Vikings Message Board.Com

Mothman wrote:
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?

Before Sullivan and Loadholt went down, I think that WAS the plan, then they went down and Turner adapted. Peterson wasn't able to. Offensive line still stunk but they went back to it cause it was the best option among bad options. In the end they had to try to make chicken salad of out chicken #$%.

And they did manage to ride it to 11 wins.

What the hell is wrong with you people? You want to get rid of the NFL rushing leader because of fumbles? How do you know Teddy doesn't throw a pick6 the play after the fumble if we recover, or if there was no fumble?


Cold is temporary. Purple Pride is forever.

PurpleMustReign wrote:What the hell is wrong with you people? You want to get rid of the NFL rushing leader because of fumbles? How do you know Teddy doesn't throw a pick6 the play after the fumble if we recover, or if there was no fumble?


Cold is temporary. Purple Pride is forever.

I don't think he's a smart football player. Not nearly as nasty and disgusting as Burfict, but almost equally dumb/situationally unaware.

I said it in another thread but my thinking remains the same, Zygi has a shiny new stadium he's opening and AD will be carrying the banner. There's simply no one else on this team in the same stratosphere in terms of recognition, status, productivity, etc. I mean the guy was literally ON the early stadium renderings until last year's events.

The Vikings would be wise to start extending some 2017 free agents, as there are a lot, but for 2016 there are only a few. Harris is probably the biggest priority with Greenway being the other if he does indeed elect to come back. Newman can go either way but I think re-signing and putting him at safety isn't a bad idea. The rest of the signings are your Thielen, Sherels, Sendejo's of the world. Not to minimize their contributions but they're not exactly going to command big bucks.

It's no secret the biggest issue (well fixable issue) is the O-line. Hopefully Loadholt and Sully are back and healthy. That plus additions via draft and free agency will hopefully shore up that area. Whether you like him or not, Bridgewater is getting at least another year. I would love for the Vikings to draft another QB mid-round but even if they do, it's unlikely that person starts next year. I'm not sold on Norv like many but I think he too will be back, maybe with a change in playmaker or two.

So basically we know the defense is good and no one of major consequence is going anywhere next year. The line can be fixed and the rest of the offense is more or less a lock to be here like it or not. All of that, plus the new stadium means AD isn't going anywhere.

First, his cap hit for 2016 is only $11 million. $4.4 million less than this year. So I see no reason they would dump him for cap reasons. His 2017 cap hit is $18 million. I doubt he sees that. $6.5 million is roster bonus. So if they are going to dump him, I would expect it to me next year, not this year.


As to dumping him. I would love to see more 2 back sets with him and Mckinnon. But that's probably a pipe dream.

If we improve our offensive line (get healthy, high-ish draft picks, maybe a decent FA pick-up) I think we could keep AD. The line would create better holes for AD and give Teddy more time, especially from under center, and everything could improve. That's a moving target, though, because who knows if we will actually be able to improve our line.

The thing that suggests to me that we can part ways with AD is Teddy's productivity on 3rd downs. Prior to the Chicago game in Week 15, Teddy was 70 of 107 (65.4%) for 802 yards and averaged 11.5 yards per completion. His passer rating went from 81.8 on first and second downs to 92.5 on third downs. (I can't find the current stats so feel free to post those if you can find them). I'm sure some of this improvement has to do with Teddy going from the shotgun vs. under center, but I don't have the specific number of times we went from the shotgun on third down so it's purely speculation.

So when AD is typically out of the game, Teddy is better. So whatever coverage advantage AD brings to the game on first and second down doesn't seem to be very helpful when our QB plays better without him in the game. On top of that, he's better without AD on the field in the face of the defense expecting a pass in these situations. That suggests to me that Teddy just might be much better without AD on the field and the ability to throw when defenses aren't expecting.

