PDA

View Full Version : Peterson > McFadden


SenorGato
10-14-2007, 11:26 PM
Perfect time for this post.

As a prospect...Peterson was one of the best of all time IMO. All the way from HS to the pros the guy was never anything less than elite.

McFadden = Elite prospect in his draft. Peterson = Elite prospect in draft history.

BTW: Yes, I do like working with hyperbole.

SuperKevin
10-14-2007, 11:36 PM
i like McFadden's trick play versatility but I can't make a real assessment until I see McFadden play an NFL down

SenorGato
10-14-2007, 11:42 PM
i like McFadden's trick play versatility but I can't make a real assessment until I see McFadden play an NFL down

Peterson's lower center of gravity, stronger legs, similar speed, and overall body strength give him away as the better prospect IMO.

Shiver
10-14-2007, 11:43 PM
I think it's funny that last year it was en vogue to take Marshawn Lynch as a prospect over Adrian Peterson. I'm just happy I've always felt that Adrian Peterson is the best RB prospect that I have seen with my own eyes.

M.O.T.H.
10-14-2007, 11:54 PM
AD was def. the better prospect, imo but, Run DMC is the next best thing. Two of the best RB prospects to come out in years. I missed out on AD...I want Mcfadden.

Iamcanadian
10-14-2007, 11:56 PM
i like McFadden's trick play versatility but I can't make a real assessment until I see McFadden play an NFL down


They were and are both solid prospects. I agree completely that comparing them now after seeing Peterson play as a pro is completely worthless. Nobody knows how well McFadden will adjust. IMO, the only thing that seperated them is Peterson injury history. If Peterson goes down with another injury and misses the rest of the season, does that count against him because that is the only reason he slipped out of the top 5 in the 1st place. AS PROSPECTS, they are about equal, as pros, that is a completely different story as it is with any rookie.

Shiver
10-15-2007, 12:05 AM
McFadden will be great in the NFL, I feel, because he's doing well with no legitimate QB to distract defenses.

Woody56
10-15-2007, 12:27 AM
Since I have been following the draft closely (2001), I would say Peterson is the best RB prospect ever.

VoteLynnSwan
10-15-2007, 12:38 AM
Since I have been following the draft closely (2001), I would say Peterson is the best RB prospect ever.

... this post is probably more useless than the one i'm submitting right now.

B-Dawk
10-15-2007, 12:47 AM
It seems like McFadden disappears in some games

M.O.T.H.
10-15-2007, 01:26 AM
It seems like McFadden disappears in some games

when? He's nearly unstoppable and it shows on that stat sheet week after week.

D-Unit
10-15-2007, 01:27 AM
I think this the perfect thread to come up at a time when the guy has a great game. ...????? whatever.... I wanna see longevity. With his history of injury and his upright style, he won't last 5 years unless things change.

255979119
10-15-2007, 01:35 AM
Since I have been following the draft closely (2001), I would say Peterson is the best RB prospect ever.

Because we all know those guys in the hall of fame were undrafted crap bags....

Turtlepower
10-15-2007, 01:55 AM
Since I have been following the draft closely (2001), I would say Peterson is the best RB prospect ever.

Jim Brown
Barry Sanders
Walter Payton
Eric Dickerson
Ricky Williams
Edgerrin James
OJ Simpson

All of those are better RB prospects that Peterson.

I think this the perfect thread to come up at a time when the guy has a great game. ...????? whatever.... I wanna see longevity. With his history of injury and his upright style, he won't last 5 years unless things change.

That was exactly what I was thinking. Peterson's biggest knock was injury concerns and they won't show up for probably some time.

D-Unit
10-15-2007, 02:17 AM
That was exactly what I was thinking. Peterson's biggest knock was injury concerns and they won't show up for probably some time.
Remember the Jamal Lewis threads when he broke the record??? LOL. Fickle fans.

Turtlepower
10-15-2007, 02:22 AM
Remember the Jamal Lewis threads when he broke the record??? LOL. Fickle fans.

I was ready to kill every analyst who thought Jamal Lewis was a top-10 RB of all-time for that one season. Didn't he have nearly 300 yards against the Browns and was getting tremendous hype from it. He did have a great season, but obviously his injury concerns have caught up to him.

My biggest surprise with Peterson this year is how well he has caught the ball in the backfield. He has remarkably nice hands and a very quick turn up field, which is something that many RBs often lack.

I'm still afraid that Childress might end up hurting AD with his workload. It's never a good thing to overwork an injury prone back.

big daddy russ
10-15-2007, 03:32 AM
Jim Brown
Barry Sanders
Walter Payton
Eric Dickerson
Ricky Williams
Edgerrin James
OJ Simpson

All of those are better RB prospects that Peterson.



That was exactly what I was thinking. Peterson's biggest knock was injury concerns and they won't show up for probably some time.

Better pros? Yeah.

Better prospects? ROFLMAO.

I've been on AD's jock since he was in HS, but he's a better prospect than Williams and James for sure. For those who don't know, the whole reason Polian drafted James over Williams was because James had better hands and was a better fit for the offense they were running, not necessarily because he was the better prospect.

The only prospects on that list who were on AD's level were Sanders, Dickerson, and OJ.

The ones you left off who were better pure prospects than those guys were the Kansas Comet, Billy Sims, and Earl Campbell.

Jim Brown was good out of college, but I doubt anyone knew what he'd become. He was a FB at Syracuse, but became a TB in the pros.

Honestly, if you gave me game tape of all these guys you just said and told me to rank them, I'd put Payton, Dickerson, and OJ on AD's level. Nobody else. AD has Williams' strength, patience, and burst, but is MUCH quicker, faster, and has better hands. Quickness and hands were Edge's strengths over Williams, but AD's quicker. May not have the hands, but he's definitely quicker.

He may be injury-prone, but that kid can play football. Like I've said a hundred times, he was every bit as good as Calvin Johnson. Light years ahead of everyone else taken in front of him and a much better prospect IMO than Reggie Bush (though I was never big on RB as a football player, just thought he was a great athlete that didn't have the skills to translate to the next level). Maybe now everyone else will see what I see when I watch AD.

He may be the next Dickerson, or he may be a more injury-prone Gale Sayers, but he'll be the most feared RB in the NFL (and yes, I'm including LT) within the next three years.

Woody56
10-15-2007, 03:35 AM
After seeing my post i worded it incorrectly, I meant since 01 Peterson is the best prospect i've seen.

Paranoidmoonduck
10-15-2007, 03:38 AM
I definitely think that Peterson's recent success is coloring this a bit. As a prospect, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if McFadden surpasses the prospect profile of Adrian Peterson. I think that Peterson had (and still has) a hint of injury concern around him, and I think that McFadden is the smoother runner with tendency to avoid more violent collisions.

I have no idea who will have the better or longer NFL career, but I do think that McFadden will be more generally regarded next April than Peterson was last April.

big daddy russ
10-15-2007, 03:41 AM
I think this the perfect thread to come up at a time when the guy has a great game. ...????? whatever.... I wanna see longevity. With his history of injury and his upright style, he won't last 5 years unless things change.

You didn't actually watch him much, did you? His upright style had nothing to do with his injuries. One was just a freak injury and the other was a high ankle sprain that prevented him from making his cuts. Still played in 11 of the 12 OU games the year he sprained his ankle.

The other was a dive into the end zone that broke his collarbone. And he came back for the bowl game even though he didn't have anything to prove to anyone.

Basically, to me it sounded like a huge smokescreen from NFL teams. I don't know what they were actually thinking, but as a guy who's seen his fair share of running backs from the other side of the LOS, Peterson easily ranks as the single back I'd never want to see. As tough as Earl Campbell between the tackles, as quick as Marshall Faulk, as fast as anyone, the only thing you may be able to knock would be his hands, but they're slightly better than average.

I'll get off my high horse now.

Freddy G
10-15-2007, 08:11 AM
Clearly Peterson IMO, if we are talking purely in prospect terms. The only thing Dmac clearly has over Peterson are less injury questions, but even then iirc Dmac has had couple minor, though simi-nagging, injuries. Its possible that Dmac has more top end speed, but AD is more explosive and has a better burst.

