Darren McFadden getting a pass on criticism.

[EvilNixon]

Originally Posted by Halsey

Peterson ran for 1,760 yards last year.

I wasn't attempting to asset Taylor was as good as AD,but their terrific oline can make an ordinary back seem good,and a good back seem great.

[Bengalsrocket]

Originally Posted by Halsey

If a RB was only as good as his line then that means any back could run as well behind Minnesota's line as Peterson does. Do you really believe any RB in the league would be as good as Peterson if they played for Minnesota? Conversely, If Peterson ran behind Oakland's line, do you really believe Peterson would average 3.1ypc? Really? Come on now.

"only as good as his line" is the wrong term. But there is a limit to what a RB can do behind a crappy line.

If you never get to the second level, you have a very low chance of being successful.

[MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)]

Peterson is the best RB in the league. An OL can get you like 4-5 yards on their own. Just get you to the second level and give you room to get those yards, assuming the RB is good enough to hit the hole. But after that is primarily on the RB, with some exceptions like when WRs make great blocks. And AD is 2nd in the league with 6 20+ yard runs(tied with Benson, behind Chris Johnson who has 7).

[P-L]

Originally Posted by fenikz

...wow did you just say DMC was a better prospect that AD?


no

Where were you prior to the 2008 draft? I'd say at least 60% of this board had McFadden as being a better prospect than Peterson.

The Vikings' offensive line might be a lot better than the Raiders, but it isn't like Minnesota had a competent passing game until this year.

[Thecollegedropout]

Originally Posted by P-L

The Vikings' offensive line might be a lot better than the Raiders, but it isn't like Minnesota had a competent passing game until this year.

I can't think that Tavaris Jackson of any year could be any worse than Russell of 08 or 09.

Really Oakland has nothing on offense besides Zach Miller and a healthy Gallery(Which he hardly is). No WRs, O-Line is pretty damn bad, QB might be the worst of the league. There's nothing going for McFadden....shoot unlike Peterson, he shares the ball with 2 others instead of just 1 guy.

The team is down in a lot of games anyhow for them to start running the ball down people's throats. Its just an entire mess.

[Saints-Tigers]

Originally Posted by P-L

Where were you prior to the 2008 draft? I'd say at least 60% of this board had McFadden as being a better prospect than Peterson.

The Vikings' offensive line might be a lot better than the Raiders, but it isn't like Minnesota had a competent passing game until this year.

There were a lot that thought McFadden was the better prospect. One guy said he was comparable to Bo Jackson.

[CC.SD]

McFadden is not at fault for what's wrong with Oakland. He was in retrospect overdrafted but so are a lot of guys. Anyone who looked at Oakland's offseason that year...loading up on guys and paying out serious contracts (even if they were to players like Javon Walker and Deangelo Hall) knew that they were going to try and make a run, and taking the 'instant offense' RB was the right pick in that scenario.

However, it didn't quite work out. Oops.

[Thecollegedropout]

It would have been interesting to have seen Run DMC slide past OAK and fall to the Jets at 6 because who knows how he'd get used or played under a more respectable O-Line.

Too bad Al Davis had to ruin that thought though.

[katnip]

Originally Posted by Bengalsrocket

"only as good as his line" is the wrong term. But there is a limit to what a RB can do behind a crappy line.

If you never get to the second level, you have a very low chance of being successful.

Wasn't Barry Sanders lineman only considered average at best? Not saying Peterson's HOF.. Just wondering how good Barry's o-line was looked at.

In my kiddy years I remember it being barry = the lions

[CC.SD]

Originally Posted by katnip

Wasn't Barry Sanders lineman only considered average at best? Not saying Peterson's HOF.. Just wondering how good Barry's o-line was looked at.

In my kiddy years I remember it being barry = the lions

I remember Barry always had a million cuts to make before reaching the line of scrimmage so they must have been pretty durn terrible. Don't even mention Sanders in this thread.

[scottyboy]

idk, maybe I was just blind as I had Rice and JStew as my top 2 RB's in the DMC draft and loved AD, but that's just me.

but I mean, he's in oakland, he gets a pass out of pity for him

[yourfavestoner]

I called both Bush and Mcfadden as busts, but I liked McFadden more than Bush. Look at the skinny legs on both of them (compared to, say, Chris Johnson) and you'll know why they struggle running the ball in the big leagues.

[MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)]

Originally Posted by scottyboy

idk, maybe I was just blind as I had Rice and JStew as my top 2 RB's in the DMC draft and loved AD, but that's just me.

but I mean, he's in oakland, he gets a pass out of pity for him

It's amazing how your epic homerism is turning out to be spot on.

[EvilNixon]

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner

I called both Bush and Mcfadden as busts, but I liked McFadden more than Bush. Look at the skinny legs on both of them (compared to, say, Chris Johnson) and you'll know why they struggle running the ball in the big leagues.

It's not necessarily the skinny legs,but the inability to be decisive about hitting the hole.McFadden runs too high,but if he were more decisive instead of trying to bounce it out and get more yards,he could be a solid 4 YPC guy. Bush has the size to do the exact same thing.

Fargas is a decisive runner,which is why he's the most reliable of our backfield.

[Paranoidmoonduck]

Originally Posted by Halsey

If a RB was only as good as his line then that means any back could run as well behind Minnesota's line as Peterson does. Do you really believe any RB in the league would be as good as Peterson if they played for Minnesota? Conversely, If Peterson ran behind Oakland's line, do you really believe Peterson would average 3.1ypc? Really? Come on now.

