have the same "wow" factor as smith, Peyton, Brown, etc.
He could be one of the best, he doensn't need to be the next Marshall Faulk, just keep being productive.

kevoncox
09-16-2009, 12:19 AM
You are all wrong....
Bo Jackson!
/thread

ThorSPL
09-16-2009, 10:33 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:


"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


This right heres what cracks me up about a few on here...No player gives more to the Vikings and Delivers more, yet a "few fans" want to critique one of the best to ever play the game...as if they are some great football mind, its laughable
Jim Brown, Marshall Faulk, Emmit Smith all rave about his abilities but a few on here love to point at their perceived expertize that he falls short...
even after he pukes his guts out to try to get back on the field... Pumps in a IV to get back on the field, bandage him up because hes spewing blood to help this team WIN...and still a few go back and look at replay after replay and say oooo see here he missed this or that. Truly laughable


You say my remark about his improving, but not yet good, blocking is so absurd that it must be a joke.
Then you criticize others (myself included) for supporting what we said... THAT is laughable...

There is NO other back I would rather have. Period. End of argument. I say that in skill alone, let alone the heart and character you point out (and I completely agree with).
However, he is not perfect.
He does not get "100"'s in every Madden category as you seem to feel he should get.
That's just life, he's the best there is at what he does, but he's not perfect.
You need to realize that just having things to work on does not mean one is awful at what they do...
He's a guy with 2 years of experience, he shouldn't be the best at everything.
This is the first level in which he has been asked to do anything other than hang on to the ball and run like hell because he was so amazing at it, nobody needed more from him.
He didn't catch many passes or block as much in college because he didn't have to.
Now he needs to learn; he's making progress - and great progress according to the coaches.

My original statement is as much a testament to his progress and work ethic as it is pointing out he isn't perfect...


Very good post Thor.
No doubt there are areas of his game he could improve on, but that takes nothing away from the fact that he is the best RB in the NFL right now and no one I would rather have on our team.
Right EJ?
Or are you still hanging on to Michael Turner?
;)


;D Like I stated I would highly think about it.
I won't change my mind from just one game.
I still think AP is the best pure runner in the NFL.
But I also believe Turner is better at coming out of the backfield and blocking.
Plus he hasn't put the ball on the ground as much.
If APs first game was a sign of things to come then there is no way in hell I would say Turner is a better all around back.
But still it takes more than one game for me to change my mind.
Fair enough?


Fair enough!

ThorSPL
09-16-2009, 10:38 AM
"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:


"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


This right heres what cracks me up about a few on here...No player gives more to the Vikings and Delivers more, yet a "few fans" want to critique one of the best to ever play the game...as if they are some great football mind, its laughable
Jim Brown, Marshall Faulk, Emmit Smith all rave about his abilities but a few on here love to point at their perceived expertize that he falls short...
even after he pukes his guts out to try to get back on the field... Pumps in a IV to get back on the field, bandage him up because hes spewing blood to help this team WIN...and still a few go back and look at replay after replay and say oooo see here he missed this or that. Truly laughable


You say my remark about his improving, but not yet good, blocking is so absurd that it must be a joke.
Then you criticize others (myself included) for supporting what we said... THAT is laughable...

There is NO other back I would rather have. Period. End of argument.
I say that in skill alone, let alone the heart and character you point out (and I completely agree with).
However, he is not perfect.
He does not get "100"'s in every Madden category as you seem to feel he should get.
That's just life, he's the best there is at what he does, but he's not perfect.
You need to realize that just having things to work on does not mean one is awful at what they do...
He's a guy with 2 years of experience, he shouldn't be the best at everything.
This is the first level in which he has been asked to do anything other than hang on to the ball and run like hell because he was so amazing at it, nobody needed more from him.
He didn't catch many passes or block as much in college because he didn't have to.
Now he needs to learn; he's making progress - and great progress according to the coaches.

My original statement is as much a testament to his progress and work ethic as it is pointing out he isn't perfect...


Ok so Im not going to go back and forth on this as we both seem to agree He is the answer to the RB position...fact I never stated he has no faults or he gets 100s

My Thing is
He Absolutely Lays it on the line everytime he laces up those cleats, and then to see someone pick him apart on a few plays here and there

Never will I say he is the best blocking back
Never will I say he is the best Recieving back, yet I think given the chance he will complete this
But I will say he is the best RunningBack in the National Football League
And he is very fun to watch, been seeing it since he was in HS and he still amazes on every level from pop warner on up
Not saying he walks on water...just that he is #1 and his position and he will work to get better every day


My previoius statement supports your statements in orange -I'm not disagreeing with you at all...
However, you seemed to take offense when I pointed out that he has things to work on.... he has those things which, if he can improve on, will put him on a far different playing field than we have seen yet....

