View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:48 am



Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 Adrian Peterson ranked #3 
Author Message
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Posts: 16627
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Post Adrian Peterson ranked #3
Ranked #3 on NFL Network's Top 100 players. Peyton Manning was #2 and Tom Brady took the top spot. Heres PFT's analysis and comments.

Quote:
3. Adrian Peterson, running back, Minnesota Vikings.

Peterson quietly had a MVP-caliber season in 2010; his teammates just didn’t help him. We’re not sure any running back should be this far ahead of top-five quarterbacks, but Peterson is the gold standard.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... work-list/

Quote:
Adrian Peterson is cool with his ranking among the Top 100 players. He knows it’s a quarterback league and that Tom Brady and Peyton Manning have championship rings.

Peterson also recognizes he can continue to improve his fumbling problem after basically correcting it in 2010.

“That’s something I looked back on, studied the film, and found out what I needed to improve on,” Peterson said on the NFL Network reaction show, via the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. “It was just really having good sound ball security and knowing that guys were really focused on punching that ball out rather than tackling me.

“Just my style of play, how I run, I get loose with the ball and it leaves opportunities for guys to punch it out. I cleaned it up and I lost one last year. This year I’m going for none.”

We think Peterson deserved the ranking and that he was actually better in 2010 than during the previous season in all aspects. He didn’t get the same blocking, and improved in the passing game. Now he just needs help from his teammates.

We’d hate to see the rest of Peterson’s prime wasted by organizational incompetence, much like Barry Sanders’ career.


http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... his-prime/

_________________
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly


Tue Jul 05, 2011 8:37 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
Posts: 4808
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
I saw that on NFLN, and I agree with all of it.

Some people will say that Peterson isn't a good blocker, or that he's not a great pass receiver in a passing league. But those things are not what he's paid to do, nor are they what he was made to do. This man was born to run around, through and away from defenders, and nobody does it better. His season last year was phenomenal given the utter ineptitude of our offensive line and quarterback play. Heck the man missed a game because his doofus quarterback (TJack) spazzed a simple handoff and gave him a leg injury. No statistics to back this up, but I'd say he was hit in the backfield on at least half his carries, and he still put up just south of 1,300 yards.

Put Adrian Peterson behind even a competent offensive line, and he'd rush for 2,000 yards.

_________________
"Is it normal to wake up in the morning in a sweat because you can't wait to beat another human's guts out?"
Joe Kapp


Tue Jul 05, 2011 8:50 am
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:55 am
Posts: 8815
Location: Way Up North
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
He might be 3rd by his peers, but there are definatley at least 10 players Id rather have on the Vikings than AD.
Manning
Brady
Rodgers
Suh
Peppers
Asomugha
Brees
Revis
Ware
Ryan


Tue Jul 05, 2011 9:04 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
Posts: 4808
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
purple guy wrote:
He might be 3rd by his peers, but there are definatley at least 10 players Id rather have on the Vikings than AD.
Manning
Brady
Rodgers
Suh
Peppers
Asomugha
Brees
Revis
Ware
Ryan

None of those players you mention are running backs. Not a knock, just an interesting observation. You've said that you don't place high stock on running backs, and the league is definitely trending in that direction.

You're obviously not as big an A.P. fan as a lot of us. That's cool. These are all quality players you've listed here. But when your PEERS rank you #3, I have to put a lot of stock in that. It's obviously more than "I'm just a big A.P. fan."

As to your list ...
• You can only have one quarterback.
• It would be a pipe dream to have more than one lockdown corner.
• And I'd say that A.P. has a greater impact on games than Suh, Peppers or Ware. It's at least an arguable point.

So even using your list, I'd still rank A.P. 3rd. Of course, seeing as we already have him, I like him just fine wearing #28 in purple!

_________________
"Is it normal to wake up in the morning in a sweat because you can't wait to beat another human's guts out?"
Joe Kapp


Tue Jul 05, 2011 9:59 am
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:55 am
Posts: 8815
Location: Way Up North
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
J. Kapp 11 wrote:
purple guy wrote:
He might be 3rd by his peers, but there are definatley at least 10 players Id rather have on the Vikings than AD.
Manning
Brady
Rodgers
Suh
Peppers
Asomugha
Brees
Revis
Ware
Ryan

None of those players you mention are running backs. Not a knock, just an interesting observation. You've said that you don't place high stock on running backs, and the league is definitely trending in that direction.

