Which team has the most screwed-up QB situation?

Joe Kapp??

 

Dammit, Hondo, I was going to post that.

 

Archie Manning (he finished his career there)

 

If I get my pick of Mannings to play for the Vikes, I'd rather have Eli or Peyton. [/looser Vikings fangirl]

 

Cooper Manning.

 

He'd still be better than what the Vikings have right now.

 

Speaking of the Vikings, do you think the coaching staff just hasn't noticed they drafted what appears to be a once-in-a-generation-type back? Why Adrian Peterson would ever get less than 20 carries and 25 touches in a game that is not an absolute blowout by the second quarter is beyond me.

 

Because he doesn't want to wreck his once-in-a-lifetime back. Peterson has a history of injury and NFL runners who average 25 carries per game have a long history of injuries and breaking down early. Check out what happened to the few backs who have rushed 400 times in a season, including Larry Johnson (averaging 72.3 yards per game and 3.6 yards per rush this season).

Coaches, who do this for a living, after all, know this and are very reluctant to put a saddle on any runner's back and ride him until he drops. Because they know he will drop. If you have two good backs, why wouldn't you split the load? Chester Taylor is certainly no Adrian Peterson, but he's not chopped liver. He ran for more than 1,200 yards last season and is averaging 4.4 yards per rush this year.

If the Vikings run it 40 times a game -- their best chance to win given the QB situation -- splitting the carries 50-50 between Peterson and Taylor makes perfect sense, taking advantage of the fact they have two quality backs and avoiding running either of them into the ground with overwork.

BTW, I believe Peterson is averaging 18 carries a game, and that includes 12 carries against Dallas, when the team only ran 49 offensive plays. Sounds like he's already getting about 20 rushes a game.

 

Yawyawyawyaw yaaaaaaaaaaawwww yaw, yaaaaaaaaaawwwwwww yaw, Brent Schaeffah!
Yawyawyawyaw yaaaaaaaaaaawwww yaw, yaaaaaaaaaawwwwwww yaw, Wild Boyz!

 

Well said.

 

As to the Vikings' situation, treating your best player like he's fragile is no way to win football games. And I didnt say 25 carries, I said 20 carries and 25 touches. They should be getting the ball into his hands as much as possible. And back to the idea they're trying to keep him from getting hurt by limiting his carries. That team would be much better off by giving him five or so more carries a game than having him return kicks. Yes, he's very dangerous as a kick returner, but that's likely to get him injured befre running the ball from scrimmage will.

I hate the idea that you have to coddle running backs to keep them from getting hurt. Great running backs don't need to sit on the sidelines for six series a game, especially at crucial points in a close game and especially when your offense doesn't sustain many drives to begin with. The NFL's top two career rushing leaders, Smith and Payton, were workhorses for well more than a decade, and the best RB in the NFL right now, LT, rarely takes more than a couple of series off per game when it's not a blowout.

If Peterson is injury prone, he's gonna get hurt anyway. You might as well build your offense around him as much as possible from the get-go. He can't help ya while he's watching Chester Taylor, who, by the way is chopped liver compared to Peterson.

 

Since he's already averaging 18 carries a game, you're looking for two more attempts -- maybe one more series. Oh yeah, he also averages just about two receptions a game. Those averages would, of course, be higher if the Minnesota defense could have managed to get Dallas' offense off the field last week. And he's getting the ball more than anyone in that offense.

When you get right down to it, the way they're already using him is very close to the way you suggest they use him.