And from a personal standpoint, i just like ADs more physical running style more, Dmac can't run in between the tackles like AD could. Also, i am not sure if there has ever been a running back with the flat out pure natural ball carrying ability that AD has (like, sanders, payton, allen esque..), i guess it is called the "it" factor, and i am not convinced Dmc has it.

Sniper
10-15-2007, 08:33 AM
when? He's nearly unstoppable and it shows on that stat sheet week after week.

17 carries, 43 yards, 0 TDs vs. Auburn this week.

vatech=accdomination
10-15-2007, 08:38 AM
dmac has alot to prove in the nfl, i dont think his tackle breaking ability is on par with petersons.

BuddyCHRIST
10-15-2007, 10:05 AM
This thread being at this time shows how short sighted people are being. AP had an amazing game and D-Mac struggled against Auburn. That's one game, throughout his career DMac has tore up top SEC teams... Auburn last year, LSU last year, Kentucky and Bama this year. To say he dissapears is ridiculous, it was one game. No one questioned Peterson's ability, it was just his ability to stay healthy over a 16 game season, which still hasn't been answered. I think very few people doubted that he had the physical ability to be an impact player.

You saying that Peterson's lower center of gravity makes him a better prospect is just completely wrong, they run almost identical, and if anything this year McFadden has started getting his pads lower. Both of them hit defenders with their elbows and knee's.

McFadden actually looks faster in pads than Peterson and burst? Look at Dmac's 80 yard run against a NFL stacked LSU defense last year, where they were all about a foot away from him and 3 yards later he's got them smoked.

I don't mean to knock Peterson because I too think he was one of the best RB prospects ever but McFadden is clearly at his level if not above it. He's got just as good of physical tools and has been more consistently productive playing against higher level of competition.

CARDIAC CAT 7
10-15-2007, 11:00 AM
Dont forget that Minne has one of the best Run Blocking Lines 3 Pro Bowlers (Birk, Hutchinson, McKinnie) and two road graders (Cook, Hicks). I think hes a great runner but that O-Line is a big reason why his numbers are that way. Marshawn Lynch runs behind a patchwork line with a star left tackle.(Peters). A big reason why Lynch was rated equal even higher for some is who knows how long Adrian will be running, he has durablility problems, let see if he can finish the season off the IR.

Staubach12
10-15-2007, 11:09 AM
This really is funny. Hindsight is 20/20. Before the draft, there were questions about Peterson's durability and running style. He was not one of the best prospects of all time. He wasn't the prospect that Bush was (as an overall player), for example. The fact that he had 300 total yards does not define the kind of prospect he was! Get a grip people.

osi+ap=allshallperish
10-15-2007, 11:24 AM
to me mcfadden is like my 04 gto versus my buddy's 96, I think, corvette. His car is lighter and has similar power so it accelerates better at the lower revs but in the end I do have more horses and at higher speeds I can just pull away from him. Same way with mcfadden and Adrian, mcfadden just has more speed and it shows with his ability to go from fast to gone.

georgiafan
10-15-2007, 12:26 PM
The reason DMAC disapears in game is because people play atleas 8 in the box since arkansas has no passing game. Just think of what he could if his team had a passing game and he faced a 7 man front.

Sniper
10-15-2007, 12:36 PM
The reason DMAC disapears in game is because people play atleas 8 in the box since arkansas has no passing game. Just think of what he could if his team had a passing game and he faced a 7 man front.

Mike Hart faced 8 and 9 man fronts in the PSU game as well as the NW game and still put up 100+ yards with a freshman at QB. If McFadden is so godly, why can't he do that? Granted, Mike had 40+ carries against PSU but still ripped off about 160 yards.

mchesnu
10-15-2007, 01:02 PM
Mike Hart faced 8 and 9 man fronts in the PSU game as well as the NW game and still put up 100+ yards with a freshman at QB. If McFadden is so godly, why can't he do that? Granted, Mike had 40+ carries against PSU but still ripped off about 160 yards.

It was one bad game pro. McFadden put up 8+ yds/carry against an LSU Defense that played 9 in the box.

georgiafan
10-15-2007, 02:51 PM
Hart may have faced 8 man fronts once or twice when Henne was hurt. Mcfadden has faced them every game for 2 years. Because he has one bad game doesn't change anything. Can you imagine what Mcfadden would do if he was playing with Michigan and ther OL and passing game.

Green Bay Scat
10-15-2007, 03:22 PM
if McFadden goes to a good line team, i wonder what he would do

yo123
10-15-2007, 03:55 PM
Dont forget that Minne has one of the best Run Blocking Lines 3 Pro Bowlers (Birk, Hutchinson, McKinnie) and two road graders (Cook, Hicks). I think hes a great runner but that O-Line is a big reason why his numbers are that way. Marshawn Lynch runs behind a patchwork line with a star left tackle.(Peters). A big reason why Lynch was rated equal even higher for some is who knows how long Adrian will be running, he has durablility problems, let see if he can finish the season off the IR.



Cook and Hicks are both awful. They are not road graders.

BuckNaked
10-15-2007, 04:11 PM
Cook and Hicks are both awful. They are not road graders.

I believe saying that they are awful may be a bit of an understatement.

619
10-15-2007, 04:26 PM
dmac is just a step or two behind peterson..he basically had the same type of season as petersons freshman year as a sophomore

P-L
10-15-2007, 04:27 PM
A lot of people want to call Peterson "injury prone," which is foolish. The guy had two injuries in college, neither of which were related to his running style. Hell, the collarbone injury was only a result of him landing awkwardly in the end zone after diving for a TD. In my opinion, the collarbone injury was a blessing in disguise. It was clear since his Freshman year that Peterson was ready for the NFL. In his junior year, Peterson was on pace for 350 carries. He only received 188 due to the injury. Do I think Peterson's running style will affect him down the road? Yeah, I think it's likely. Has it affected him to this point? No, and people need to open their eyes and realize that.

Vikes99ej
10-15-2007, 04:28 PM
Yes, people, let us all recognize that his collar-bone had everything to do with his running-style, even though he was just flipping into the end-zone.

bigbluedefense
10-15-2007, 04:36 PM
I definately agree. Peterson runs angry, and is a better pure runner than McFadden.

2 things scare me about McFadden.

1. his body type is kind of lanky for a RB, and his "trickplay" mumbo jumbo is blown out of proportion. Seriously...who cares.

2. his lower body isn't thick enough. that could be an issue in the NFL

He seems to be a stud, but I have some reservations about him translating that to the NFL.

My opinion can change on him though. At first I thought Lynch would be better than Peterson, but then after seeing more tape of Peterson I changed my mind, so who knows.

Staubach12
10-15-2007, 04:50 PM
His body type is fine, except for a small problem with his lower body, which you mentioned. Heck, if that's his biggest issue right now, he's better than Peterson was. I had questions about him running upright. I remember Chris Brown comparisons (not to say that I agree with those comparisons at all).

bigbluedefense
10-15-2007, 04:57 PM
His body type is fine, except for a small problem with his lower body, which you mentioned. Heck, if that's his biggest issue right now, he's better than Peterson was. I had questions about him running upright. I remember Chris Brown comparisons (not to say that I agree with those comparisons at all).

Don't get me wrong, I like the kid. But I just don't see why everyone is annoiting him like they are. I don't think he's that above and beyond other RBs the way everyone makes it seem.

M.O.T.H.
10-15-2007, 05:29 PM
17 carries, 43 yards, 0 TDs vs. Auburn this week.

lol...look at every week before that game. Pretty hard to run when defenders were in the backfield when he was getting the handoff.

It sure would be nice if had a QB that could take some of the focus/pressure off of him but, he doesnt.

Paranoidmoonduck
10-15-2007, 06:19 PM
A lot of people want to call Peterson "injury prone," which is foolish. The guy had two injuries in college, neither of which were related to his running style. Hell, the collarbone injury was only a result of him landing awkwardly in the end zone after diving for a TD. In my opinion, the collarbone injury was a blessing in disguise. It was clear since his Freshman year that Peterson was ready for the NFL. In his junior year, Peterson was on pace for 350 carries. He only received 188 due to the injury. Do I think Peterson's running style will affect him down the road? Yeah, I think it's likely. Has it affected him to this point? No, and people need to open their eyes and realize that.