We don't disagree, we just have different levels of admiration.

ThorSPL
09-16-2009, 10:41 AM
"kevoncox" wrote:


You are all wrong....
Bo Jackson!
/thread


Bo Knowns Kevon

ejmat
09-16-2009, 10:41 AM
"ThorSPL" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:


"soonerbornNbred" wrote:


This right heres what cracks me up about a few on here...No player gives more to the Vikings and Delivers more, yet a "few fans" want to critique one of the best to ever play the game...as if they are some great football mind, its laughable
Jim Brown, Marshall Faulk, Emmit Smith all rave about his abilities but a few on here love to point at their perceived expertize that he falls short...
even after he pukes his guts out to try to get back on the field... Pumps in a IV to get back on the field, bandage him up because hes spewing blood to help this team WIN...and still a few go back and look at replay after replay and say oooo see here he missed this or that. Truly laughable


You say my remark about his improving, but not yet good, blocking is so absurd that it must be a joke.
Then you criticize others (myself included) for supporting what we said... THAT is laughable...

There is NO other back I would rather have. Period. End of argument. I say that in skill alone, let alone the heart and character you point out (and I completely agree with).
However, he is not perfect.
He does not get "100"'s in every Madden category as you seem to feel he should get.
That's just life, he's the best there is at what he does, but he's not perfect.
You need to realize that just having things to work on does not mean one is awful at what they do...
He's a guy with 2 years of experience, he shouldn't be the best at everything.
This is the first level in which he has been asked to do anything other than hang on to the ball and run like hell because he was so amazing at it, nobody needed more from him.
He didn't catch many passes or block as much in college because he didn't have to.
Now he needs to learn; he's making progress - and great progress according to the coaches.

My original statement is as much a testament to his progress and work ethic as it is pointing out he isn't perfect...


Very good post Thor.
No doubt there are areas of his game he could improve on, but that takes nothing away from the fact that he is the best RB in the NFL right now and no one I would rather have on our team.
Right EJ?
Or are you still hanging on to Michael Turner?
;)


;D Like I stated I would highly think about it.
I won't change my mind from just one game.
I still think AP is the best pure runner in the NFL.
But I also believe Turner is better at coming out of the backfield and blocking.
Plus he hasn't put the ball on the ground as much.
If APs first game was a sign of things to come then there is no way in hell I would say Turner is a better all around back.
But still it takes more than one game for me to change my mind.
Fair enough?


Fair enough!


Cool.
One thing settled on my to do list
;D

BloodyHorns82
09-16-2009, 11:27 AM
Keep an eye on Chris Johnson...that kid looks special.
Very patient and shifty.
He seems to have a knack for busting off some big ones.
Watch your back AD!
He's comin' :D

hx38596
09-16-2009, 12:29 PM
"BloodyHorns82" wrote:


Keep an eye on Chris Johnson...that kid looks special.
Very patient and shifty.
He seems to have a knack for busting off some big ones.
Watch your back AD!
He's comin' :D


I agree, CJ was very fast and looked good Sunday.
As Tice would say, "there's no substitute for speed."
lol

PackSux!
09-16-2009, 06:43 PM
"hx38596" wrote:


"BloodyHorns82" wrote:


Keep an eye on Chris Johnson...that kid looks special.
Very patient and shifty.
He seems to have a knack for busting off some big ones.
Watch your back AD!
He's comin' :D


I agree, CJ was very fast and looked good Sunday.
As Tice would say, "there's no substitute for speed."
lol


Are you talking about the Chris Johnson from the Titans?
He looked like crap on THURSDAY!

He didnt get me crap in my fantasy league.

gregair13
09-16-2009, 07:12 PM
How's the bench LT?

kevoncox
09-16-2009, 08:18 PM
Lol..
I don't have to get taken out on 3rd down...
Easy to say that when you don't play at all.

idahovikefan7
09-16-2009, 09:05 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


Lol..
I don't have to get taken out on 3rd down...
Easy to say that when you don't play at all.


Haha same thing came to mind for me!

Zeus
09-16-2009, 10:01 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


You are all wrong....
Bo Jackson!
/thread


That might be the silliest thing you've ever written, and that's saying something.

