How Many RBs would You Rate above Peterson Right Now?

See You Next Wednesday · Wed Oct 17, 2007 9:28 pm

I still think LT ranks ahead of Adrian Peterson (duh), but after that I am not so sure. ROnnie Brown is having a phenomenal year nad may now have a coach who knows how to use him, so he may have moved up. LJ may be on the wrong side of his career afdter getting so used up. Steven Jackson, Joseph Addai, Frank Gore, who of these owuld you take ahead of AD? Personally i will rsate the top 5 RBs at:

1. LT
2. Brown
3. Peterson
4. Jackson
5. Addai

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:03 pm

Uhm, you might wanna read your own thread title, then see if you can figure out why you look kinda dumb "right now."

Why would you "right now" rank a player whose performance is considerably short of the leader as being "better"?

That makes no sense... "right now."

"Right now," the competition for best RB in the NFL "right now" isn't even freaking close.

Of course, I predicted this development 3 years ago.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:16 pm

You been smokin' that shit again Dins?

"Right now" you're really struggling to make sense.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:30 pm

mvscal wrote:
Mikey wrote:You been smokin' that shit again Dins?

"Right now" you're really struggling to make sense.
I believe it's a common symptom of not knowing what the fuck you're talking about.

That's a good possibility too.

KC Scott · Post by **KC Scott** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:43 pm

If SYNW is ranking them in FFL then he's really lost since Steven Jackson has been a bust second only to LJ this season.

But, if I were starting a team tomorrow I'd rank AD ahead of LT simply due to the number of years he has left in him. Maybe Addai and Gore right after that.

That said, every one of them have injury problems except LT - and considering his totals that is amazing.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:52 pm

See You Next Wednesday wrote:I still think LT ranks ahead of Adrian Peterson (duh), but after that I am not so sure. ROnnie Brown is having a phenomenal year nad may now have a coach who knows how to use him, so he may have moved up. LJ may be on the wrong side of his career afdter getting so used up. Steven Jackson, Joseph Addai, Frank Gore, who of these owuld you take ahead of AD? Personally i will rsate the top 5 RBs at:

1. LT
2. Brown
3. Peterson
4. Jackson
5. Addai

SYNW, did you do any research whatsoever before blurting out that post?

Steven Jackson? :roll:

Here, let me help you out. The most productive RB's thus far this season taking bye weeks into account:

1. Westbrook
2. Brown
3. Tomlinson
4. Peterson
5. Addai

How in hell anyone overlooks Westbrook is ponderous indeed.

See You Next Wednesday · Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:41 pm

1) I was really thinking about FF, just who you would want to on your team. So I am not just basing it on this year, but an overall feeling of whether you would want that guy on your team for now and the next year and the next five years. Yeah, Jackson is hurt, but I think I still rank him.

2) Westbrook I admit I kinda overlooked. In my mind he finds himself on the injury loist too often sometimes, but when he is in there he is easily top 5 if not top 3. Sorry for being so ponderous.

jiminphilly · Post by **jiminphilly** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:55 pm

How in hell anyone overlooks Westbrook is ponderous indeed.

He's nothing more than a 3rd down scat back

Sinc,

Mvscal

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 12:27 am

See You Next Wednesday wrote: Westbrook I admit I kinda overlooked. In my mind he finds himself on the injury loist too often sometimes, but when he is in there he is easily top 5 if not top 3.

Dude is always listed as questionable, and then invariably goes out there and lights it up. And FF wise, he's #1. Not top 5. Not top 3. Numero Uno.

As for AD, I don't think the rook is quite ready to be annointed the next Jim Brown yet. He might try getting listed as the #1 RB on his own teams depth chart first.

Is he talented and does he have exceptional potential? Sure he does, but just 6 games in is too early to make a definitive judgement.

That last game was an eye opener, but realize it came against the Bears and their piss poor defense. They suck, but just like you thought Jackson should be ranked in the top 5, you probably think the Bears are still a good measuring stick. They're not. They rank 23rd in points gakked up and 26th in yards allowed.

Get back to me on Peterson around week 12.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 12:57 pm

Hey, I'm not sure how you want to 'rank' the current backs, but A. Peterson is just simply SICK.
He's on a pretty short list of most impressive backs to ever come into the league, IMO.
When you watch him you're watching greatness.

Time will tell what kind of durability he will show, but right now the kid is young, fresh, healthy, and exciting.