I was calling Peterson a potential injury problem based on the fact that most runner who run like him don't last particularly long like that in the NFL. I believe the comparison that was drawn was Deuce McAllister, who ran the same way coming out of Mississippi. He showed talent, missed a solid amount of time due to injury, but more importantly, had to play a lot of time while not at 100%.

Of course, that didn't and still doesn't mean anything about the kind of career Peterson will have. But the single biggest question mark I had about Peterson before the draft is the same I have now, which is whether a team will be paying for a 100% Peterson when they'll only be getting spurts of that punctuating mostly hobbled performances.

I definately agree. Peterson runs angry, and is a better pure runner than McFadden.

2 things scare me about McFadden.

1. his body type is kind of lanky for a RB, and his "trickplay" mumbo jumbo is blown out of proportion. Seriously...who cares.

2. his lower body isn't thick enough. that could be an issue in the NFL

He seems to be a stud, but I have some reservations about him translating that to the NFL.

My opinion can change on him though. At first I thought Lynch would be better than Peterson, but then after seeing more tape of Peterson I changed my mind, so who knows.

I'm interested as to what you use to define "pure runner". Running angry is all well and good, and you love it when your runner intimidates a defense like that, but it is harder and harder to be a successful runner like that in today's NFL.

Just my take on McFadden. I think he is better at picking running routes and making reads while still behind his offensive line than Peterson. I think he's faster and I think he has a top gear that I'm not quite sure I ever saw from Peterson. I think that both are unbelievably quick at hitting the hole. I think that McFadden is a much smoother runner and that, for being taller and skinnier than Peterson, takes far less big shots and delivers almost as much punishment himself. I think Peterson is better at making a guy flat out miss in the open field, but I also think that McFadden takes great angles when he gets in a foot race.

I don't necessarily disagree about McFadden being lanky, especially in the lower body, but I haven't really seen it affect him on the field. No matter what his build, he's demonstrated adequate strength with his play.

P-L
10-15-2007, 06:53 PM
I was calling Peterson a potential injury problem based on the fact that most runner who run like him don't last particularly long like that in the NFL. I believe the comparison that was drawn was Deuce McAllister, who ran the same way coming out of Mississippi. He showed talent, missed a solid amount of time due to injury, but more importantly, had to play a lot of time while not at 100%.

Of course, that didn't and still doesn't mean anything about the kind of career Peterson will have. But the single biggest question mark I had about Peterson before the draft is the same I have now, which is whether a team will be paying for a 100% Peterson when they'll only be getting spurts of that punctuating mostly hobbled performances.

See, a potential injury concern is different than being injury prone. I agree Peterson is a potential injury risk, but his running style didn't cause problems while in college.

Moses
10-15-2007, 06:58 PM
I'm not sold on Peterson's running style making him injury prone. He lowers his shoulder upon contact and drives the defender back. How would that make him more injury prone than other runningbacks?

Paranoidmoonduck
10-15-2007, 07:21 PM
See, a potential injury concern is different than being injury prone. I agree Peterson is a potential injury risk, but his running style didn't cause problems while in college.

I don't necessarily agree with that either. Obviously this is just my opinion, but the Adrian Peterson that came to OU was a cleaner, smoother runner than the one that left, and I've had people I rely on telling me that he played hobbled a lot. Whether that just makes his college career more impressive or his NFL future less so is up to you I guess.

I'm not sold on Peterson's running style making him injury prone. He lowers his shoulder upon contact and drives the defender back. How would that make him more injury prone than other runningbacks?Well, firstly, because more contact = more hits = equals more chances of something going wrong when hit. Obviously that's a simplification, but it is true. It isn't that Peterson is driving into defenders, it's that he seeks contact when it might well be better avoided.

Secondly, because Peterson is no longer bigger, stronger, and faster than all the defenders he faces. There isn't a single runningback I can think of in the last 20 or so years who had a long and fruitfull career running the way Peterson runs.

Think of the recent Peterson-esque successful runners. Eric Dickerson, while sublime, had 4 truly healthy and dominant campaigns, and I still think he was better at avoiding contact that Peterson. I guess you could call Eddie George and Corey Dillon in the discussion too, but I don't think either was ever all that dominant. Additionally, Eddie liked contact, but he didn't run into people at the speed Peterson does, and Dillon avoided it fairly well.

And, like I've said, I'm not saying Peterson will get injured. I'm not saying he'll only last five years either. A lot is going to depend on how his team uses him, if he can make stylistic adjustments to his running method over time, etc. However, I think that as a prospect his running style was a legitimate concern considering the money and length of contract he was bound to get, and I don't think he's done anything to alleviate that concern in the first 6 weeks of his rookie season. What he has done is go a long way to towards showing he's worth the risk.

619
10-15-2007, 07:23 PM
hopefully he doesnt end up like jamal lewis. so dominant early on in his career then nothin since.

oldLibid21
10-15-2007, 09:51 PM
Adrian Peterson's running behind the best run-blocking offensive line in the NFL. He's a great running back, but I don't think we can judge them yet until we see what kind of offensive line McFadden ends up with and how good he is behind that line. Adrian Peterson owes a lot to his linemen for how good he's been doing so far. If he was running behind Atlanta's linemen, I doubt he'd be having this good of a rookie season.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
10-15-2007, 10:09 PM
I severely doubt a line boasting such studs as Cook and Hicks is the best in football. I dunno what you guys think, but in football, and the NFL especially, backside guys can make plays, so he can't just run to the left all day. Let's not act like he isn't the only threat on his offense, either. Tarvaris Jackson does not scare people(at least not yet), and neither do any of the WRs(Sidney Rice may in the near future). Teams know that the only guy who is gonna hurt them is AD, but he still gets the job done. The guy is a stud, plain and simple.

natepurcell
10-15-2007, 10:15 PM
AD running behind the best run blocking line in the NFL is such a fallacy I don't even know where to start.

lets go from left to right.

Mckinnie: he is average at best at run blocking. He is known to be a pass protection franchise LT and he has been subpar at doing that this year.

Hutch: hes great, no complaints.

Birk: getting old, can still pull with the best of them but past groin injuries has limited his lateral movement somewhat.

Hicks: horrible, has been replaced by Anthony Herrera who Childress has just announced to be the future starter. Now I like Herrera but he is by no means elite at his position.

Cook: Cook has been solid and I think will eventually become a pretty dang good RT. He has the size, athleticism and smarts to do well. That said, hes young, learning a new position and still a bit green.


I honestly don't know how anyone can call this line the best run blocking line in the nfl. I see one elite linemen, two solid linemen and two young players trying to find themselves in the league.

DHVF
10-15-2007, 10:19 PM
I severely doubt a line boasting such studs as Cook and Hicks is the best in football. I dunno what you guys think, but in football, and the NFL especially, backside guys can make plays, so he can't just run to the left all day. Let's not act like he isn't the only threat on his offense, either. Tarvaris Jackson does not scare people(at least not yet), and neither do any of the WRs(Sidney Rice may in the near future). Teams know that the only guy who is gonna hurt them is AD, but he still gets the job done. The guy is a stud, plain and simple.Definitely agree with this assessment. Its an absolute joke to call the Vikings line the best in football, especially in run blocking. I mean, do you honestly consider the above mentioned offensive linemen even as average? When it comes to run blocking, big ol' Bryant McKinnie has proven to be highly inadequate. That statement was simply ridiculous.

edit: well said nate lol

M.O.T.H.
10-15-2007, 10:23 PM
The line did have a great game but, AD did all his damage in the open field, the Bears couldnt touch him.

Paranoidmoonduck
10-15-2007, 10:32 PM
I don't think the Vikings have the best offensive line in football, but that line is playing great right now. Both the left side and the right side are cutting off defenders and creating lanes for Peterson with great effectiveness.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
10-15-2007, 10:34 PM
I'm gonna break down the following clip of his runs against Chicago.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRMrGoTGtK4

1st run: This one was all AD. The Line did a good job pushing the guys away form the play, but they naturally gravitated there anyway, since it was a counter. Then Briggs has a shot to get him for a loss or at least no gain. Adrian Peterson outran Briggs, Tillman, and the safety, THREE GUYS who had contain on that play, all were outran by AD who turned a bad play into a big gain.