=Z=

BloodyHorns82
09-17-2009, 03:13 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


You are all wrong....
Bo Jackson!
/thread


That might be the silliest thing you've ever written, and that's saying something.

=Z=


Bo knows early retirement.

V4L
09-18-2009, 01:22 PM
"BloodyHorns82" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"kevoncox" wrote:


You are all wrong....
Bo Jackson!
/thread


That might be the silliest thing you've ever written, and that's saying something.

=Z=


Bo knows early retirement.



+1

Purple Floyd
09-19-2009, 02:41 PM
"kevoncox" wrote:


You are all wrong....
Bo Jackson!
/thread


They are actually pretty similar.

Bo was my favorite player of all time but AD is changing that.

Watch these runs and tell me there isn't a quite a bit of similarity between the two backs.

Bo Jackson Running Down A Dream (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVqkqlC60N4#)

snowinapril
09-19-2009, 02:51 PM
Bo was pretty cool.


Career too short that is too bad.
The whole baseball thing was a distraction also.

The last clips.
He ran in to LT.
He lowered his shoulder into Lott.
He ran out of the King Dome.
Awesome!

Watching him saddens me a bit.
I try not to think about AD's possible career too much.
I would hate to think that it would be as short at Jackson's.
For a RB to have a career like Payton's or E.Smith's it a blessing.
Those two guys were extremely blessed.
Let's hope AD will be also.

His yards did not total much, but he wasn't playing full seasons.
Look at his long runs, 90 something, 90 something, and 88 yds.
Wow.

Bo stats:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/J/JackBo00.htm

Mr Anderson
09-19-2009, 03:52 PM
Bo was a great back, but different than Peterson.

Jackson was raw speed and power, if he got to the second level, much like AD it was all over.


But he lacked the lateral agility that Peterson has, look at the clips above, not really any impressive cuts.

Purple Floyd
09-19-2009, 06:06 PM
"Mr" wrote:


Bo was a great back, but different than Peterson.

Jackson was raw speed and power, if he got to the second level, much like AD it was all over.


But he lacked the lateral agility that Peterson has, look at the clips above, not really any impressive cuts.

Agreed.
Jackson had more straight away speed than AD. AD has more lateral agility.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_Jackson

He also ran a 4.12 40 yard dash, still considered the fastest verifiable 40 time at an NFL Combine.

In the strength department they are probably very similar.

Prophet
09-19-2009, 07:58 PM
What position is AD going to play in MLB?

vikinggreg
09-19-2009, 08:11 PM
"Prophet" wrote:


What position is AD going to play in MLB?

Outfield, 1-3 base, pitcher and catcher.
Doesn't believe in the shortstop position because he isn't short and never stops......and he plays them simultaneously
;) ;D

Vikes
09-19-2009, 10:38 PM
Being LT is hurt this pretty much should end the debate.

ejmat
09-20-2009, 06:38 AM
"Vikes" wrote:


Being LT is hurt this pretty much should end the debate.


Not that there is a debate at thispoint and time but just because someone isn't playing a game doesn't mean one is better than the other.
So if AP got hurt and LT played does that mean LT is better?

Minniman
09-20-2009, 12:21 PM
Bo Jackson could have been the best running back of all time in the NFL.
I have never seen a combination of speed, power, and balance in one running back.

I consider Walter Payton and Earl Campbell the best running backs I have seen play.
Adrian Peterson isn't quite there, yet.
Peterson could be one of the greats as well, but he doesn't have Campbell's size or Bo's speed.
Then again, he he doesn't have to.

The key for all running backs is staying healthy.
L.T. is on the bench.

V4L
09-20-2009, 05:10 PM
Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

ThorSPL
09-20-2009, 06:07 PM
"V4L" wrote:


Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.

V4L
09-20-2009, 06:28 PM
"ThorSPL" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Mr Anderson
09-20-2009, 06:33 PM
"V4L" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.

V4L
09-20-2009, 06:38 PM
"Mr" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.



They aren't on my list

Mr Anderson
09-20-2009, 06:41 PM
"V4L" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.



They aren't on my list

What is the first quote then?

V4L
09-20-2009, 06:46 PM
"Mr" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:




Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.



They aren't on my list

What is the first quote then?



Left to right man

Maybe I misunderstood what ur saying im drunk as fuck

Mr Anderson
09-20-2009, 07:05 PM
"V4L" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:






Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.



They aren't on my list

What is the first quote then?