Nixhex · Post by **Nixhex** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:38 pm

It's really hard to rank them. Offensive line play and scheme have so much to do with their production. Barry Sanders was one of the few RB's who could thrive even if both the O-Line and scheme sucked. I always wonder how good he would have been had he and Emmitt Smith switched teams.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:07 pm

War Wagon wrote:That last game was an eye opener, but realize it came against the Bears and their piss poor defense. They suck, but just like you thought Jackson should be ranked in the top 5, you probably think the Bears are still a good measuring stick. They're not. They rank 23rd in points gakked up and 26th in yards allowed.

Thank God for Devin Hester.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 · Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:00 pm

War Wagon wrote:As for AD, I don't think the rook is quite ready to be annointed the next Jim Brown yet. He might try getting listed as the #1 RB on his own teams depth chart first.

Is he talented and does he have exceptional potential? Sure he does, but just 6 games in is too early to make a definitive judgement.

How does he compare to Maroney?

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:18 pm

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote: How does he compare to Maroney?

Quite favorably, you ASS.

But hey, I heard her strained vulva is almost healed up and she just might be able to play this week.

Of course, that's a gametime decision. :brad:

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:21 pm

Can we slow down on the Peterson love just a touch? This is the problem with a week between every game...you have all this time to over-analyze, over-scrutinize, and over-evaluate every single detail about a single game. Teams and players get propped up or buried based on what they did the previous week. He had a great game against the Bears but let's not call him the next great running back yet. I think most of us agree he has the potential to be special for the Vikings but let's cool it with putting him among the ranks of LT before he puts up some consistent numbers over a longer period of time. Why are we always in such a hurry to call some young stud "the next ____". Let's sit back and enjoy the development of said player and not get sucked into the hype machine. Check out ESPN.com...they're already propping up Peterson.

DallasFanatic · Post by **DallasFanatic** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 5:28 pm

Shoalzie wrote:Can we slow down on the Peterson love just a touch? This is the problem with a week between every game...you have all this time to over-analyze, over-scrutinize, and over-evaluate every single detail about a single game. Teams and players get propped up or buried based on what they did the previous week. He had a great game against the Bears but let's not call him the next great running back yet. I think most of us agree he has the potential to be special for the Vikings but let's cool it with putting him among the ranks of LT before he puts up some consistent numbers over a longer period of time. Why are we always in such a hurry to call some young stud "the next ____". Let's sit back and enjoy the development of said player and not get sucked into the hype machine. Check out ESPN.com...they're already propping up Peterson.

You can't blame them Shoalzie. Minnesota hasn't had a great running back since the legendary Herschel Walker.

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:20 pm

I don’t know. Peterson has run for over 100 yards in 4 of his first 5 games, averaging 6.3 per carry. On pace for over 1,900 yards for the season. And he looks awesome. I’m a Packer fan, and I already find myself flipping back and forth to the Viking game on Sundays just to see the guy run.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:58 pm

Goober McTuber wrote:find myself flipping back and forth to the Viking game on Sundays just to see the guy run.

We did that for 3 years, only on saturdays.

Sin,
CFB Fan

Except in CFB, the benchmark he set was 200 every game, pretty much.

Then again -- the left side of the Queens' line isn't exactly chump-change, either. Funny how most of AD's long runs have been to the left.

DallasFanatic · Post by **DallasFanatic** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 7:05 pm

The Cowboys will have their hands full. I think they'll be alright against the run, but I'll give up on this team if they make Tavaris freakin Jackson look like Joe Cool.

RevLimiter · Post by **RevLimiter** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 8:01 pm

mvscal wrote:
Dinsdale wrote:Then again -- the left side of the Queens' line isn't exactly chump-change, either.
Fuck no. Matt Birk, Steve Hutchinson and Bryant Mckinnie are all studs. They made a scrub like Chester Taylor look like an All Pro.

Agreed- Vikes have the biggest, most talented offensive line in football and no matter what RB runs for them they should be churning out 150+yards rushing every single game no matter who they play.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 9:32 pm

When Hutchinson played for the Seahawks, Both Shaun Alexander and Maurice Morris carried some fairly gaugy career per-carry averages. Those lofty numbers have been in steady decline for both ever since they made the horrible decision to let him go.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Thu Oct 18, 2007 9:42 pm

RevLimiter wrote: Agreed- Vikes have the biggest, most talented offensive line in football and no matter what RB runs for them they should be churning out 150+yards rushing every single game no matter who they play.

:roll:

RevLimiter · Post by **RevLimiter** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 12:40 am

War Wagon wrote:
RevLimiter wrote: Agreed- Vikes have the biggest, most talented offensive line in football and no matter what RB runs for them they should be churning out 150+yards rushing every single game no matter who they play.
:roll:

Care to explain the rolling of the eyes, Wags? What I said was FACT- the Vikes by average weight have the biggest O-line in the game, and the whole left side of that line are perennial Pro Bowlers.