2nd run: OL made a good crease, to get him at least 5 yards. However, after 5 yards, the other 62 yards are all AD. He makes a sick juke on Tillman, and just blows past everyone else. This is a run only an elite back can make.

3rd run: We see the RE beat McKinnie and head over to make the tackle. But AD sees that there are no holes to run through and cuts it back. He makes several defenders look stupid, and then 73 yards later is in the endzone. This run was clearly all AD.

4th run: a guy gets a chance at AD in the backfield, but Peterson is too quick. The OL provides a small crease, which most RBs would turn into a 4-5 yard gain. AD is quick enough togo through the hole untouched, cut so quickly that while travelling twice the distance of his pursuers, still beats them to the spot. He turned this from a solid run into a 35 yard TD.

KO return: Not much to say here, but he demonstrated his amazing top speed and burst here. He gets from the 10 to midfield before the Bears know what's going on.


To sum it up, bottom line, AD is a stud. Could he get hurt? Yes, anyone could. Were his injuries flukes, completely unrelated to running style? Yes. Is Adrian Peterson already one of, if not the, best pure runner in the NFL? Without a doubt.

mchesnu
10-16-2007, 12:44 AM
To sum it up, bottom line, AD is a stud. Could he get hurt? Yes, anyone could. Were his injuries flukes, completely unrelated to running style? Yes. Is Adrian Peterson already one of, if not the, best pure runner in the NFL? Without a doubt.

The best pure runner in the NFL? Are you kidding me? Let's at least wait a full season before making any such bold statements.

natepurcell
10-16-2007, 12:49 AM
The best pure runner in the NFL? Are you kidding me? Let's at least wait a full season before making any such bold statements.

its not just him making the statement, ive seen that statement thrown out by a plethora of sports writers and analysts.

Dolfan2788
10-16-2007, 01:07 AM
The best pure runner in the NFL? Are you kidding me? Let's at least wait a full season before making any such bold statements.

It's not that hard to say that he's the best 'pure runner'. It doesn't mean he's the best though.

Benson and Cadillac Williams are both what you would consider better pure runners than Ronnie Brown. Brown however is by far the best back out of the 3.

If you said he was better than LT or LJ at this stage though I would have a few qualms about that.

Vikes99ej
10-16-2007, 01:41 AM
When I see AD make head-on contact with someone, I rarely see him budge. I always expect to see some sign of an impact, and it never happens. I love that quality about him.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
10-16-2007, 04:41 PM
The best pure runner in the NFL? Are you kidding me? Let's at least wait a full season before making any such bold statements.

You can already see just by watching him he's one of the top 5 pure runners. Seriously, can you name 5 backs who could make the plays AD did? I doubt it. He run through guys, around guys, and past guys. Very few NFL backs can do that. It isn't something you need to wait and see on. It's not like he's on a loaded offense with a very good QB and passing game. He's the only threat on the field. I'm not saying he's a top 5 back, however, THAT is what we need to wait and see on.

toonsterwu
10-16-2007, 08:19 PM
I think this the perfect thread to come up at a time when the guy has a great game. ...????? whatever.... I wanna see longevity. With his history of injury and his upright style, he won't last 5 years unless things change.

That's the thing for me. I'll stick with what I said last year, and that is, Peterson may have the better individual seasons, but I still believe that Lynch may end up being the better back long term. But only time will tell.

As for the McFadden/Peterson comparison, I like McFadden's running style/fluidity better than I liked Peterson's, and if he pops a good time, I think McFadden is the better prospect of the two, and arguably, one of the elite prospects of draft history, which is a rarity for me, as I'm not typically a fan of tall backs.

yo123
10-16-2007, 08:21 PM
When I see AD make head-on contact with someone, I rarely see him budge. I always expect to see some sign of an impact, and it never happens. I love that quality about him.



Me too. And the upright running style is being VERY overexaggerated. On contact he always lowers his shoulder, unlike the people hes being compared to like Chris Brown or Fred Taylor.

big daddy russ
10-16-2007, 09:46 PM
AD's one of the top five backs in the NFL right now. Two weeks down the road, it may be different, but I haven't seen any signs of anyone or any team who can stop him. And this dates back to his HS days. Let me know if you find that man/team.

big daddy russ
10-16-2007, 09:49 PM
On a side note, does anyone on this board really believe that Lynch is a better back than AD? Honestly? Hell, does anyone even think that Lynch was close to AD's level? I can't even compare the two. Couldn't when they were in college, can't now.

During their college days, there was Bush and Peterson, then everyone else. The gap between Lynch and Peterson was huuuuuge.

LonghornsLegend
10-16-2007, 11:52 PM
McFadden is going to be great, but he really is not the same physical talent as AD, and I dont think he is on the same level, even if I was judging from college, AD's freshman year was better then any season McFadden has put together...And another knock on AD was that he couldnt catch well out of the backfield, so much for that...Also its pretty obvious that he could return punts and kickoffs and be alot more explosive then reggie bush, or half of the league for that matter and he had no experience in college...


Its real easy to say if AD gets hurt, oh its his injury concerns we all knew about, but there is no guarantee any rb is going to play injury free for 10 years, happens to the best of them...But as far as talent is concerned, AD is on another level then McFadden is, we can judge more accurately next year, but I saw things with AD at 18, that some rbs will never possess


And note, this is from a guy who has held a slight grudge he chose OU over UT, and i hate OU and pretty much every athlete that goes there, I lied to myself for a long time that he wasnt better then Cedric Benson when he was at UT(as sad as it may be), but I got to watch him play first hand alot, and read alot of articles on him, you dont get an athlete like him that comes along every year, he may not be the greatest prospect ever, but Im pretty confident the only thing that stopped him from that title is injury concerns(that people overblow)

How can you talk about his "upright running style" and his 2 injuries were a high ankle sprain, and a broken collarbone from jumping into the endzone, he was never even injured from his running style, eric dickerson ran the exact same way, you cant assume a guy will get injured because he has an "upright running style", i dont buy into that

geaux tigers
10-16-2007, 11:57 PM
cant really compare running at OU vs running at Arkansas where the passing game is nonexistant. Not to mention McFadden share carries with another 1st day RB in Felix Jones.

SenorGato
10-17-2007, 01:15 AM
Me too. And the upright running style is being VERY overexaggerated. On contact he always lowers his shoulder, unlike the people hes being compared to like Chris Brown or Fred Taylor.

Exactly. I hate that knock. He's got an excellent center of balance for a taller back, and he's got freakish leg and core strength.

BTW: Tomlinson isn't good because he might get injured sounds alot like Peterson isn't/won't be elite because he might get injured.

big daddy russ
10-17-2007, 02:49 AM
cant really compare running at OU vs running at Arkansas where the passing game is nonexistant. Not to mention McFadden share carries with another 1st day RB in Felix Jones.

Sure you can. Paul Thompson only averaged 190 yards per game last year. The Sooner staff didn't give Thompson an ounce of responsibility until Peterson went down and the role players had no choice but to step up.

Being from the same region as both schools, I've seen both backs play. A lot. AD can run behind any offensive line in America while McFadden's going to struggle unless a line can open a few holes. Sure, McFadden's a great downhill runner with the vision, fluidity, and ability to change direction to avoid most direct hits, along with the athleticism to play anywhere on the field (he was recruited as an ATH out of HS), but saying that he'll wind up being the NFL running back that Peterson will be is like saying that Janet Reno will wind up being as sexy as Scarlett Johanssen.

The only people who put McFadden on AD's level are people who never actually watched AD play that much. And if that's not the reason, then I don't know what other people see when they watch football games.

Three things people need to realize:
1. AD dominated from day one at every level. He stepped out on the field and was immediately better than everyone. And not just by a little. The Heisman Trophy should've gone to him his freshman year. People weren't talking about how dominant Matt Leinart was, they were talking about that freshman running back out of Norman who couldn't be stopped. You know you're a b/a when you step out onto the field as an 18-year-old fresh out of HS and run roughshod through the first three major tests you have, averaging dang near 200 yards per game, including a 225-yard, 7 ypc game against the then-fifth-ranked Texas Longhorns.