You're obviously not as big an A.P. fan as a lot of us. That's cool. These are all quality players you've listed here. But when your PEERS rank you #3, I have to put a lot of stock in that. It's obviously more than "I'm just a big A.P. fan."

As to your list ...
• You can only have one quarterback.
• It would be a pipe dream to have more than one lockdown corner.
• And I'd say that A.P. has a greater impact on games than Suh, Peppers or Ware. It's at least an arguable point.

So even using your list, I'd still rank A.P. 3rd. Of course, seeing as we already have him, I like him just fine wearing #28 in purple!



Ill give him, that he is probably the best RB playing now. As far as my list only having one QB?? The Top Ten list had 3. What I was saying, is I would prefer the Vikings had any one of those versus AD. And, admittedly, thats as much of a knock on the lack of importance in the position, as it is on AD. So my list maybe isnt a "top ten" as far as talent goes, but of players I think would be harder to relace than AD. The difference in an elite RB vs an elite QB, DE, DB, or even LB is big IMO. What would Arian Foster do on the Vikings compared to AD?? Chris Johnson, Taylor, MJD, or Charles?? Im sure they wouldnt do as well, but I doubt we win one less game.

Given the holes in ADs game, it is surprising his peers would rank him so highly. In my eyes, the top ten players would be the top ten you would want on your team, AD, for me, is not in the top ten, mostly because he is a RB. Now, if it was a top ten RB list, yea, Id pick him. But as far as making a huge difference in a game/season overall, there are a lot of players I would wish the Vikings had over AD, or any RB for that matter.


Tue Jul 05, 2011 10:27 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
Posts: 4808
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
purple guy wrote:
Ill give him, that he is probably the best RB playing now. As far as my list only having one QB?? The Top Ten list had 3. What I was saying, is I would prefer the Vikings had any one of those versus AD. And, admittedly, thats as much of a knock on the lack of importance in the position, as it is on AD. So my list maybe isnt a "top ten" as far as talent goes, but of players I think would be harder to relace than AD. The difference in an elite RB vs an elite QB, DE, DB, or even LB is big IMO. What would Arian Foster do on the Vikings compared to AD?? Chris Johnson, Taylor, MJD, or Charles?? Im sure they wouldnt do as well, but I doubt we win one less game.

Given the holes in ADs game, it is surprising his peers would rank him so highly. In my eyes, the top ten players would be the top ten you would want on your team, AD, for me, is not in the top ten, mostly because he is a RB. Now, if it was a top ten RB list, yea, Id pick him. But as far as making a huge difference in a game/season overall, there are a lot of players I would wish the Vikings had over AD, or any RB for that matter.

I'm going to guess his high peer-ranking has everything to do with the fact that those doing the voting actually have to tackle this beast of a man. When an opposing LB or DB has to try and stop A.P., especially when he's not slowed in the backfield like he is half the time, chances are good that they couldn't care less whether he's a good blocker. At his best, A.P. is either going to make them miss, run away from them, or run them over.

There are a lot of ways of looking at this. You're viewing it in a GM-type "wins over replacement" sort of way, which is perfectly legitimate. The players, however, seem to view it is as a simple "who's the best damn player on the field" sort of thing. I'd say there are very few instances where A.P. doesn't qualify.

I also happen to disagree with the notion that the NFL is just a passing league. Before you all laugh too loud, hear me out.

What I'd say is that it's not a run-dominant league, as it was when I was growing up. The passing game is definitely important and emphasized in the rules, but very few teams that can't run the ball win championships. That goes even for the Colts, Saints and Patriots, each of whom won championships with offenses that were pass-first in nature. The common thread was that all of those teams could also run the ball well. When the Colts, for example, field teams that simply can't run, they fizzle out in the playoffs. But when Joseph Addai and Dominic Rhodes put up 1,700 yards between them, they won the Super Bowl.

This ain't arena football. Pass-only may work in the regular season, but if you can't run or stop the run, you're going to flame out in the postseason.