Left to right man

Maybe I misunderstood what ur saying im drunk as fuck



So your list goes:
1) Earl Campbell
2) Jim Brown
3) Walter Payton
4) Barry Sanders
5) Emmitt Smith
6) Adrian Peterson
7) Bo Jackson

?

V4L
09-20-2009, 07:09 PM
"Mr" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:








Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.



They aren't on my list

What is the first quote then?



Left to right man

Maybe I misunderstood what ur saying im drunk as fuck



So your list goes:
1) Earl Campbell
2) Jim Brown
3) Walter Payton
4) Barry Sanders
5) Emmitt Smith
6) Adrian Peterson
7) Bo Jackson

?



Yes sir

ThorSPL
09-20-2009, 08:22 PM
"V4L" wrote:


"ThorSPL" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha


blah blah blah :)

marshallvike
09-20-2009, 08:40 PM
"V4L" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:










Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.



They aren't on my list

What is the first quote then?



Left to right man

Maybe I misunderstood what ur saying im drunk as floop



So your list goes:
1) Earl Campbell
2) Jim Brown
3) Walter Payton
4) Barry Sanders
5) Emmitt Smith
6) Adrian Peterson
7) Bo Jackson

?



Yes sir


No Dickerson?

gregair13
09-20-2009, 09:52 PM
LT sucks.

V4L
09-20-2009, 10:39 PM
"marshallvike" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:












Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.



They aren't on my list

What is the first quote then?



Left to right man

Maybe I misunderstood what ur saying im drunk as floop



So your list goes:
1) Earl Campbell
2) Jim Brown
3) Walter Payton
4) Barry Sanders
5) Emmitt Smith
6) Adrian Peterson
7) Bo Jackson

?



Yes sir


No Dickerson?



Shit thats what happens when u drink!

i would make a list later ha im fuckin drunk as shit

Purple Floyd
09-20-2009, 11:23 PM
"V4L" wrote:


"marshallvike" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:














Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.



They aren't on my list

What is the first quote then?



Left to right man

Maybe I misunderstood what ur saying im drunk as floop



So your list goes:
1) Earl Campbell
2) Jim Brown
3) Walter Payton
4) Barry Sanders
5) Emmitt Smith
6) Adrian Peterson
7) Bo Jackson

?



Yes sir


No Dickerson?



Shit thats what happens when u drink!

i would make a list later ha im fuckin drunk as shit


Marcus Allen

Zeus
09-20-2009, 11:28 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"marshallvike" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:
















Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.



They aren't on my list

What is the first quote then?



Left to right man

Maybe I misunderstood what ur saying im drunk as floop



So your list goes:
1) Earl Campbell
2) Jim Brown
3) Walter Payton
4) Barry Sanders
5) Emmitt Smith
6) Adrian Peterson
7) Bo Jackson

?



Yes sir


No Dickerson?



Shit thats what happens when u drink!

i would make a list later ha im fuckin drunk as shit


Marcus Allen


Any list that doesn't have Jimmy Brown or Walter Payton first is wrong.
Dead wrong.

=Z=

Purple Floyd
09-20-2009, 11:30 PM
"Zeus" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"marshallvike" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


















Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.



They aren't on my list

What is the first quote then?



Left to right man

Maybe I misunderstood what ur saying im drunk as floop



So your list goes:
1) Earl Campbell
2) Jim Brown
3) Walter Payton
4) Barry Sanders
5) Emmitt Smith
6) Adrian Peterson
7) Bo Jackson

?



Yes sir


No Dickerson?



Shit thats what happens when u drink!

i would make a list later ha im fuckin drunk as shit


Marcus Allen


Any list that doesn't have Jimmy Brown or Walter Payton first is wrong.
Dead wrong.

=Z=


And no Juice.

It's just not right.

C Mac D
09-21-2009, 01:10 AM
"Zeus" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"marshallvike" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


















Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.



They aren't on my list

What is the first quote then?



Left to right man

Maybe I misunderstood what ur saying im drunk as floop



So your list goes:
1) Earl Campbell
2) Jim Brown
3) Walter Payton
4) Barry Sanders
5) Emmitt Smith
6) Adrian Peterson
7) Bo Jackson

?



Yes sir


No Dickerson?



Shit thats what happens when u drink!

i would make a list later ha im fuckin drunk as shit


Marcus Allen


Any list that doesn't have Jimmy Brown or Walter Payton first is wrong.
Dead wrong.

=Z=


Eh... maybe in your opinion. But Sanders deserves to be mentioned as #1, at least above Payton. He was about to blow past Payton's record before he bowed out. Sanders only played 10 seasons, Payton played for 12.

