Adrian Peterson -- The elephant in the room

[Mothman]

I don't disagree that we had the shot but with the way or defense was playing. No fumble means we win.

No fumble just means no fumble. There's no way to know what would have happened next.

[mondry]

I'm on the fence, but leaning towards keep. AP does a lot of stuff that is simply fantastic. He also does stuff that is quite frustrating.

AP is a special, HOF, for the ages talent when he takes the ball from 8 yards deep. However, he isn't always magnificent. Sometimes he dances and loses yards, other times he gets 6 yards when anyone else would get 3. He can score on plays in the red zone that few others can. On the other hand, a player like McKinnon is far more versatile, can pass protect etc. You can line him up as a WR as well, which is tremendous.

IMO, the real issue is the red zone TDs. Who is going to be the main threat for this team to punch the ball in the red zone? I think if we give up AP losing the scoring is going to really hurt us in the near term and for me that outweighs the negatives, at least right now.

Keep in mind Asiata had 9 touch downs the year AD was out, AD had 11 touch downs this year for comparisons sake. The goal line TD's might not be that different since I don't think any of Asiata's TDs were of the say 80 yard variety!

[IrishViking]

No fumble just means no fumble. There's no way to know what would have happened next.

Its seems to me that the Play of Bridgwater seems to be the only time we extrapolate "what could have been"

[mansquatch]

My guess on this is they'll keep him through next year since his restructured contract will still be in effect and he is the major advertising force for the new stadium. In a way, it just wouldn't seem right to not open USB Stadium without #28. That being said, if they were to be offered a high round pick or two for him I think they should strongly consider it. He is likely to walk after his contract expires as he hates the MN weather and has often voiced his desire to play in his home state of TX.

[losperros]

Keep in mind Asiata had 9 touch downs the year AD was out, AD had 11 touch downs this year for comparisons sake. The goal line TD's might not be that different since I don't think any of Asiata's TDs were of the say 80 yard variety!

Doesn't it really depend on the philosophy that Zimmer/Turner are going to employ next year? In no way is Asiata the back that AD is but he is valuable in his own way. Even so, if the Vikings are going to stick with a power running game first and foremost then an explosive back will be needed or the offense might do much scoring.

Maybe a running-by-committee dynamic would work with McKinnon and Asiata but I'd still rather have Peterson involved as well. Whatever the case, this offense needs to score more TDs, not only from the red zone but from anywhere on the field. The overall offensive philosophy will determine what personnel changes will probably be made.

[J. Kapp 11]

I am not absolving AP by any means, but just as 2009 it was a multitude of factors.

There are the key words for me ... "just as 2009."

How does a HOF running back make the same mistakes and have the same issues as he had six years ago?

The fumble yesterday was as big a factor yesterday as the missed kick. People have actually threatened Blair Walsh, but few mention AP. Did anybody in the media even ask him or Mike Zimmer about the fumble? Yet 40 reporters crowded around Walsh's locker.

Fumbling the football isn't a reason to cut a HOF running back. But paying him $15 million at age 31 might be.

[IrishViking]

Doesn't it really depend on the philosophy that Zimmer/Turner are going to employ next year? In no way is Asiata the back that AD is but he is valuable in his own way. Even so, if the Vikings are going to stick with a power running game first and foremost then an explosive back will be needed or the offense might do much scoring.

Maybe a running-by-committee dynamic would work with McKinnon and Asiata but I'd still rather have Peterson involved as well. Whatever the case, this offense needs to score more TDs, not only from the red zone but from anywhere on the field. The overall offensive philosophy will determine what personnel changes will probably be made.

I think we are getting to the point were I don't instantly agree with that Mck isn't equal to AP. For career and talent level wise yes no comparison. But for what they provide on the field on any given down. I think One is rapidly falling and one is rapidly rising.

[J. Kapp 11]

No fumble just means no fumble. There's no way to know what would have happened next.

Fine. I agree.

But we DO know what happened as a result of the fumble. Seattle scored to take the lead. You can't argue that. And it was a vitally important turning point in the game.

[losperros]

I think we are getting to the point were I don't instantly agree with that Mck isn't equal to AP. For career and talent level wise yes no comparison. But for what they provide on the field on any given down. I think One is rapidly falling and one is rapidly rising.

Possibly and I understand why you would be concerned about that.

I guess I'm just saying that the Zimmer/Turner run first philosophy will have impact on the Vikings keeping AD. Of course, so will his contract.

[J. Kapp 11]

Possibly and I understand why you would be concerned about that.

I guess I'm just saying that the Zimmer/Turner run first philosophy will have impact on the Vikings keeping AD. Of course, so will his contract.

Here's my question.

Are we a run-first team because that's Zimmer and Turner's philosophy?

Or is it because we have Adrian Peterson?

[IrishViking]

Possibly and I understand why you would be concerned about that.

I guess I'm just saying that the Zimmer/Turner run first philosophy will have impact on the Vikings keeping AD. Of course, so will his contract.

I agree with you there. IMO if Asiata was a bit better or they could find a sure upgrade for him they would unload AP somehow.

[vikeinmontana]

Are we a run-first team because that's Zimmer and Turner's philosophy?

Or is it because we have Adrian Peterson?

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

[losperros]

Fine. I agree.

But we DO know what happened as a result of the fumble. Seattle scored to take the lead. You can't argue that. And it was a vitally important turning point in the game.

And we know what happened with an offense that can't get finish drives with TDs. Would Peterson's fumble meant much if the Vikings had actually scored touchdowns instead of kicking FGs three times?

I know that doesn't let Peterson off the hook and I'm not really trying to. But I don't think he lost the game. I saw offensive shortcomings and low output from this passing game too many times this last season to pin the loss of the playoff game on AD and/or Walsh.

[losperros]

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

Good questions. Maybe all the above?

[Mothman]

Its seems to me that the Play of Bridgwater seems to be the only time we extrapolate "what could have been"

Hardly... and I'm getting very tired of insinuations like that.

I've had the same take on this sort of play for years. It happened and everything that happened after that impacted the outcome of the game too. Anything that might have happened after that is 100% hypothetical, pure conjecture, which is not the same as looking at a play that occurred in a game and considering options that were actually available.

All Peterson's fumble did was create an opportunity for Seattle but every play is a new opportunity. The Seahawks weren't yet in scoring position when they took possession of the ball. Their score on that drive wasn't the last play of the game. If the defense had been able to come on the field and force a three and out, the Vikes still could have won. If the Vikes had scored on a subsequent possession, they could have won.

Games aren't won and lost on one play. They're won and lost over the course of all 4 quarters.