Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How much longer for Adrian Peterson?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    The question really comes down to whether or not Adrian Peterson is a once a decade type of back. Can you put his name in the group of Sanders, Payton, and Smith? He hasn't taken any significant injuries heading into the 2011 season. He runs to contact which is both bad and good. Very rarely does he take a crushing hit, he usually delivers the punishment, but those are still 360 collisions a year. He is physically capable of taking those hits, unlike Tomlinson who's body hasn't been able to hold up over the years and years of punishment.

    Again Peterson hasn't suffered any significant injury, no knee or leg problems, no serious head injuries or kneck injuries. Those are the injuries that cut a running backs life expectancy.

    Comment


    • #32
      AP breaks the mold. Honestly, I'm hoping he doesn't sign an extension with the Vikings and then surprised me by making a move on him next year. Well, maybe not.


      This team would be unstoppable if they had Peterson. Of course, the Vikings will likely franchise him, if they aren't wasting their time with Greenway.
      "There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted Thompson

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Deputy Nutz View Post
        The question really comes down to whether or not Adrian Peterson is a once a decade type of back. Can you put his name in the group of Sanders, Payton, and Smith?
        yes, from what i see

        Comment


        • #34
          The Vikings won't be scary until the fix their OL and their defense. The overall decline of their OL, teh loss of Fat Pat and Ray Edwards, combined with their always mediocre secondary makes me think they won't be winning at the LOS or stopping too many teams this year.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by hoosier View Post
            The Vikings won't be scary until the fix their OL and their defense. The overall decline of their OL, teh loss of Fat Pat and Ray Edwards, combined with their always mediocre secondary makes me think they won't be winning at the LOS or stopping too many teams this year.
            their o-line looked very good saturday. the white boy that replaced edwards looks like good player.

            you never know in the nfl, teams rise and fall unexpectedly. i pick the vikes to finish at bottom of division, but i really have no idea, beyond expecting pack to cruise to nfc north title.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Fritz View Post
              I dunno, BLue Dog. Maybe I am mean. I actually really like the guy and I think he's a fabulous athlete, but he plays for the stinking Vikings, so I hope he's only good if it helps the Packers. So, for example, if it would help the Pack if the Vikes played the Lions and beat them, then I'd root for Peterson. But even if it's a game between the Vikes and say, the Chargers, and it's meaningless, I can't stand the Vikes, therefore, I hope they get beat. I don't want them getting momentum and feeling good about themselves - what if they took that into a game two weeks later with the Pack? Therefore, I don't want Peterson to do all that well unless I want him to do well so the Pack is helped out.

              And yes, I kick puppies.
              This is the kind of iron-clad reasoning you expect from a true Packer fan. You never cheer on you mortal enemy unless their success helps you - 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' - conditionally. I would only make one alteration: "And yes, I kick Viking puppies." Otherwise, you're solid.
              "Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - Woodbuck

              Comment


              • #37
                Really? Outside of making a nice tackle on a reverse, Robinson was pretty invisible. Romo had time in the pocket--despite the fact the Vikings blitzed more often than not in a preseason game. I think Edwards is much better than Robinson. Edwards was underrated--which is one of the reasons that I'm more on the Falcons bandwagon than most seem to be. Robinson will be able to rush the passer a bit, but not enough to justify his poor run defense. Most of the Viking fans that I know aren't that high on Robinson. They think he's a situational pass rusher that will get exposed playing full-time.

                Their OL did look good though. Peterson looks out of this world. Then again, looking at the names on that OL it's hard for me to believe that it will carry over into the season against a good defense. Johnson is ordinary, Hutchinson is on the downside, Sullivan was terrible last year, Herrera is ordinary, Loadholt was average last year but has tons of talent.
                "There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted Thompson

                Comment

                Working...
                X