Payton averaged 4.4 yards per attempt... Sanders averaged 5.0.

In 12 years, Payton had 110 TDs. In 10 years, Sanders had 99.

ThorSPL
09-21-2009, 11:11 AM
I just wish Sanders hadn't retired....

1) Sanders
2) Brown
3) Sweetness

But you could shuffle those and make an argument each way and be just as right as you are wrong.

tastywaves
09-21-2009, 11:17 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"marshallvike" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:
















Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.



They aren't on my list

What is the first quote then?



Left to right man

Maybe I misunderstood what ur saying im drunk as floop



So your list goes:
1) Earl Campbell
2) Jim Brown
3) Walter Payton
4) Barry Sanders
5) Emmitt Smith
6) Adrian Peterson
7) Bo Jackson

?



Yes sir


No Dickerson?



pooh thats what happens when u drink!

i would make a list later ha im fricken drunk as pooh


Marcus Allen


Over Darren Nelson?

Purple Floyd
09-21-2009, 09:48 PM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"marshallvike" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


















Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.



They aren't on my list

What is the first quote then?



Left to right man

Maybe I misunderstood what ur saying im drunk as floop



So your list goes:
1) Earl Campbell
2) Jim Brown
3) Walter Payton
4) Barry Sanders
5) Emmitt Smith
6) Adrian Peterson
7) Bo Jackson

?



Yes sir


No Dickerson?



pooh thats what happens when u drink!

i would make a list later ha im fricken drunk as pooh


Marcus Allen


Over Darren Nelson?


OK

That one gets the proverbial LMFAO.

Zeus
09-22-2009, 08:06 AM
"C" wrote:


Eh... maybe in your opinion. But Sanders deserves to be mentioned as #1, at least above Payton. He was about to blow past Payton's record before he bowed out. Sanders only played 10 seasons, Payton played for 12.

Payton averaged 4.4 yards per attempt... Sanders averaged 5.0.

In 12 years, Payton had 110 TDs. In 10 years, Sanders had 99.



Payton blocked.
Sanders did not.


=Z=

tastywaves
09-22-2009, 10:45 AM
"C" wrote:


"Zeus" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"V4L" wrote:


"marshallvike" wrote:




















Campbell>> brown>> Payton>>> Sanders>> Smith>> AP>>> Jackson

I have to disagree.... Smith is only there due to longevity; we gave him a line for many years... He was good in all facets of the game, but not amazing in any.

The top three I could agree with, though I really only saw Payton and Sanders live...

AND I think AD could leapfrog them in time.



I think the all team leading rusher has to be in the top 5 haha

Look at the number of years the rest of those guys played though. If you're basing his position on the list on his statistics, Bo Jackson and AP certainly shouldn't be in front of him.



They aren't on my list

What is the first quote then?



Left to right man

Maybe I misunderstood what ur saying im drunk as floop



So your list goes:
1) Earl Campbell
2) Jim Brown
3) Walter Payton
4) Barry Sanders
5) Emmitt Smith
6) Adrian Peterson
7) Bo Jackson

?



Yes sir


No Dickerson?



pooh thats what happens when u drink!

i would make a list later ha im fricken drunk as pooh


Marcus Allen


Any list that doesn't have Jimmy Brown or Walter Payton first is wrong.
Dead wrong.

=Z=


Eh... maybe in your opinion. But Sanders deserves to be mentioned as #1, at least above Payton. He was about to blow past Payton's record before he bowed out. Sanders only played 10 seasons, Payton played for 12.

Payton averaged 4.4 yards per attempt... Sanders averaged 5.0.

In 12 years, Payton had 110 TDs. In 10 years, Sanders had 99.



In Emmit's first 10 years, he had 136 rushing TD's.
He finished his career with 164.


Jim Brown had 106 rushing TD's in 9 years, with a 5.2 ypc.
LT had 126 rushing TD's in 8 years.

If you look at a RB's total career, it's hard not to give Emmit his dues.
He was a very productive RB.

If you look at who had the biggest impact in their prime, its a much tougher call, but it would be hard to go against Jim Brown.
Guys like Campbell and Dickerson came out on fire there first 5-6 years, before wearing down.

Walter Payton had a long productive career.
He was maybe the most complete back of the group.
Had the wow factor, but probably not quite as dominating as some of the others in their prime.

Sanders was a whole different animal.
Clearly one of the most enjoyable guys to watch, not so much with power or top end speed, but those crazy hips and short bursts were amazing.
All time ankle breaker to play the game, combined with great production.