_________________
"Is it normal to wake up in the morning in a sweat because you can't wait to beat another human's guts out?"
Joe Kapp


Tue Jul 05, 2011 12:01 pm
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 12:28 am
Posts: 1376
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
purple guy wrote:
J. Kapp 11 wrote:
purple guy wrote:
He might be 3rd by his peers, but there are definatley at least 10 players Id rather have on the Vikings than AD.
Manning
Brady
Rodgers
Suh
Peppers
Asomugha
Brees
Revis
Ware
Ryan

None of those players you mention are running backs. Not a knock, just an interesting observation. You've said that you don't place high stock on running backs, and the league is definitely trending in that direction.

You're obviously not as big an A.P. fan as a lot of us. That's cool. These are all quality players you've listed here. But when your PEERS rank you #3, I have to put a lot of stock in that. It's obviously more than "I'm just a big A.P. fan."

As to your list ...
• You can only have one quarterback.
• It would be a pipe dream to have more than one lockdown corner.
• And I'd say that A.P. has a greater impact on games than Suh, Peppers or Ware. It's at least an arguable point.

So even using your list, I'd still rank A.P. 3rd. Of course, seeing as we already have him, I like him just fine wearing #28 in purple!



Ill give him, that he is probably the best RB playing now. As far as my list only having one QB?? The Top Ten list had 3. What I was saying, is I would prefer the Vikings had any one of those versus AD. And, admittedly, thats as much of a knock on the lack of importance in the position, as it is on AD. So my list maybe isnt a "top ten" as far as talent goes, but of players I think would be harder to relace than AD. The difference in an elite RB vs an elite QB, DE, DB, or even LB is big IMO. What would Arian Foster do on the Vikings compared to AD?? Chris Johnson, Taylor, MJD, or Charles?? Im sure they wouldnt do as well, but I doubt we win one less game.

Given the holes in ADs game, it is surprising his peers would rank him so highly. In my eyes, the top ten players would be the top ten you would want on your team, AD, for me, is not in the top ten, mostly because he is a RB. Now, if it was a top ten RB list, yea, Id pick him. But as far as making a huge difference in a game/season overall, there are a lot of players I would wish the Vikings had over AD, or any RB for that matter.



I'm sorry I just don't agree with any of this.

First of all, I don't get your comparison with other RBs. Ignoring that some of the RBs run behind much better offensive lines then AD, are system RBs, and/or do not have the consistency that Adrian has, you're still grabbing the elite and fitting them in. Take any position, other than maybe QB, and tell me replacing one elite player with another changes how many wins you have. Does replacing Revis with Nnamdi change how many games you win? Does replacing Andre Johnson with Larry Fitzgerald or Roddy White change the number of games you win? What about Jake Long and Joe Thomas, DeMarcus Ware and Clay Matthews.... etc. etc.

So it's kind of a moot point you make about the "replacing AD" leading to more wins. AD is by far the best and most talented player on field almost every time he's out there. If anything, he's been able to win more games close to singlehandedly than players from other positions like OT or CB. Did you forget about San Diego or Chicago in 2008? Or Green Bay the same year, where he willed us to victory at the end of the game.


I don't know where this idea that RBs are so unimportant and replaceable came from. Yes the league is more of a passing league these days, but that doesn't mean the running game is obsolete. Yes finding a rotation of guys who can produce good numbers or a guy who can have one or two good years isn't terribly difficult, but does that mean that it diminishes the value of the guys that put up elite numbers, year after year after year like AD?

Just for example, compare the impact of an elite RB vs. an elite CB. An elite RB touches the ball 30+ times a game, he puts points on the board, he may make plays in a game that completely alter the momentum and the game in it's entirety. They can establish the tempo of a game, manage the clock, close out games. All of this is an elite RB's role and impact on a game. Can an elite RB make up for a poor Oline or poor passing offense? Absolutely. Now take an elite CB. What's his job? Take one WR out of every play. Now if he can do that, but the rest of the guys on defense aren't up to par, how valuable really is that CB who can take a WR out of the game, when the opposing team can simply game plan to avoid that CB and pick apart the rest of the defense.