DallasFanatic · Post by **DallasFanatic** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:08 pm

RevLimiter wrote:
War Wagon wrote:
RevLimiter wrote: Agreed- Vikes have the biggest, most talented offensive line in football and no matter what RB runs for them they should be churning out 150+yards rushing every single game no matter who they play.
:roll:
Care to explain the rolling of the eyes, Wags? What I said was FACT- the Vikes by average weight have the biggest O-line in the game, and the whole left side of that line are perennial Pro Bowlers.

Paul.

You don't know jack shit unless you have gazed at each offensive linemans junk while recording their weights. However, I assume you are going by website statistics and not FACTual weight. These guys weigh more than whats given on a website or inside a program. For example, my beast of a right guard is listed as 354 lbs. It has been reported that he weighs around the 365-370 mark. So throw those numbers out the door Paul, and leave your argument as the Minnesota offensive line is damn good.

Churning out 150 yard rushers? Ummmm, not this weekend.

jiminphilly · Post by **jiminphilly** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 3:05 pm

DallasFanatic wrote:
RevLimiter wrote:
War Wagon wrote: :roll:
Care to explain the rolling of the eyes, Wags? What I said was FACT- the Vikes by average weight have the biggest O-line in the game, and the whole left side of that line are perennial Pro Bowlers.
Paul.

You don't know jack shit unless you have gazed at each offensive linemans junk while recording their weights. However, I assume you are going by website statistics and not FACTual weight. These guys weigh more than whats given on a website or inside a program. For example, my beast of a right guard is listed as 354 lbs. It has been reported that he weighs around the 365-370 mark. So throw those numbers out the door Paul, and leave your argument as the Minnesota offensive line is damn good.

Churning out 150 yard rushers? Ummmm, not this weekend.

I'll take Vikings plus the 10.

DallasFanatic · Post by **DallasFanatic** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 3:09 pm

Pipe down jimbo and concentrate on that cellar dweller you have in Philly.

jiminphilly · Post by **jiminphilly** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 3:26 pm

DallasFanatic wrote:Pipe down jimbo and concentrate on that cellar dweller you have in Philly.

The NFC is so weak, the Iggles could finish the season at 8-8 and make the playoffs as a Wild Card. I'll take Philly in a playoff over the Cowboys.. :D:D

DallasFanatic · Post by **DallasFanatic** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 3:47 pm

jiminphilly wrote:
DallasFanatic wrote:Pipe down jimbo and concentrate on that cellar dweller you have in Philly.
The NFC is so weak, the Iggles could finish the season at 8-8 and make the playoffs as a Wild Card. I'll take Philly in a playoff over the Cowboys.. :D:D

There's the comdeian in you. Good to know you are taking McScabb's collapse in stride. My only question will be if you lose the next two weeks, do you start Kolb (or whatever his name is)? Any talk of McScabb riding some pine in the near future?

jiminphilly · Post by **jiminphilly** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 5:59 pm

DallasFanatic wrote:
jiminphilly wrote:
DallasFanatic wrote:Pipe down jimbo and concentrate on that cellar dweller you have in Philly.
The NFC is so weak, the Iggles could finish the season at 8-8 and make the playoffs as a Wild Card. I'll take Philly in a playoff over the Cowboys.. :D:D
There's the comdeian in you. Good to know you are taking McScabb's collapse in stride. My only question will be if you lose the next two weeks, do you start Kolb (or whatever his name is)? Any talk of McScabb riding some pine in the near future?

McNabb is only going to improve if he continues to play- remember he's back early from a knee injury which, for some reason, is making him incredibly indecisive. Couple that with a bunch of receivers that can't get off a jam and you have a pathetic offense that doesn't run the ball enough. Though incredibly impatient, Eagles fans are not calling for Kolb to play and would rather see Andy Reid fired and a coach who isn't so stubborn about the run be brought instead.

McNabb is due a rather large roster bonus next year- I wonder if the Eagles will try to shop him- I can't see them releasing him- if so, he'll be the Chicago Bears starting QB next year.

DallasFanatic · Post by **DallasFanatic** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 5:29 pm

jiminphilly wrote: McNabb is due a rather large roster bonus next year- I wonder if the Eagles will try to shop him- I can't see them releasing him- if so, he'll be the Chicago Bears starting QB next year.

Nice audition he gave yesterday jimbo. The beat goes on.............