J. Kapp 11 wrote:Might as well address this right away.

Adrian Peterson is going to cost the team a LOT of money next year. We are getting close, but we have definite needs -- the O-line, safety, depth at linebacker and more. Jerick McKinnon has shown to be a very versatile back who runs very well out of the shotgun. Adrian isn't getting any younger -- he'll be 31 next year. He only gained 524 yards after the Oakland game. He's obviously prone to fumbles. He requires the QB to be under center. And he's not effective in the passing game.

On the other hand, AP has been the face of the franchise for 9 years. He's arguably the best RUNNER at running back in the NFL. He's a threat to score every time he touches the ball.

You're the GM. Do you bring him back? What tips the scales for you?

Kapp, your the only one who could frame this topic in a way to not get called a troll.
This has been bothering me all year.
I would not bring him back unless he restructures all the money they just guaranteed him. He's getting paid more now than he ever has. He's still a great back, but certainly not what he's being paid. He's done more dancing this year than I've ever seen. And it drives me crazy that he's not playing on third downs.
He does have a hard time fitting into the scheme of football that Teddy likes to play and Norv Turner likes to coach.
I think this year we had a situation where Adrian Peterson was still a better running back than Teddy Bridgewater was a quarterback.
In that regard, Adrian still gave them a better chance to win this year. I think that's why the team went back to Adrian in the deep I.
Adrian shouldn't get all the credit for winning the rushing title. The offensive line that so many have criticized also helped Adrian the title. Furthermore, shouldn't Adrian be expected to win the rushing title when the entire game plan and focus of the offense is to get him the most yards possible? No other team in the league still does this.
I asked the question a while back: do you build your team around a 31-year-old running back or a 23-year-old quarterback?
Adrian will lose another step next year, keep that in mind.
I suspect next year that they will make Adrian Peterson run out of the shotgun and center the offense more around Teddy Bridgewater. I also expect next year to be Adrian Peterson's last year with the Minnesota Vikings. They guaranteed him all that money last year I can't see them going back on that now.
And we all know how he fumbles in the biggest games at critical times. He couldn't play for the big tuna. Can't be trusted.

The face of the Franchise = The face of failure.
The league has passed AP by. A RB is no longer important to teams that WIN. Look at Who is in the play offs and contending....None of them depend on a RB as the core of their offense. The Vikes are behind the times. We are centering on a RB in a league that DEMANDS a potent passing game ( and we have NO passing game...thanks Teddy....) .
I doubt we can get much for AP since most GMs have long ago come to realize the the RB is no longer critical, but if we COULD get a high pick it would be foolish to not deal him. If spielman is worth much as a GM he ought to be able to feel out the league and find whatever sucker is still out there.
Fans that think we are on the cusp of greatness are delusional. We have NO OL, we have what appears to be a floundering experiment at QB, and a RB over 30 who likes to give the ball away in the playoffs, cannot pass block, and requires to get the ball 20 yards deep. We need talent, lots of it.

I dont see them getting rid of AD this year. I wish we could make a trade but theres no way. Would do the Vikings and Teddy (Norv too in a way) if AD wasnt on the team. Ezekiel Elliott would have looked so good in purple (if he would slip to #23).

Great conversation here. I've been holding off on commenting so I could read the thoughts of others. Have to admit, there have been some great arguments on both sides.

So here's what I think, if anybody cares.

The question I'd ask is, "What would Belichick do?" Not that I'm some kind of syncophant. Honestly, I can't stand the Patriots. But let's be honest here. The man has been the undisputed king of roster management for the better part of 15 years. He's been harshly criticized as a cold-hearted SOB because of some of the veterans he's released, but in virtually every case, he's been proven right.

I believe Belichick would release Adrian Peterson. Why?

1. Belichick learned a long time ago that you don't build a modern NFL offense around a running back, especially one who makes quarterback money.

2. He would never allow a running back -- or any single player -- to dictate the offense, call out the coaching staff for not giving him enough carries, or force his starting quarterback to play in a way that didn't maximize the QB's efficiency.