_________________
Image


Tue Jul 05, 2011 12:28 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:55 am
Posts: 8815
Location: Way Up North
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
^Thats your opinion, and thats fine. As you much as you disagree with me, I disagree with you. Fair enough. Im certainly not attempting to change anyones opinion, simply stating mine, which is what these message boards are for, FYI. You didnt understand my point, but I couldnt care less.


Tue Jul 05, 2011 1:03 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:55 am
Posts: 8815
Location: Way Up North
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
J. Kapp 11 wrote:
purple guy wrote:
Ill give him, that he is probably the best RB playing now. As far as my list only having one QB?? The Top Ten list had 3. What I was saying, is I would prefer the Vikings had any one of those versus AD. And, admittedly, thats as much of a knock on the lack of importance in the position, as it is on AD. So my list maybe isnt a "top ten" as far as talent goes, but of players I think would be harder to relace than AD. The difference in an elite RB vs an elite QB, DE, DB, or even LB is big IMO. What would Arian Foster do on the Vikings compared to AD?? Chris Johnson, Taylor, MJD, or Charles?? Im sure they wouldnt do as well, but I doubt we win one less game.

Given the holes in ADs game, it is surprising his peers would rank him so highly. In my eyes, the top ten players would be the top ten you would want on your team, AD, for me, is not in the top ten, mostly because he is a RB. Now, if it was a top ten RB list, yea, Id pick him. But as far as making a huge difference in a game/season overall, there are a lot of players I would wish the Vikings had over AD, or any RB for that matter.

I'm going to guess his high peer-ranking has everything to do with the fact that those doing the voting actually have to tackle this beast of a man. When an opposing LB or DB has to try and stop A.P., especially when he's not slowed in the backfield like he is half the time, chances are good that they couldn't care less whether he's a good blocker. At his best, A.P. is either going to make them miss, run away from them, or run them over.

There are a lot of ways of looking at this. You're viewing it in a GM-type "wins over replacement" sort of way, which is perfectly legitimate. The players, however, seem to view it is as a simple "who's the best damn player on the field" sort of thing. I'd say there are very few instances where A.P. doesn't qualify.

I also happen to disagree with the notion that the NFL is just a passing league. Before you all laugh too loud, hear me out.

What I'd say is that it's not a run-dominant league, as it was when I was growing up. The passing game is definitely important and emphasized in the rules, but very few teams that can't run the ball win championships. That goes even for the Colts, Saints and Patriots, each of whom won championships with offenses that were pass-first in nature. The common thread was that all of those teams could also run the ball well. When the Colts, for example, field teams that simply can't run, they fizzle out in the playoffs. But when Joseph Addai and Dominic Rhodes put up 1,700 yards between them, they won the Super Bowl.

This ain't arena football. Pass-only may work in the regular season, but if you can't run or stop the run, you're going to flame out in the postseason.



I agree. A team cant be one dimensional, running or passing. You definately have to be able to run the ball. Again, Im not knocking AD specifically. But look at the last few SB winners. They could run the ball, but their RBs were definately not elite. Now if any of those teams were without their QBs, would they still have won the SB?? I doubt it. A team cant have total garbage at RB, but Id take an elite OL, QB, or DB and an average RB over an elite RB and an average OL, QB, or DB. The proof is in the Vikings record. They supposedly have the 3rd best player on the field and they won how many games last season?? How many SBs since he has been a Viking???


Tue Jul 05, 2011 1:13 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:28 pm
Posts: 5462
Location: University of Iowa
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
I am glad some justice was at least done to this list because it was simply pathetic. Anyway, I really hope this team can get its #### in gear and help Peterson get a ring. I would just be sick to have AP have a stellar career but be overlooked because he lacks a ring (i.e. Cris Carter, Jim Marshall, Mick Tinglehoff, Randy Moss (after he retires).)

_________________
A Randy Moss fan for life. Skol Randy.


Tue Jul 05, 2011 2:15 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 9:44 pm
Posts: 10852
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
80 PurplePride 84 wrote:
Why is McNabb on it? its supposed to be top 100 players of 2011 and you put a QB who was benched for Rex Grossman and deemed unfit to run a 2 minute drill by his own coach on it? LaDanian Tomlinson should be on it then he had a good year and his career as a whole is better than McNabb's


Sounds like the players think McNabb got screwed by the Shannys.