2. Peterson is almost as quick as Reggie Bush, he just doesn't look like it because of his frame and his violent running style. Think LT's quicks with LenDale White's strength and Walter Payton's determination.

3. All the athleticism and versatility in the world doesn't make you a better football player than another guy, it just makes you a more versatile football player than another guy.

Javzz
10-17-2007, 02:11 PM
Sure you can. Paul Thompson only averaged 190 yards per game last year. The Sooner staff didn't give Thompson an ounce of responsibility until Peterson went down and the role players had no choice but to step up.

Being from the same region as both schools, I've seen both backs play. A lot. AD can run behind any offensive line in America while McFadden's going to struggle unless a line can open a few holes. Sure, McFadden's a great downhill runner with the vision, fluidity, and ability to change direction to avoid most direct hits, along with the athleticism to play anywhere on the field (he was recruited as an ATH out of HS), but saying that he'll wind up being the NFL running back that Peterson will be is like saying that Janet Reno will wind up being as sexy as Scarlett Johanssen.

The only people who put McFadden on AD's level are people who never actually watched AD play that much. And if that's not the reason, then I don't know what other people see when they watch football games.

Three things people need to realize:
1. AD dominated from day one at every level. He stepped out on the field and was immediately better than everyone. And not just by a little. The Heisman Trophy should've gone to him his freshman year. People weren't talking about how dominant Matt Leinart was, they were talking about that freshman running back out of Norman who couldn't be stopped. You know you're a b/a when you step out onto the field as an 18-year-old fresh out of HS and run roughshod through the first three major tests you have, averaging dang near 200 yards per game, including a 225-yard, 7 ypc game against the then-fifth-ranked Texas Longhorns.

2. Peterson is almost as quick as Reggie Bush, he just doesn't look like it because of his frame and his violent running style. Think LT's quicks with LenDale White's strength and Walter Payton's determination.

3. All the athleticism and versatility in the world doesn't make you a better football player than another guy, it just makes you a more versatile football player than another guy.

Okay, point number 1. McFadden's dominated on every level as well. He went over 1000 his freshman season with a 6.3 average. Coincidently, said 6.3 average was higher than AD's 5.8 average during his freshman season. McFadden also didn't share the benefit of having a heisman winning in the same offense. McFadden had a higher ypc last year as well.

2. Are you really serious? You have me convinced that Adrian Peterson is in fact not human at all. Are you sure he really doesn't have Jim Brown's strength? Bo Jackson's speed? Hell, let's throw in John Elway's arm in there too for shits in giggles.

3. McFadden has versatality, yes. But when you hand him the ball he still gets the job done. You've taken this time to write this long post yet brought up no point on why exactly McFadden is not on Peterson's level, besides simply that you believe so.

Sniper
10-17-2007, 02:40 PM
3. McFadden has versatality, yes. But when you hand him the ball he still gets the job done. You've taken this time to write this long post yet brought up no point on why exactly McFadden is not on Peterson's level, besides simply that you believe so.

Does the word "witness" in your sig stand for "Witness to McFadden's awesome 17-43-0 game"?

fenikz
10-17-2007, 02:50 PM
Peterson > LT > Ricky Williams > Reggie Bush > Run DMC

as prospects

Javzz
10-17-2007, 03:37 PM
Does the word "witness" in your sig stand for "Witness to McFadden's awesome 17-43-0 game"?

At the end of the day McFadden>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Hart.

Pretty pathetic troll attempt, by the way.

Sniper
10-17-2007, 03:50 PM
At the end of the day McFadden>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Hart.

Pretty pathetic troll attempt, by the way.

It wasn't a troll attempt. It was a question.

Hart: 200 carries, 1,078 yards, 12 TD, 5.4 ypc, 7 receptions, 43 yards, 6.1 ypc, 0 fumbles, Low of 102 on 21 carries (in one half!)

McFadden: 147 carries, 822 yards, 7 TD, 5.6 ypc, 8 receptions, 61 yards, 7.6 ypc, ???? fumbles but I do know it's more than Hart, Low of 43 yards on 17 carries (in the whole game)

You had 20 of these (>), so are you still so sure that McFadden is 20 times better than Hart after seeing the stats?

BroadwayJoe10
10-17-2007, 04:07 PM
i posed this question in another forum, but i was wondering what is the general concensus of everyone here? If there are clearly other glaring needs on ur team such as LG, RT, NT, DE is Dmac that great of a prospect that you take him if you can't trade down? (ie. i would never take an OG in the first round, RT can be gotten later due to the depth in this draft, there is no clear elite NT in this draft this high. The only pick i can see is a top flight DE who can play the 3-4)

If it was your time to pick, would you guys skip over Oline and Dline help in order to snag McFadden?

Javzz
10-17-2007, 04:50 PM
It wasn't a troll attempt. It was a question.

Hart: 200 carries, 1,078 yards, 12 TD, 5.4 ypc, 7 receptions, 43 yards, 6.1 ypc, 0 fumbles, Low of 102 on 21 carries (in one half!)

McFadden: 147 carries, 822 yards, 7 TD, 5.6 ypc, 8 receptions, 61 yards, 7.6 ypc, ???? fumbles but I do know it's more than Hart, Low of 43 yards on 17 carries (in the whole game)

You had 20 of these (>), so are you still so sure that McFadden is 20 times better than Hart after seeing the stats?

Hart is also running behind the best run blocking OT in the NCAA in Jake Long. Big 10 has also been far from impressive. Hart is an elite back in CFB. He seems like a great person both on and off the field, I'd love to have him at LSU. With that being said, he's not close to McFadden.

Saints-Tigers
10-17-2007, 05:00 PM
Anyone who says that one or the other isn't on the same level is kidding themselves.

These guys are pretty close as prospects, I personally like Peterson better.

MaddHatter
10-17-2007, 05:02 PM
AFD is the best RB in the NFL as it stands right now - McFadden can't touch McFadden's shoe laces at this point

Sniper
10-17-2007, 05:26 PM
Hart is also running behind the best run blocking OT in the NCAA in Jake Long. Big 10 has also been far from impressive. Hart is an elite back in CFB. He seems like a great person both on and off the field, I'd love to have him at LSU. With that being said, he's not close to McFadden.

How can you say Hart isn't close to McFadden? Jake Long or not, everyone else on that line isn't playing very well and Hart makes them look so much better. Not close to McFadden my ass. Because he doesn't pull off 60+ TD runs all the time? Big deal. He's consistent, he's the best pass blocking RB in D-1, he never fumbles etc...Not close to McFadden my ass.

big daddy russ
10-17-2007, 05:37 PM
Okay, point number 1. McFadden's dominated on every level as well. He went over 1000 his freshman season with a 6.3 average. Coincidently, said 6.3 average was higher than AD's 5.8 average during his freshman season. McFadden also didn't share the benefit of having a heisman winning in the same offense. McFadden had a higher ypc last year as well.

2. Are you really serious? You have me convinced that Adrian Peterson is in fact not human at all. Are you sure he really doesn't have Jim Brown's strength? Bo Jackson's speed? Hell, let's throw in John Elway's arm in there too for shits in giggles.

3. McFadden has versatality, yes. But when you hand him the ball he still gets the job done. You've taken this time to write this long post yet brought up no point on why exactly McFadden is not on Peterson's level, besides simply that you believe so.

1. There's a difference between being one of the most dominant players in the nation and doing well. McFadden carried the ball 173 times his freshman year and made the All-SEC squad, so I'm definitely not selling him short. He's the best college back in America right nwo. What I'm saying is that Peterson was absolutely dominant against any and all comers from the get-go. Peterson carried the ball almost twice as much (339 times), was a consensus First Team All-American, and finished second in Heisman voting-- one spot ahead of Jason White (who, as you pointed out, won the award the previous year). And I could care less about his YPC. Allen Patrick's getting 6.3 YPC this year, but nobody will ever confuse him with Peterson.

2. I'm an Auburn guy and Bo's my second-favorite player of all-time, but Peterson's every bit as good as Jackson. One of my friends played for Auburn from 1981 through 1984, and we were talking about Adrian Peterson last year. He said that Bo Jackson was the fastest player to the corner he ever played with or against, that he could destroy pursuit angles like nobody he'd ever seen. He then said that Herschel Walker wasn't as fast, but was impossible to tackle because of his core strength. He'd graze you and put you on your arse. He then said that Peterson was a mix of the two, so when you said that he has Bo's speed and Brown's strength, you aren't far off.