For an all time RB, I think you need to consider both how they played in their prime along with how productive there careers ended up.

1) Walter Payton -- most complete back of the greats
2) Jim Brown -- most dominating in his prime
3) Barry Sanders -- good production, game changing ability,
4) Emmit Smith -- most productive RB to play the game

After that, its hard to argue where Dickerson, Campbell, Simpson, Allen, Faulk and others should fall.

If LT has a couple more productive years and he will be up there with the best of them.
Its easy to see these guys as they start deteriorating and forget how great they once were.
Its also easy to fall in love with the greats of yesteryear and forget about how they fell apart at the end of their careers.

ThorSPL
09-22-2009, 01:18 PM
"tastywaves" wrote:





In Emmit's first 10 years, he had 136 rushing TD's.
He finished his career with 164.


Jim Brown had 106 rushing TD's in 9 years, with a 5.2 ypc.
LT had 126 rushing TD's in 8 years.

If you look at a RB's total career, it's hard not to give Emmit his dues.
He was a very productive RB.

If you look at who had the biggest impact in their prime, its a much tougher call, but it would be hard to go against Jim Brown.
Guys like Campbell and Dickerson came out on fire there first 5-6 years, before wearing down.

Walter Payton had a long productive career.
He was maybe the most complete back of the group.
Had the wow factor, but probably not quite as dominating as some of the others in their prime.

Sanders was a whole different animal.
Clearly one of the most enjoyable guys to watch, not so much with power or top end speed, but those crazy hips and short bursts were amazing.
All time ankle breaker to play the game, combined with great production.

For an all time RB, I think you need to consider both how they played in their prime along with how productive there careers ended up.

1) Walter Payton -- most complete back of the greats
2) Jim Brown -- most dominating in his prime
3) Barry Sanders -- good production, game changing ability,
4) Emmit Smith -- most productive RB to play the game

After that, its hard to argue where Dickerson, Campbell, Simpson, Allen, Faulk and others should fall.

If LT has a couple more productive years and he will be up there with the best of them.
Its easy to see these guys as they start deteriorating and forget how great they once were.
Its also easy to fall in love with the greats of yesteryear and forget about how they fell apart at the end of their careers.[/quote]

From what I can gather, LT seems to have NO trouble remembering how good he used to be :)

Mr Anderson
09-22-2009, 01:50 PM
I'm gonna try to bring this thread back to the future.

We are watching the greatest runner to ever step onto the gridiron mature in front of our eyes, nobody knows what he's going to end up doing, but I know one thing for damn sure. It's fun to watch.

tastywaves
09-22-2009, 01:58 PM
"ThorSPL" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:





In Emmit's first 10 years, he had 136 rushing TD's.
He finished his career with 164.


Jim Brown had 106 rushing TD's in 9 years, with a 5.2 ypc.
LT had 126 rushing TD's in 8 years.

If you look at a RB's total career, it's hard not to give Emmit his dues.
He was a very productive RB.

If you look at who had the biggest impact in their prime, its a much tougher call, but it would be hard to go against Jim Brown.
Guys like Campbell and Dickerson came out on fire there first 5-6 years, before wearing down.

Walter Payton had a long productive career.
He was maybe the most complete back of the group.
Had the wow factor, but probably not quite as dominating as some of the others in their prime.

Sanders was a whole different animal.
Clearly one of the most enjoyable guys to watch, not so much with power or top end speed, but those crazy hips and short bursts were amazing.
All time ankle breaker to play the game, combined with great production.

For an all time RB, I think you need to consider both how they played in their prime along with how productive there careers ended up.

1) Walter Payton -- most complete back of the greats
2) Jim Brown -- most dominating in his prime
3) Barry Sanders -- good production, game changing ability,
4) Emmit Smith -- most productive RB to play the game

After that, its hard to argue where Dickerson, Campbell, Simpson, Allen, Faulk and others should fall.

If LT has a couple more productive years and he will be up there with the best of them.
Its easy to see these guys as they start deteriorating and forget how great they once were.
Its also easy to fall in love with the greats of yesteryear and forget about how they fell apart at the end of their careers.

From what I can gather, LT seems to have NO trouble remembering how good he used to be :)
[/quote]

True that, but it doesn't take away from what he's done.

Purple Floyd
09-22-2009, 07:37 PM
Injuries can really make a difference. had it not been for the career-ender we might be putting Terrell Davis in that list too. You just never know.