Wed Jul 06, 2011 8:56 am
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 8:53 pm
Posts: 7147
Location: bakersfield california
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
i agree with most of the list. the list was best players of 2011 not in 2011. you have to go by the complete body of work.


Wed Jul 06, 2011 2:40 pm
Profile
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Posts: 16627
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
Another fun stat.

Quote:
No player over the past three seasons has forced more missed tackles than the Vikings’ Adrian Peterson. Running behind an often suspect O-line, Peterson has forced 167 missed tackles, 25 more than any other player (Chris Johnson is second, with Fred Jackson just three further behind). Though this study does try and minimize the effect blocking has on a player’s numbers, there’s no doubt that Peterson would only be more dangerous with some improved blocking, and despite the lack of help from the big guys in front of him, he is still able to post impressive numbers across the board.


http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/20 ... 2008-2010/

_________________
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly


Wed Jul 13, 2011 9:30 am
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:28 pm
Posts: 5462
Location: University of Iowa
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
dead_poet wrote:
Another fun stat.

Quote:
No player over the past three seasons has forced more missed tackles than the Vikings’ Adrian Peterson. Running behind an often suspect O-line, Peterson has forced 167 missed tackles, 25 more than any other player (Chris Johnson is second, with Fred Jackson just three further behind). Though this study does try and minimize the effect blocking has on a player’s numbers, there’s no doubt that Peterson would only be more dangerous with some improved blocking, and despite the lack of help from the big guys in front of him, he is still able to post impressive numbers across the board.


http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/20 ... 2008-2010/


More proof that Peterson is the best running back in the NFL. How any could still rank Chris Johnson higher just blows my mind.

_________________
A Randy Moss fan for life. Skol Randy.


Wed Jul 13, 2011 5:23 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 8:53 pm
Posts: 7147
Location: bakersfield california
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
AP is definately the best overall back in the nfl. CJ may be a better pure running back. AP has reggie bush's hands and big play ability and is a much better runner than reggie bush. AP has speed and power. i can see why he is #3. :smilevike:


Wed Jul 13, 2011 8:57 pm
Profile
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:24 pm
Posts: 23028
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
Quote:
AP has reggie bush's hands


:rofl:

Bush gets snaps at receiver occasionally...Peterson gets taken off the field on passing downs. And it isn't entirely because of his blocking.


Wed Jul 13, 2011 9:32 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 8:53 pm
Posts: 7147
Location: bakersfield california
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
Demi wrote:
Quote:
AP has reggie bush's hands


:rofl:

Bush gets snaps at receiver occasionally...Peterson gets taken off the field on passing downs. And it isn't entirely because of his blocking.


i am just comparing there receiving ability. both are good at catching the ball. better tha CJ. plus AP is a much better pure runner than bush.


Thu Jul 14, 2011 1:17 am
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 9:13 am
Posts: 6334
Location: Ft Walton Beach, Florida
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
purple guy wrote:
He might be 3rd by his peers, but there are definatley at least 10 players Id rather have on the Vikings than AD.
Manning
Brady
Rodgers
Suh
Peppers
Asomugha
Brees
Revis
Ware
Ryan


Well I would agree with you on Manning, Brady, Rogers, Ryan, Brees, maybe revis but the list would end there. I do see your point But I wouldn't trade him for a pass rusher
. Peterson is the 3rd best player right now, and I actually would rate him over Manning. Manning is getting old and after all this NFL channel raving about him, he has only won 1 Superbowl. hardly a Joe Montana, Roger Staubauch or terry Bradshaw.


Thu Jul 14, 2011 8:29 am
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 8:53 pm
Posts: 7147
Location: bakersfield california
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
Laserman wrote:
purple guy wrote:
He might be 3rd by his peers, but there are definatley at least 10 players Id rather have on the Vikings than AD.
Manning
Brady
Rodgers
Suh
Peppers
Asomugha
Brees
Revis
Ware
Ryan


Well I would agree with you on Manning, Brady, Rogers, Ryan, Brees, maybe revis but the list would end there. I do see your point But I wouldn't trade him for a pass rusher
. Peterson is the 3rd best player right now, and I actually would rate him over Manning. Manning is getting old and after all this NFL channel raving about him, he has only won 1 Superbowl. hardly a Joe Montana, Roger Staubauch or terry Bradshaw.


i wouldnt agree on rogers, suh, or ryan right now. they havent been in the league that long. longevity and consistency matters. let them have a body of work first. some are comparing rogers too montana and suh to warren sapp. TOO EARLY.....TOO EARLY!!!!!