3. I'm not saying McFadden doesn't get the job done. I'm saying that Peterson gets the job done better. Here, watch these highlights. I know you're a McFadden homer, but there's no way you can't change your mind after watching them.

AD
http://youtube.com/watch?v=AmFM8MepDjE

DMC
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1FCfZoPGEFA

And I'm sorry I didn't give you all the reasons that Peterson's better than McFadden, but here's a list of what Peterson excels in and what McFadden excels in.

By the way, I'm watching SportsCenter right now and Sean Salisbury just agreed with me... Peterson's the best pure runner in the league right now.

Peterson's Advantages
-Strength
-Breaking Tackles (Huge advantage)
-Acceleration
-Cutback ability (Huge advantage)
-Dexterity (huge advantage)
-Agility
-Balance (Huge advantage)
-Can make his own holes

McFadden's Advantages
-6th gear (Huge advantage)
-Shiftiness
-Hands
-Versatility

They both have great vision and are both great downhill runners, so I'm calling it a wash. Anything to add?

Sniper
10-17-2007, 05:57 PM
By the way, I'm watching SportsCenter right now and Sean Salisbury just agreed with me... Peterson's the best pure runner in the league right now.



Sean Salisbury? You're gonna have to do better than that ;)

Seems like we've all forgotten about this running back in San Diego...Kind of a weird name, apparently he's pretty good. He may have won the MVP last year.

bigbluedefense
10-17-2007, 06:00 PM
Sean Salisbury? You're gonna have to do better than that ;)

Seems like we've all forgotten about this running back in San Diego...Kind of a weird name, apparently he's pretty good. He may have won the MVP last year.

Tomlinson is not the best pure runner in the league. He's the best runningback, but not the best pure runner.

LJ was the best pure runner, and now Peterson (aka LJ on steroids) is the best pure runner.

Javzz
10-17-2007, 07:42 PM
1. There's a difference between being one of the most dominant players in the nation and doing well. McFadden carried the ball 173 times his freshman year and made the All-SEC squad, so I'm definitely not selling him short. He's the best college back in America right nwo. What I'm saying is that Peterson was absolutely dominant against any and all comers from the get-go. Peterson carried the ball almost twice as much (339 times), was a consensus First Team All-American, and finished second in Heisman voting-- one spot ahead of Jason White (who, as you pointed out, won the award the previous year). And I could care less about his YPC. Allen Patrick's getting 6.3 YPC this year, but nobody will ever confuse him with Peterson.

2. I'm an Auburn guy and Bo's my second-favorite player of all-time, but Peterson's every bit as good as Jackson. One of my friends played for Auburn from 1981 through 1984, and we were talking about Adrian Peterson last year. He said that Bo Jackson was the fastest player to the corner he ever played with or against, that he could destroy pursuit angles like nobody he'd ever seen. He then said that Herschel Walker wasn't as fast, but was impossible to tackle because of his core strength. He'd graze you and put you on your arse. He then said that Peterson was a mix of the two, so when you said that he has Bo's speed and Brown's strength, you aren't far off.

3. I'm not saying McFadden doesn't get the job done. I'm saying that Peterson gets the job done better. Here, watch these highlights. I know you're a McFadden homer, but there's no way you can't change your mind after watching them.

AD
http://youtube.com/watch?v=AmFM8MepDjE

DMC
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1FCfZoPGEFA

And I'm sorry I didn't give you all the reasons that Peterson's better than McFadden, but here's a list of what Peterson excels in and what McFadden excels in.

By the way, I'm watching SportsCenter right now and Sean Salisbury just agreed with me... Peterson's the best pure runner in the league right now.

Peterson's Advantages
-Strength
-Breaking Tackles (Huge advantage)
-Acceleration
-Cutback ability (Huge advantage)
-Dexterity (huge advantage)
-Agility
-Balance (Huge advantage)
-Can make his own holes

McFadden's Advantages
-6th gear (Huge advantage)
-Shiftiness
-Hands
-Versatility

They both have great vision and are both great downhill runners, so I'm calling it a wash. Anything to add?

I'd give McFadden the Acceleration advantage. McFadden has seemed to improve himself in this department coming into this season. Dexterity, huh? I'd also say McFadden can create something out of nothing. From an overall standpoint, I'd go like this.

Peterson
-Lateral Ability
-Breaking tackles.
-Balance
-Strength(not as far as a gap as most people think between the two)
-Cutback ability beyond LOS(probably falls under "Lateral ability", but I wanted to make it known that I see this as an advantage for Peterson.)
-After contact
-More natural runner(perhaps the most natural I've seen with my own eyes)
-Making something out of nothing.(Double edge sword, as McFadden is more likely to hit the small hole and get 2-5 yards, where Peterson may end up getting nothing. )

McFadden
-Acceleration
-Top End speed
-Versitality
-Stiff Arm/Seperating from defenders.
-Finishing off runs(Double edged sword here again, as in these situations Peterson is more likely to end up taking it all the way whereas McFadden lowers his shoulder and pops a hit on the defender and gets the 2-3 extra yards.)
-Cutback ability behind the line(I feel McFadden is better as in making a quick cut and exploding through a hole)
-Avoiding contact

Hands are a push, since I feel McFadden's are highly overrated. Not that he can't, just that Arkansas doesn't do it too much. The few times they've spread McFadden outwide he's looked really good.) McFadden's blocking worries me as well, since in reality he hardly every has to do it.

Probably far too many catagories here, and probably some catagories that basically mean the same thing, but when trying to compare elite prospects such as these two it's hard not to nitpick. Please realize that nowhere am I stating that I believe McFadden is far and away the better prospect. I believe they're very similar and couldn't really go wrong either way.

T.Smith
10-17-2007, 07:49 PM
I have been calling McFadden the poormans AD for many many months(before heisman ceremony last year) and everytime I say It people always flame me. It's nice to see AD doing GREAT in the nfl.

geaux tigers
10-17-2007, 09:18 PM
Sure you can. Paul Thompson only averaged 190 yards per game last year. The Sooner staff didn't give Thompson an ounce of responsibility until Peterson went down and the role players had no choice but to step up.
.

190yds per game is a lot better than Casey Dicks on a good day 140ypg passing. Arkansas arguably has the worst passing game in CFB.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
10-17-2007, 09:24 PM
I would just like to say, while McFadden may end up testing slightly faster, Peterson is SO fast but doesnt even look like it. He doesn't look like he's moving that fast, then all of a sudden guys are diving at his ankles and missing. Like on that kick return. It was he got it, you blink, and then he was at midfield. He is VERY fast, so much so that any advantage McFadden has is really just extra, nothing overly necessary.

doingthisinsteadofwork
10-17-2007, 09:28 PM
omg!!!!!!!!AD is a better prospect than McFadden because hes having a very succesfull rookie year so far.
This thread was better when people hadnt seen what he could do in the NFL.But what can you expect from Sheeple.They see a player doing well and they immediately join the bandwagon.Before the draft there were plenty of people saying that McFadden and Lynch were both better prospects.There were also a few that thought Bush was a better RB prospect than AD.

I think it's funny that last year it was en vogue to take Marshawn Lynch as a prospect over Adrian Peterson. I'm just happy I've always felt that Adrian Peterson is the best RB prospect that I have seen with my own eyes.
AD was always a better prospect than Lynch.The only thing that people liked about Lynch more than AD was that he hadnt sustained the same amount of injuries.

adschofield
10-17-2007, 09:33 PM
I think that they are pretty equal in terms of who's the better prospect...I think AD has a little better vision while DMac is a little more explosive...I guess it's just what you prefer...but in the end I think AD will have the better career.

San Diego Chicken
10-17-2007, 09:34 PM
These guys are both scary good. They're Eric Dickerson and Marcus Allen reincarnated. Peterson is making a huge impact this season and don't be surprised if/when McFadden does the same next year, even though Peterson was probably more "NFL ready" coming out of college.