3. He would never allow sentimental reasons such as "AP deserves to open the new stadium" or "he was the MVP three years ago" to affect his decisions.

4. He would never keep a player, especially a 9-year veteran, who either can't or won't improve major deficiencies such as pass protection, pass catching, or (especially) ball security.

5. He would never have given a running back a $100 million salary in the first place ... and he certainly wouldn't let a running back's salary cause him to be short on talent at other positions.

It's clear to me. While AP has been one of my favorite players, times have changed. The best running backs in the league nowadays are the ones with versatility. They're role players who are happy to play that role. AP, for all the thrills he has given us, is not that back.

The Vikings have a decision to make. If they release AP prior to the third day of the new league year, his cap hit is zero. I think they need to let him go ... and don't be surprised if that's exactly what happens. But no matter what, if he wears purple, I'll root for him.

J. Kapp 11 wrote:The Vikings have a decision to make. If they release AP prior to the third day of the new league year, his cap hit is zero. I think they need to let him go ... and don't be surprised if that's exactly what happens.

I'll be shocked if that happens...

... but I appreciate your thoughts on the subject anyway.

some of the things in here i read are unbelievable. i know i constantly get pegged as mr. negativity, but i'm fine with that. you guys are talking about flat our releasing our best offensive player (and who has been our best offensive player for years). from a financial state, maybe i could understand. but, what about from a practical standpoint? there were several games peterson took over by himself this year and he did it yet again without a passing attack. he led the entire nfl in rushing. and i know peterson didn't have a good game yesterday, but what about the fact that our entire offense didn't have a single touchdown in two games against seattle? why isn't anyone addressing that fact instead of blaming our kicker and talking about releasing our best player?

The Star Tribune's Mark Craig weighs in:

http://www.startribune.com/for-all-his- ... 364934701/

Do the Vikings have a winning formula that features a running back in his 30s?

Oh, I don’t know. They went 6-9 and missed the playoffs without Adrian Peterson last year. This year, they went 11-5 and won the NFC North with Adrian Peterson capturing the league rushing title and All-Pro first-team honors behind an offensive line that lost two starters in August and struggled throughout the season.

You’d think that kind of logic would silence an argument. But Vikings fans are a tormented band of brothers. With good reason, as we saw once again Sunday.

They’re hurting, again, and they want to share their pain. Next to Blair Walsh’s missed 27-yard field-goal attempt with 22 seconds left, Peterson’s fourth-quarter fumble ranks No. 2 on the Purple Pain-O-Meter that runneth over. It was that fumble that handed Seattle a 12-yard drive that produced the go-ahead field goal in the Vikings’ 10-9 NFC wild-card loss.

Speaking for those who have suggested on occasion that Peterson ain’t half bad, it took less than one rising sun for the cyber pitchforks to arrive at the pillow. And away we go with what likely will be a popular offseason story line. Again.

Peterson is bad for the offense and the team, they said. He can’t be trusted with the ball, they said. He’s stunting Teddy Bridgewater’s growth, they said. And, of course, Peterson must be cut or traded because he’s making too much money, they said.

In a strange sort of way, this is good news to Peterson’s teammates.

Sound familiar?

It's a good article.

Great post Kapp.

I really dont see them resigning him. One more year, and I imagine we will have a new #1 RB. I think its silly some people believe that people want AD gone just because of his performance on Sunday too. I doubt anyone really thinks that. Its his age, the fact he is starting to show signs of weakness, and people are tired of an offense built entirely around AD. Which hasnt brought us to the big game yet. I just dont see AD negotiation at all. Or his agent (I think he's the one that just got arrested?).

J. Kapp 11 wrote:The Vikings have a decision to make. If they release AP prior to the third day of the new league year, his cap hit is zero. I think they need to let him go ... and don't be surprised if that's exactly what happens. But no matter what, if he wears purple, I'll root for him.

Excuse my lack of knowledge on the subject, Kapp, but I don't understand the above. Why is the cap hit zero under those conditions? I thought a contract was locked through next year.