Adrian Peterson -- The elephant in the room

[IrishViking]

But in all seriousness. I really believe that AP and the direction this team is trying to go Via Norv are just to different and it would be best for both parties to go separate ways.

I'm just not sure why people keep reaching that conclusion when almost the entirety of turner's history as an OC and playcaller suggests he likes to run his offense with the QB under center and a power running game. In what direction are they trying to go?[/quote]


Developing a young QB.

The options are develop Teddy which will eventually involve playing to his strength, more shotguns, more rhythm passing, both of which will cut back on APs production. OR draft a new QB and start over and hope that somehow we draft a well prepared 1st rounder with a cannon.

[glenecho]

Hmmm....good topic really...

I think that until somebody else on the offense can step up and prove they are a viable threat that we have no other choice BUT to keep AP. While I think he comes very close to hurting us more than he helps us, the bottom line is that other teams have to change their entire defensive philosophy when AP is in the game. You can't say that for anyone else on the team. As long as he's out there he DOES help open up the passing game (I know there are some that insist on arguing this point but...).

Without AP we simply have no offensive threat that requires teams to gameplan and focus on. Bridgewater's been pretty far from "fantastic", but without AP...wow...I don't really even want to think about it.

If Bridgewater or someone else would step up their game and become a viable threat I'd be all for getting rid of AP.

[Mothman]

Developing a young QB.

The options are develop Teddy which will eventually involve playing to his strength, more shotguns, more rhythm passing, both of which will cut back on APs production. OR draft a new QB and start over and hope that somehow we draft a well prepared 1st rounder with a cannon.

I wouldn't mind seeing them draft a QB like that anyway.

I just don't understand why so many people seem to view keeping peterson and developing Bridgewater as as mutually exclusive goals. The rhythm passing is more a question of playcalling than anything else. Bridgewater was pretty much as effective under center as he was from the shotgun this season so it doesn't seem necessary to put him in that formation more often. If they pass more and that cuts into Peterson's production, that doesn't seem problematic if the passing is effective. Their goal should be to achieve the complementary relationship between the running and passing game that they had in 2009 and that Turner has had at some of his more successful stops.

[Laserman]

With the new stadium coming our way there is little chance the Vikes deal Peterson away. My View is keep him one more year and see what happens. But the offense needs to lessen it's dependence on AD Just a little to keep opposing Defenses from stacking the box on us. When Good teams Decide to Stop AD at all cost they have been just about 100% of the time successful at it the last 3-4 years. $10 Million a year for 45 yards and a game costing Fumble? He's not the same runner he used to be. The long runs are starting to become a memory now. The problem is NOBODY but maybe Dallas would take the trade. Keep him another year, slowly transition the offense away from AD to Teddy, give AD fewer carries, make him a decoy

[IrishViking]

Hmmm....good topic really...

I think that until somebody else on the offense can step up and prove they are a viable threat that we have no other choice BUT to keep AP. While I think he comes very close to hurting us more than he helps us, the bottom line is that other teams have to change their entire defensive philosophy when AP is in the game. You can't say that for anyone else on the team. As long as he's out there he DOES help open up the passing game (I know there are some that insist on arguing this point but...).

Without AP we simply have no offensive threat that requires teams to gameplan and focus on. Bridgewater's been pretty far from "fantastic", but without AP...wow...I don't really even want to think about it.

If Bridgewater or someone else would step up their game and become a viable threat I'd be all for getting rid of AP.

We have been talking about this for a while now and I'll say it here again. I don't think its a forgone conclusion anymore that AP is the hands down best option at RB going forward. His big gains are fewer and farther between, his break away speed is less and less, He no longer always makes the first guy miss.

The hard truth that I think most people don't want to deal with yet is that this year was AP coming off a year break, eager to prove that he is still the best. I would argue that it would be unreasonable to think that this WASN'T his peak going forward. He will come back next year on "only" 9 months of rest, you hear it all the time from older players, the seasons seem longer the off season seems shorter. He will be a year older with more mileage. I would argue that you could probably bank on Asiata and Jerick tandeming for a little over 1000 yards. That seems reasonable. I think its also reasonable that you could expect AP to get around 1200 yards. With numbers that close it becomes a matter of how the yards are gotten, how they effect game plans, etc.

This Season AP ran for over 100 yards 7 times. He was held under 50 yards 4 times with sub 100 games 6 other times. Those aren't bad numbers but he was "contained" more often than not. Will he still be the focus? Yes obviously, but now I would guess teams are going to try and contain him with less... and less... and less... I wouldn't be surprised if he sees 7 man boxes next year and there isnt appreciable change in his production. Is that bad? Not at all. Is that bad for 15 mil and the center piece of your offense? I would say yes.

[Purple Reign]

I'm guessing AP won't be able to be traded for a high enough draft choice so he will be here next year. But as far as his 'worth', I think all you have to do is look at last year when the team's total yards without AP (except for 1 game) were almost identical to this year's total. I think the offense with McKinnon and Asiata is more than capable of replacing AP's production. With AP in the game, we have become too predictable IMO. I think Jim mentioned that he thinks we won the division this year because of AP, which I will disagree with and say that the defense is the primary reason we won the division this year, not the offense. Someone also mentioned they thought it would be bad if we didn't have AP because we wouldn't have someone that the defense would have to game plan for. I don't see that as being a bad thing. If your offense is diverse then the defenses can't concentrate on stopping just one person. When the defenses stopped AP this year we lost. Having a more diverse offense would be a good thing and last year proved we can move the ball without AP.

[Mothman]

This Season AP ran for over 100 yards 7 times. He was held under 50 yards 4 times with sub 100 games 6 other times. Those aren't bad numbers but he was "contained" more often than not.