Fri Jul 15, 2011 10:44 pm
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:11 pm
Posts: 1021
Location: New Jersey
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
I think it's pretty obvious that a team would rather have an elite QB over an elite RB. It's the way the NFL is played, not to mention the longevity of a QB over a RB.

So what? Can we just enjoy having a premier player -- and the best running back in our history -- instead of playing the "yeah, but ..." game?

Sometimes there is no satisfying people.

_________________
"Meet at the quarterback"


Mon Jul 18, 2011 1:46 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:55 am
Posts: 8815
Location: Way Up North
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
VikeMike wrote:
I think it's pretty obvious that a team would rather have an elite QB over an elite RB. It's the way the NFL is played, not to mention the longevity of a QB over a RB.

So what? Can we just enjoy having a premier player -- and the best running back in our history -- instead of playing the "yeah, but ..." game?

Sometimes there is no satisfying people.




Its a message board. You arent going to agree with everyone. If YOU dont want to play the "yeah but" game.......................then dont. Dont tell others what they should post/think.


Mon Jul 18, 2011 6:08 pm
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:11 pm
Posts: 1021
Location: New Jersey
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
PG, yeah, it's a message board ... and I used it to say my opinion. I didn't tell anyone what to think.

_________________
"Meet at the quarterback"


Sat Jul 30, 2011 10:27 am
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 2:26 pm
Posts: 1854
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
You put Manning and Brady on your list... but they were ahead of him. Honestly I wouldn't take anyone on your top 10 over AD. Ad makes this team better, he makes the QB's on this team better. It would surprise me to see someone like Brady, Manning, or Rodgers come over to the Vikings and have the same level of success without AD. Its not just a coincidence that Favre had his best season statistically with AD.


Sat Jul 30, 2011 10:41 am
Profile
Franchise Player
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 6:01 pm
Posts: 402
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
i hate purpleguy so much..

thank you.

_________________
Image
LES GO: Greg, Ted, Kyle, CP, Jarius, Asia, Jerizzick Adam, Kalil, Phil, Sully, Shariiiiif, B Rob, Everson, Linval, Anthony, Chad, Gerald, Harrison, Xav, Cap, Josh, Robert, Jasper, Blair, Zimm, Norv -


Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:15 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Posts: 7796
Location: Hawaii
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
28BreaksAnkles wrote:
i hate purpleguy so much..

thank you.


Knock off the personal attacks. Not just you, there's been enough of this stuff by more than one person over the last few days.


Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:19 pm
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:11 pm
Posts: 1021
Location: New Jersey
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
Purple Guy is fine. I like his openness. He says what he thinks — just what a message board is about.
I don't always agree with him, but so what? Can you imagine a board where everyone agrees? Kind of defeats the purpose of a board.

_________________
"Meet at the quarterback"


Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:42 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:55 am
Posts: 8815
Location: Way Up North
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
28BreaksAnkles wrote:
i hate purpleguy so much..

thank you.



NO, thank you. Thats awesome. Keep up the personal shots, I love em.


Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:18 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 11:25 pm
Posts: 5185
Location: Too far from MN...
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
purple guy wrote:
28BreaksAnkles wrote:
i hate purpleguy so much..

thank you.



NO, thank you. Thats awesome. Keep up the personal shots, I love em.


I love you purpleguy. I enjoy our colorful banter!

_________________
"The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding, go out to meet it." ~Thucydides


Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:29 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:55 am
Posts: 8815
Location: Way Up North
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
thatguy wrote:
purple guy wrote:
28BreaksAnkles wrote:
i hate purpleguy so much..

thank you.



NO, thank you. Thats awesome. Keep up the personal shots, I love em.


I love you purpleguy. I enjoy our colorful banter!



:beerchug:


Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:35 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 9:44 pm
Posts: 10852
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Adrian Peterson ranked #3
:point:

more glass half full and glass half empty collisions! :lol:


Mon Aug 01, 2011 4:48 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], bchviking60 and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.