No, I imagine Peterson would be doing better than 3.1 in Oakland. That's because he's a better running back. However, we shouldn't damn McFadden because he's worse than Peterson. Because, realistically, so is every other runner in the NFL. And considering that Chester Taylor has averaged 4.5 YPC during Peterson's three years in Minnesota, I do think that an average runner would find success in Minnesota that even a great runner wouldn't find in Oakland right now.

[ElectricEye]

Adrian Peterson is an all time talent at runningback. We're talking Eric Dickerson, Earl Campbell, Walter Payton, Bo Jackson, Herschel Walker, and Jim Brown in terms of guys who he is with in terms of talent. He's one of those guys you can just tell when he runs. Nobody is like him in the league right now. Guys like that don't

I never really thought McFadden was close to that, but I didn't think he was going to struggle this much either. He's lost the ability to absorb contact in the NFL. He was never spectacular at that in college, but he did run with some power for Arkansas. It's not like he wasn't getting touched in the SEC. You don't run for 1600+ yards consecutive years with close to 300 carries in both of them as a scat back. Not giving up on him yet, but the knock on his legs is proving to be pretty true. He's able to get by smaller guys, but if he goes up against anyone his size or bigger he goes down on first contact. The Raiders line improving could make him look night and day better, but he still has some major weight room work to do. There's been flashes between the injuries, but it's always been in space. Bush is a pretty lazy comparison for his play, but it works as of right now, unfortunately. I'll still maintain they were very different runners in college.

[General Zod]

Im still willing to give DMC a pass for now. Opposing defenses put like 11 people in the box because of no passing game.

[Shiver]

The revisionist history on McFadden vs. Peterson slays me. About half of this forum liked Marshawn Lynch over Adrian Peterson, including a lot of well respected posters. There were quite a few who thought McFadden was as good as it gets. Of course all that changed in hindsight, but it was very close back in the day. Peterson was hardly the can't miss prospect.

Darren McFadden's problems are the same things he's always had. He fumbles way too often, but I wouldn't blame his low YPC on him. The Oakland offense he has been in is dreadful. He is facing 9 man fronts daring Russell and co. to beat them. If you put McFadden in Minnesota, behind Hutchinson and McKinnie I guarantee you he would be doing a lot better.

[A Perfect Score]

Originally Posted by Shiver

The revisionist history on McFadden vs. Peterson slays me. About half of this forum liked Marshawn Lynch over Adrian Peterson, including a lot of well respected posters. There were quite a few who thought McFadden was as good as it gets. Of course all that changed in hindsight, but it was very close back in the day. Peterson was hardly the can't miss prospect.

Darren McFadden's problems are the same things he's always had. He fumbles way too often, but I wouldn't blame his low YPC on him. The Oakland offense he has been in is dreadful. He is facing 9 man fronts daring Russell and co. to beat them. If you put McFadden in Minnesota, behind Hutchinson and McKinnie I guarantee you he would be doing a lot better.

I remembered Adrian Peterson.

[7-11]

I love how everyone bar a few posters are claiming that it was some massive consensus opinion that Peterson was this sure thing and DMC was just 'overdrafted'. Do you all only have a memory stretching back to Monday?

DMC, especially on these boards was largely seen as very close to or even equal to AD, and alot of posters thought he was a better prospect.

[Shiver]

To be clear: I definitely had Adrian Peterson over Marshawn Lynch, and I had Mendenhall over McFadden. I just wanted to make the point that it was hardly a consensus here. There was a real concern about Peterson's durability that has yet to manifest itself in the NFL.

[bigbuc]

Run Dmc was not that great of a back coming out. Can't make people miss and his legs go dead when you get a hand on him. I think he would do great in a one cut and go zone blocking system. He just needs a lane and he's gone with his speed. Hope he can get out from Oak! Or they invest in there Rb and next Qb with some O linemen. If I were Oak... I would try and trade him for a late first or early second. And let Bush be there back. Then invest that pick and there second on some O linemen because they should be drafting a new QB.

[A Perfect Score]

I had Stewart as a better prospect then DMC, and AD as a better prospect then Stewart. I dont think I fit!

That said, DMC gets a pass from me, as Oakland are awful and I do not blame anyone to ever play there for failing.

[San Diego Chicken]

I though D-Mac would be a star back, but during evaluations one thing people messed up on is not realizing that he doesn't have much elusiveness at all. He's a downhill, straight line runner with a quality stiff arm, but his open field moves aren't really there.

Also consider how many snaps he got out of the Wildcat in college. Definitely helped create running lanes galore for him. That said, there are still lots of skills he brings to the table.

[ElectricEye]

Originally Posted by A Perfect Score

I remembered Adrian Peterson.

Made one of those avatars. People were dropping him out the top twenty in mocks. Just as laughable now as it was then.


I agree that some people seem to either swayed there stance on AD or were awfully quiet about how highly they thought of him when he was being killed for running too up right and being injury prone, not being ALL that fast, ect. Marshawn Lynch was thought of VERY highly here for a while, probably too highly. The entire let's **** on the top runningback prospect that started with Reggie Bush trickled down to AD and in his case, it was completely unfair. That was the year of the two back system setup really taking off, so runningbacks were really devalued then, but still, pretty proud to say that I thought Peterson was the best runningback prospect I've seen. Thought both McFadden and Bush were up there too though :/