Yes, but why was he contained so often? I'd argue it was for 4 reasons. in order;

1.) Lousy blocking up front on far too many plays.
2.) Predictable playcalling (almost deserves the #1 spot)
3.) A passing game that didn't scare anybody.
4.) He's lost a little off his game... but not enough to prevent him from leading the league in rushing despite 1-3 and every defense keying on him over the course of the season.

Just look at what happened yesterday. The Seahawks were practically living in the Vikings backfield. A lot of Peterson's runs were practically D.O.A. for reasons 1-3.

[IrishViking]

I'm guessing AP won't be able to be traded for a high enough draft choice so he will be here next year. But as far as his 'worth', I think all you have to do is look at last year when the team's total yards without AP (except for 1 game) were almost identical to this year's total. I think the offense with McKinnon and Asiata is more than capable of replacing AP's production. With AP in the game, we have become too predictable IMO. I think Jim mentioned that he thinks we won the division this year because of AP, which I will disagree with and say that the defense is the primary reason we won the division this year, not the offense. Someone also mentioned they thought it would be bad if we didn't have AP because we wouldn't have someone that the defense would have to game plan for. I don't see that as being a bad thing. If your offense is diverse then the defenses can't concentrate on stopping just one person. When the defenses stopped AP this year we lost. Having a more diverse offense would be a good thing and last year proved we can move the ball without AP.

Exactly.


Another point is that I think it takes away the "easy" call from the Offense. You cant just feed it to the beast anymore. Dig into your playbook!

[Mothman]

I'm guessing AP won't be able to be traded for a high enough draft choice so he will be here next year. But as far as his 'worth', I think all you have to do is look at last year when the team's total yards without AP (except for 1 game) were almost identical to this year's total. I think the offense with McKinnon and Asiata is more than capable of replacing AP's production. With AP in the game, we have become too predictable IMO. I think Jim mentioned that he thinks we won the division this year because of AP, which I will disagree with and say that the defense is the primary reason we won the division this year, not the offense.

What is aid was that peterson was a key factor in winning the division this year. The defense was too (and probably the bigger factor of the two).

[IrishViking]

Yes, but why was he contained so often? I'd argue it was for 4 reasons. in order;

1.) Lousy blocking up front on far too many plays.
2.) Predictable playcalling (almost deserves the #1 spot)
3.) A passing game that didn't scare anybody.
4.) He's lost a little off his game... but not enough to prevent him from leading the league in rushing despite 1-3 and every defense keying on him over the course of the season.

Just look at what happened yesterday. The Seahawks were practically living in the Vikings backfield. A lot of Peterson's runs were practically D.O.A. for reasons 1-3.

I don't disagree with your points per se. My issue is that, bottom line, This was another year on his belt. He will be a year older with less tread next year. He is trending down and will continue to do so. Next year will be probably 33% of his remaining career. He proved this year he can't be the sole working part of this offense which isn't a knock on him. Its just the reality of time.

[CbusVikesFan]

I hate to sound like a broken record but I'm surprised the Vikings offense not finishing drives with TDs isn't a bigger issue.

Bingo! Whether it is Teddy, Norv, O-line, AP and his issues, or the lack of WR production, it does not matter. What matters is points. And the Vikings are not scoring enough points. Say what you want, but the lack of production in the passing game is what really needs to improve.
In this upcoming draft the Vikings need to draft another QB to give a safety net if you will. I am convinced that Teddy will not take us where we want to be. Not that he can't do well here and there but his progression is not up to what I consider to be on a path to great success. I think that Norv has scaled down his gameplans in order to keep Teddy on the field.
Now as far as AP goes, the only reason to keep him at this point is because no team will want him with his huge cap hit 2016. If the Vikings could get him to restructure, that would be great. Keep him or trade him but the Vikes cannot take that big of a hit next year. It is so close to the end of his career that being loyal to him is not prudent. Also let's get rid of Locke. I am sure that we could find a more capable punter.

[losperros]

Yes, but why was he contained so often? I'd argue it was for 4 reasons. in order;

1.) Lousy blocking up front on far too many plays.
2.) Predictable playcalling (almost deserves the #1 spot)
3.) A passing game that didn't scare anybody.
4.) He's lost a little off his game... but not enough to prevent him from leading the league in rushing despite 1-3 and every defense keying on him over the course of the season.

Just look at what happened yesterday. The Seahawks were practically living in the Vikings backfield. A lot of Peterson's runs were practically D.O.A. for reasons 1-3.

As you know, I very much agree with your four reasons. In fact, reasons #1 and #2 also impacted the passing game, therefore hurting all the players at skill positions. That damaged Peterson's runs and helped make the passing game one of the worst in the league.

[fiestavike]

or option #3....because we have teddy...?

Or option number 4, because our line is too terrible to have our QB drop back to pass?

[fiestavike]

They tried to be a balanced "spread them out" offense in the first 4 games passing and running out of the shotgun. I don't see any reason they would start the season doing that if they intended to be a power running team from the get go. It wasn't until Peterson was extremely ineffective in that role ( running out of the shotgun) and the blocking of the O-line left so much to be desired that they decided to come out of the BYE week as a power running, under center, multiple tight end offense.

It's pretty clear to me that they don't want to be a one dimensional power running team but given the blocking, they were left with little choice. If they think they upgraded the O-line enough this offseason I expect them to try the shotgun offense out again.

Bingo.

[Purple Reign]

What is aid was that peterson was a key factor in winning the division this year. The defense was too (and probably the bigger factor of the two).

Fair enough - but I still disagree and don't think AP was a key factor. McKinnon and Asiata could have done just as well IMO (as evidenced by last year's stats).