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:59 pm

Peterson had 63 yards rushing on 12 carries with 1 lost fumble whilst splitting rushing attempts with Chester the Molester.

The legend of Half Day continues to grow and he should be fitted for his HoF jacket before Thanksgiving.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:02 pm

That was awfully nice of the Queens' coaching staff to stop giving the ball to AllDay after he dropped from his season average of around 6.2 per to a pedestrian 5.3 per.

I mean, if dude isn't going to ring up a 20 yard TD EVERY play, rather than just once in a while, they need to bench the little shit.

That was a fairly shocking meltdown of a coaching staff. I'm sure the Cowboys were loving it -- sit the most effective offensive player in the entire league down... for some reasons unbeknownst to everyone else. Must have been that 2nd career fumble that got him in the doghouse.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:48 pm

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the need to make third down conversions stem from making less than 10 yards on 1st and 2nd?

I mean, from what I understand, both 1st Down AND 2nd Down usually occur before 3rd Down, right?

Believe it or not, there's actually a couple of OCs in the NFL who will occasionally run the ball on 1st and 2nd Down... just a casual observation.

Let's see... early in the game, AD was given the rock, and busted off a 20yd TD, to cap off his 4 carries on the opening series, a series in which he averaged about 7 per carry.

The Queens led at half.

After the opening series, the Most Productive Player in the NFL touched the ball 8 more times.

Yes... 8.

Hmmm.... let's see.... we've got the player who has the most yards from scrimmage in the entire league, and we're having trouble making yardage. Whatever shall we do about it?

I know!!! LET'S BENCH HIM!!!!!!

Pure. Freaking. Genius.

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:57 pm

Dinsdale wrote:sit the most effective offensive player in the entire league down

seems you have a bit of a man crush on Half-Day......

oh, and Tom Brady says you're full of shit.....

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:18 pm

Outstanding logic. Just outstanding.

You should be an OC, mv.

"Hey! We can't gain yards for shit! Where's that one guy who's leading the NFL in yards from scrimmage? Get his ass over here, so I can bench him! Leading 14-7 at half is no fucking reason to try and establish the run."

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:36 pm

mvscal wrote:Peterson sucked yesterday

Alrighty then...

I guess we can lock this thread down then, no?

If 5.3 yards per carry on the day, including a 20 yard TD is "sucking," it clearly put the topic of debate in this thread to rest, in emphatic fashion.

If dude has already set the bar so high that a 5.3 per, 63 yard, 1 TD effort "sucked," then all debate over the top RB has been removed.

Thanks for making my point.

DallasFanatic · Post by **DallasFanatic** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:18 pm

Sorry Dins, but I watched the game and Peterson, while having a decent Dallas debut on his first drive, was pretty much stuffed the rest of the game. The fourth and 1 was a bullshit spot too. Clown was a half yard short. Anyways, the Boys figured out the Vikings blocking scheme and rendered AP pretty much a target for Canty, Ware and Co.

AP will be good over time, but I think its a little premature to start referring to him as the "most effective offensive player in the entire league."

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:04 pm

Dinsdale wrote: Must have been that 2nd career fumble that got him in the doghouse.

2nd career fumble?

H-D fumbled twice against KC alone, though granted it was more a case of a seriously pissed off Jared Allen ripping the ball from his grasp. In that game he also had a great start, but then started sucking more and more wind with each carry. He was also getting absolutely pounded, as his upright running style leads to taking excessive abuse. With each hit, he took longer and longer to get up off the ground.

There's a good reason he's splitting carries. He's not carrying the ball against Taco Tech and Okie State anymore. He's fragile and must be handled with care. No way that guy is ready to get 25 touches a game.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:14 pm

mvscal wrote:
War Wagon wrote:H-D fumbled twice against KC alone
No, he didn't.

Did you watch the game?

I did, and can assure you that he fumbled twice.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:15 pm

DallasFanatic wrote:AP

Who? Is that the dude for the Bears?

but I think its a little premature to start referring to him as the "most effective offensive player in the entire league."

Hmmm... let's see....

Leads the NFL in rushing. Leads qualifying ball carriers in YPC. Has the most yards from scrimmage.

I guess our definition of "effective" must be a little different.

But we'll just agree to disagree, and chalk it up to a mere semantics debate, Rumplefanatic.

T1B

How Many RBs would You Rate above Peterson Right Now?

How Many RBs would You Rate above Peterson Right Now?

Re: How Many RBs would You Rate above Peterson Right Now?

Re: How Many RBs would You Rate above Peterson Right Now?