Sniper
10-17-2007, 10:12 PM
McFadden needs to hang onto the ball. In his chat today, Kiper said he has 7 fumbles this year and lost 4 of them. Not too good.

geaux tigers
10-17-2007, 10:23 PM
McFadden needs to hang onto the ball. In his chat today, Kiper said he has 7 fumbles this year and lost 4 of them. Not too good.

not sure how accurate espn stats are, but it shows no fumbles?

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=170928

Sniper
10-17-2007, 10:25 PM
not sure how accurate espn stats are, but it shows no fumbles?

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=170928

ESPN.com never updates its fumbles section. Look at anyone.

d34ng3l021
10-18-2007, 12:07 AM
Question about DMac. From the highlights of him, he seems so untouched. How is he after contact?

And also, it seems as if he bounces alot of runs to the outside to use his speed. Is that true, or am I just missing something?

jsagan77
10-19-2007, 08:42 AM
I love how people are saying that McFad's getting 8 itb against him because of his passing game.. DO you think that AP has any passing game at all? Jeeze...lol

Paranoidmoonduck
10-19-2007, 03:15 PM
I love how people are saying that McFad's getting 8 itb against him because of his passing game.. DO you think that AP has any passing game at all? Jeeze...lol

No NFL team really ever puts 8 in the box, because even if the Vikings passing game is below average, it is totally capable of hurting you. Additionally, in Peterson's only truly dominant year in college, he had a Heisman caliber passing game.

T.Smith
10-20-2007, 01:47 PM
AD has, and always will be just a flat out better football player then Mcfadden. Mcfadden may have a few more physical advantages over AD, but AD has always been the better football player.

remix 6
10-20-2007, 01:53 PM
only flaw on AD is his upright style. he can be a lot better if he stays low and avoids some hits even though he still makes people look silly when hes running straight up. hes fast..ran 4.38..can jump. Had a nice vertical. He can truck people..breaks all kinds of tackles..can juke well. receiving was a question mark but hes proved people wrong imo.

what i love is the way he bobs his head when he runs lol. sometimes when i go out for a run or something..i do the same thing :o. looks awesome but if it were a sprint..it would slow u down. should keep head straight. im gonna og watch some of his college highlights..again.

hes got good size..looks lean and not so big but dude packs some unbelievable strength. u look at him..hes not like a power back but he trucks people..bounces off people so well. Petersons style of running is beautiful. again..running a little lower will only benefit him but its hard to switch the way you've been running for years just like Maroney. Both run high..try to fix it but its something natural after a while

LonghornsLegend
10-20-2007, 08:21 PM
omg!!!!!!!!AD is a better prospect than McFadden because hes having a very succesfull rookie year so far.
This thread was better when people hadnt seen what he could do in the NFL.But what can you expect from Sheeple.They see a player doing well and they immediately join the bandwagon.Before the draft there were plenty of people saying that McFadden and Lynch were both better prospects.There were also a few that thought Bush was a better RB prospect than AD.
AD was always a better prospect than Lynch.The only thing that people liked about Lynch more than AD was that he hadnt sustained the same amount of injuries.

Right, because its impossible that anyone thought AD was a better prospect then McFadden before he started the season :rolleyes:


It might make some sense if people havent been watching him play since High School, and watched what he has done at every level, not just in the NFL...what he is doing right now is no surprise to everyone who knew he had this type of ability, its not like I dont expect McFadden to tear up the NFL as well, and these 2 may very well be the top 2 backs in the NFL in a few years thats definately not out of the question, but Peterson is going to be remembered as a better prospect, and the only thing that is going to stop him from being an all time great is if he ends up like Cadillac...One of his small knocks was being a receiver out of the backfield and he has made that look pretty useless and showed he doesnt have a weakness

big daddy russ
10-21-2007, 07:04 PM
No NFL team really ever puts 8 in the box, because even if the Vikings passing game is below average, it is totally capable of hurting you. Additionally, in Peterson's only truly dominant year in college, he had a Heisman caliber passing game.
ROFL. Didn't watch Peterson much last year, did you?

UAB 24 carries/143 yds 1 TD
Washington 32/168 2 TDs
Oregon 34/211 1 TD
Middle Tenn 27/149 3 TDs
Texas 25/119 1 TD
Iowa St 26/188 2 TDs

Boise St. (Fiesta Bowl) 20/88 2 TDs


His freshman year was the only full year he played and he averaged almost as many yards per game in 2006 (145 ypg) as he did his freshman year (148 ypg). On top of that, he was one of the frontrunners for the Heisman last year until he went down.

http://heismanpundit.com/item/1135/

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=gallo/060828

soybean
11-05-2007, 02:26 PM
I think mcfadden can have a peterson like impact his rookie year.

I don't mean he can put up 300 yards on the ground or have 1000 yards half-way through the season, but I can definitely see a huge impact from mcfadden.

they are just so similar, and dynamic.

d34ng3l021
11-05-2007, 03:20 PM
As prospects I think AD and McFadden are VERY close, maybe even equal, but alot of things are being blown out of proportion here because of AD's recent success against NFL defenses. Hindsight is 20/20 so it is easy to say that AD is the greater prospect because of his success against the NFL.

Shiver
11-05-2007, 03:21 PM
As prospects I think AD and McFadden are VERY close, maybe even equal, but alot of things are being blown out of proportion here because of AD's recent success against NFL defenses. Hindsight is 20/20 so it is easy to say that AD is the greater prospect because of his success against the NFL.

That's why I am proud that I posted:

"Peterson > McFadden > Bush"

as of last year.

P-L
11-05-2007, 03:58 PM
As prospects I think AD and McFadden are VERY close, maybe even equal, but alot of things are being blown out of proportion here because of AD's recent success against NFL defenses. Hindsight is 20/20 so it is easy to say that AD is the greater prospect because of his success against the NFL.

Many people said Peterson was the better RB before this season.

d34ng3l021
11-05-2007, 06:49 PM
Many people said Peterson was the better RB before this season.

I remember differently. I remember it being alot closer than this thread indicates.

Heres a thread from another site. It was started on May 2007. http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=140703

duckseason
11-05-2007, 06:53 PM
I remember differently. I remember it being alot closer than this thread indicates.

Heres a thread from another site. It was started on May 2007. http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=140703

What PL said is true. There were "many people" saying that Peterson is better. Just as there were "many people" saying the same about Mcfadden.

draftguru151
11-05-2007, 06:57 PM
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12895

There's is the other time it was discussed on here.

Babylon
11-05-2007, 07:01 PM
Not going to compare the two but i think the success that AP is having is only going to help Darren's draft status. Teams tend to copy other teams success.

Addict
11-05-2007, 07:02 PM
this discussion is completely irrelevant until DMC touches the ball in the NFL, he'll have trouble catching up to peterson, sure, but a career isn't made of one season.

yourfavestoner
11-05-2007, 07:15 PM
Remember back when people were saying that Bush was a better prospect than Peterson, too? How'd that work out for them?

Addict
11-05-2007, 07:23 PM
Remember back when people were saying that Bush was a better prospect than Peterson, too? How'd that work out for them?

he was a better prospect. Just not a better NFL running back.

nobodyinparticular
11-05-2007, 07:39 PM
Jim Brown
Barry Sanders
Walter Payton
Eric Dickerson
Ricky Williams
Edgerrin James
OJ Simpson

All of those are better RB prospects that Peterson.



That was exactly what I was thinking. Peterson's biggest knock was injury concerns and they won't show up for probably some time.

Bo Jackson says hi.

On another note, Adrian Peterson has tent pitching talent. Before the draft I felt he was very similar to Eric Dickerson and 8 games into the season, I don't think there is anything to prove otherwise. His ability to get into the second level is amazing, and once he's there it is no contest. He just high steps and powers through tackles in the secondary and outruns all the other defenders. His vision, his burst, acceleration and ability to actually hit the cut is amazing. I'm not going to pretend that I know the level of prospects that most of those guys were, but I've got to say that Peterson is (and was when he was coming out) amazing. Two guys I wouldn't have up there in the same category are Williams and James. Peterson was past them in my mind.

Spectre
11-06-2007, 12:27 AM
If there was any doubt before, there isn't now.

Simply put, Peterson is a special player. Don't think we need to sport those "I remember Adrian Peterson" avatars these days. =D

draftguru151
11-06-2007, 12:27 AM
Just in case they forgot I've got it up for the week. :D

DChess
11-06-2007, 12:35 AM
Just in case they forgot I've got it up for the week. :D

you're supposed to see your doctor if it lasts longer than 4 hours.

d34ng3l021
11-06-2007, 02:42 AM
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12895

There's is the other time it was discussed on here.

Well ****. I guess I CAN say that I have always had AD over McFadden.

Turtlepower
11-06-2007, 03:12 AM
My concerns with AD will show up in the next 3 years. If he is healthy, then he really will be great, but let's see if Minnie runs him into the ground.

TankDogg
11-06-2007, 01:54 PM
Bo Jackson says hi.

On another note, Adrian Peterson has tent pitching talent. Before the draft I felt he was very similar to Eric Dickerson and 8 games into the season, I don't think there is anything to prove otherwise. His ability to get into the second level is amazing, and once he's there it is no contest. He just high steps and powers through tackles in the secondary and outruns all the other defenders. His vision, his burst, acceleration and ability to actually hit the cut is amazing. I'm not going to pretend that I know the level of prospects that most of those guys were, but I've got to say that Peterson is (and was when he was coming out) amazing. Two guys I wouldn't have up there in the same category are Williams and James. Peterson was past them in my mind.
I think he's more like O.J. Simpson. Dickerson was two inches taller and ran very high and didn't look fast. Peterson can get low and look's very fast.

toonsterwu
11-07-2007, 04:41 PM
I'll stick by what I said last year. I think Marshawn Lynch will end up having the better career between Lynch and AD. I think AD will end up having the more explosive years. And finally, I think if McFadden runs a 4.4 time (or better), he'll have a better relative prospect grade than Peterson.

Vikes99ej
11-07-2007, 05:45 PM
Just so everyone knows, Marshawn Lynch has 19 more carries than Adrian Peterson.

619
11-07-2007, 06:02 PM
everyone is expecting AD to slow down or get injured but those injuries in college were flukes so u shouldnt use them against him. better prospect is AD over mcfadden..40 time is overrated and peterson is one of the most complete RBs already as a rookie.

remix 6
11-08-2007, 01:50 PM
Anyone think this is a possibility..little too "big" maybe

Lets say draft is today..Patriots-Cowboys trade
Patriots send 4th round pick

Cowboys send:
pick 23
pick 31
Marion Barber

Value chart:
1800 for 1360 + Barber

Cowboys select: McFadden

Why? Jerry Jones is in love..Cowboys dont use Barber enough imo..he should be their starter.

Problem: Leaves them with no real backup..JJ is an FA and Barber traded.

Vikes99ej
11-08-2007, 04:06 PM
Anyone think this is a possibility..little too "big" maybe

Lets say draft is today..Patriots-Cowboys trade
Patriots send 4th round pick

Cowboys send:
pick 23
pick 31
Marion Barber

Value chart:
1800 for 1360 + Barber

Cowboys select: McFadden

Why? Jerry Jones is in love..Cowboys dont use Barber enough imo..he should be their starter.

Problem: Leaves them with no real backup..JJ is an FA and Barber traded.

Marion Barber and Maroney on the same team? LOL

litlharsh
11-08-2007, 04:08 PM
Marion Barber and Maroney on the same team? LOL

haha I recognize that from somewhere...

no love
11-08-2007, 04:17 PM
Anyone think this is a possibility..little too "big" maybe

Lets say draft is today..Patriots-Cowboys trade
Patriots send 4th round pick

Cowboys send:
pick 23
pick 31
Marion Barber

Value chart:
1800 for 1360 + Barber

Cowboys select: McFadden

Why? Jerry Jones is in love..Cowboys dont use Barber enough imo..he should be their starter.

Problem: Leaves them with no real backup..JJ is an FA and Barber traded.

Why would Dallas do this? Right now they have Barber on the contract of a low first day pick, why would they trade one of the toughest runners right now for a guy who might not be an upgrade and with a much much larger contract.

Total madden fantasy stuff right there. Patriots would get 3 potential starters at a much lower cap price than the one guy on the Cowboys. Jerry Jones is way to smart for this.

no love
11-08-2007, 04:44 PM
I'll stick by what I said last year. I think Marshawn Lynch will end up having the better career between Lynch and AD. I think AD will end up having the more explosive years. And finally, I think if McFadden runs a 4.4 time (or better), he'll have a better relative prospect grade than Peterson.

I used to think this. But Lynch will have to play in the AFC so I think his road will be much tougher, at least for the next 3-4 years.

Simply put I think Lynch will be more durable and consistent, he is a great workhorse who never gives up the rock. He already looks to be a pretty good pass protector and should get better at receiving when given more opportunities.

AD is much more explosive and a overall play maker and will probably have more highlights. He is also in an offense with an OC who loves passing to the back (see Westbrook in Philly). But he will need to get better at pass pro and ball security (though neither are too huge of an issue)

As far as injury concerns I think it would be best to platoon AD with another guy so he stays fresh for the whole year. He has a much different build than Marshawn who is much much thicker all around and he runs much more down hill than Lynch who plays with a very wide base. Lynch will probably have more strains and sprains because of the way he runs, but Peterson will be more likely to take a pounding (yes he gets low when he expects contact, but he charges at full-speed which has to take its toll eventually).

Shiver
11-08-2007, 05:09 PM
I am more worried about Lynch's durability than I am about Peterson. Lynch is getting a bigger workload, behind a worse O-Line.

remix 6
11-08-2007, 05:35 PM
Why would Dallas do this? Right now they have Barber on the contract of a low first day pick, why would they trade one of the toughest runners right now for a guy who might not be an upgrade and with a much much larger contract.

Total madden fantasy stuff right there. Patriots would get 3 potential starters at a much lower cap price than the one guy on the Cowboys. Jerry Jones is way to smart for this.

just wondering. i didnt make this up..some kid brought it up on another board and i wondered..how crazy is Jones for McFadden during draft day?

no love
11-08-2007, 06:41 PM
just wondering. i didnt make this up..some kid brought it up on another board and i wondered..how crazy is Jones for McFadden during draft day?

Ok, sorry for going off on how ridiculous it was then. It definitely didn't sound like something that is generally posted on this board. I hate it when boards become full of "what if" trade scenarios that are completely not based in the way most NFL teams operate. Although crazy trade speculation on teams like the Redskins are fair game (they seem to hate draft picks).

But to answer your question. Probably not THAT crazy given the fact that both of his WR's are going to be 34 next year and his left tackle will be 33.

If you notice, Jones has done well to provide that he is developing a lot of young talent on that defense, so that even when people leave due to FA or age, there will be a young high round pick who has been waiting and learning in the wings. I suspect he will focus on doing this with the offense as soon as he gets a chance.

I could really see Dallas being the next in line with the Pats and Colts, to those teams who have figured out how to run a franchise in the post salary cap era.

draftguru151
11-08-2007, 07:23 PM
I am more worried about Lynch's durability than I am about Peterson. Lynch is getting a bigger workload, behind a worse O-Line.

Peterson's style more than makes up for the difference in carries.

brat316
11-08-2007, 08:08 PM
Peterson i think is the best to come out, in a long time. Every year there is a rb that is "no one compares to this kid, best to come out in a long time" This only applies to Peterson, can do inside run outside, catch, block. Bush ain't got nothing on Peterson. Mcfadden is good but i think he is going to have an average season.

HEISMANHERSCHEL
11-08-2007, 11:27 PM
I think Peterson also had it all coming out of college. I too have been on his jock for a long time.

I would love to be able to chime in with some of you and say, "Look, I told you so!!!" However, I dont remember anyone saying he wasnt worth the 7th pick in the draft. I think the ONLY knock on him was his injuries. If he had never been injured, everyone would have agreed on how good he was and he would have gone first pick, almost without question. In fact, most said the only thing that would stop AD from being an elite back in the NFL was his history of injuries.

RunDMC is in the same class, but I would say AD was a better prospect. However, RunDMC's lack of injuries should count for something.

And by the way, no one has mentioned Herschel Walker coming out of college.:( For those that watched him, they remember he was completely dominant. Bigger that AD. Faster than AD. Vision was not as good. But he was in the same class as all the other top running backs.