6,680 YARDS Does ADP have what it takes to catch Emmitt? (1 Viewer)

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

Peterson has gained 11,675 yards, which puts him 6,680 yards behind Smith. If Peterson plays four more seasons, he must average 1,670 yards. If he plays five seasons, he would need to average 1,336 yards to break Smith’s record.

 

[BigTex]

No

 

[Milkman]

Losing that year killed any chance he had.

 

[Pots]

5 seasons of 1336 from ages 31-35 is pretty unrealistic.

FWIW, Emmitt had 2,300 more yards than Peterson at this stage of his career.

 

[Biabreakable]

Very unlikely. He had a chance if he wouldn't have missed most of 2014 due to the suspension. 

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Nope. Like others said, that year long suspension killed the shot he had. Shame, but doubt he would have done it even with another 1,700 yards under his belt right now.

 

[menobrown]

I voted no but so long as the NFL does not come up with a good HGH testing plan I think he's got a shot.

 

[petekrum]

No chance in hell.

 

[Ghost Rider]

No. 

I know he is a beast of a physical freak, but he is such a physical runner, and when the hits that wall, and they all do, it is going to be a massive and sudden drop. 

 

[Milkman]

Even though he won't rush for more yards he's pretty clearly a better RB than Emmitt.

 

[FUBAR]

Even though he won't rush for more yards he's pretty clearly a better RB than Emmitt.

But not Barry 

 

[tone1oc]

But not Barry 

Imagine if Barry had ADP's o line.... 

 

[FUBAR]

Fwiw, there's a better chance that McCoy finishes with more yards than AD over Emmitt.

 

[Anarchy99]

Emmitt is the only RB to have 4,000 career yards rushing past from age 31 on (4409 to be exact). ADP would have to beat that by more than 50%. I just don't see it happening. 

 

[Biabreakable]

But not Barry 

Or Walter.

 

[Tau837]

Or Walter.

In the history of the NFL, all-time RB rankings read: Brown, Payton, ...everyone else.

 

[TheGrimReaper]

I think this is one of those records that, given the current state of RB usage, will never be broken unless something dramatically changes.  Like in baseball with complete games and/or shutouts...there just isn't enough opportunity for a given player, regardless of greatness, to accumulate the needed stats.  Just my two cents..... 

 

[cstu]

Emmitt is the only RB to have 4,000 career yards rushing past from age 31 on (4409 to be exact). ADP would have to beat that by more than 50%. I just don't see it happening. 

ADP has access to 'medical science' that Emmitt could only dream of. 

6,680 over 6 years is only 1,133 yards per year.

Emmitt is the only RB to have 4,000 career yards rushing past from age 31 on (4409 to be exact). ADP would have to beat that by more than 50%. I just don't see it happening. 

You missed John Henry Johnson (4,607) and Riggins (4,530). 

It's a long shot but ADP is a determined SOB. Barring major injury I believe he hangs around to get it.

 

[DropKick]

Imagine if Barry had ADP's o line.... 

And Peterson should pass....  Fred Taylor next on the career rushing list.  For the record, the knock on Fred's injury history was always over done.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Even though he won't rush for more yards he's pretty clearly a better RB than Emmitt.

I think a more interesting question is, who is the best NFL RB of the last 20 years (basically best RB to come into the league after Smith and Sanders did)? 

Has to be Faulk, Tomlinson or Peterson, and I would say Peterson is probably 3rd on that list.  Tough call between Faulk and Tomlinson for numero 1. 

 

[Milkman]

I think a more interesting question is, who is the best NFL RB of the last 20 years (basically best RB to come into the league after Smith and Sanders did)? 

Has to be Faulk, Tomlinson or Peterson, and I would say Peterson is probably 3rd on that list.  Tough call between Faulk and Tomlinson for numero 1. 

Peterson is one demensional but what he does well he might do better than anybody ever has.  He's that good.

 

[tone1oc]

I think a more interesting question is, who is the best NFL RB of the last 20 years (basically best RB to come into the league after Smith and Sanders did)? 

Has to be Faulk, Tomlinson or Peterson, and I would say Peterson is probably 3rd on that list.  Tough call between Faulk and Tomlinson for numero 1. 

I think that if your metric for best RB was based on pure running ability, then AP is probably tops.  But all around, and more importantly getting Ws, I think he is a distant 3rd IMO. 

 

[TheFanatic]

No way he does it. Even if he hadn't lost that year, I doubt he could do it. Age is a constant thing. I know the guy has had some chemical help, but until they discover the fountain of youth, he's not going to beat Emmit and he won't come within 500 yards of his season average of doing so. 

 

[dgreen]

Through the age 30 season, Peterson has played in 120 games and Smith was at 155 games. Big advantage to Smith because he started at 21 (22 for Peterson) and didn't miss a full season in that span. 

 

[Bri]

I think a more interesting question is, who is the best NFL RB of the last 20 years (basically best RB to come into the league after Smith and Sanders did)? 

Has to be Faulk, Tomlinson or Peterson, and I would say Peterson is probably 3rd on that list.  Tough call between Faulk and Tomlinson for numero 1. 

It's a unique time with CJ, Priest, and LJ being arguably the best but just for a few years.

I don't think Faulk belongs. Curtis Martin passed him in rushing yards while they were playing, despite him having a year head start and  Martin finished with 2k more. Also, Edge was very similar and put did similarly well in the same offense. These don't give me a "best of" vibe.

I'd vote Tomlinson. I could throw out yards or touchdown stats but on an FF board please allow this- he was very often the top pick in every draft. We don't have a better barometer

 

[Milkman]

I think that if your metric for best RB was based on pure running ability, then AP is probably tops.  But all around, and more importantly getting Ws, I think he is a distant 3rd IMO. 

Faulk and LT had much better QB play.

 

[Bri]

Faulk and LT had much better QB play.

Very good point

 

[bucsbaby]

People on here forgetting just how good LT was, for years.  He's been out of the league long enough for people to forget, but not long enough for the nostalgia factor to kick in, in his favour I guess  

At any rate, a lot of HoF worthy RBs in the last couple decades.  Except for AP, not very many of those around the NFL these days...

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

Even though he won't rush for more yards he's pretty clearly a better RB than Emmitt.

That couldn't be more true. So... I'm hoping he can somehow pull it off.

 

[Biabreakable]

LT definitely one of the best RB I have seen (although I have watched Peterson more) and I think he was a better all around RB than Peterson is.

Part of why folks may not think of LT as much is because of the end of his career being the most recent memory. Emmitt wasn't lighting the world on fire in his last few years either, but I don't think people remember that about him as much as they might with LT.

I think Tomlinson was good enough that I don't call him LT 2 anymore, and Lawrence Taylor one of the best defenders I have ever seen. Ladanian is up there with Lawrence for me.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

How much does longevity matter?  Peterson put together a great year at age 30 and is still going.  LT's last year as a really good NFL player was his age 28 season.  After that he had one more year as a 3.8ypc plodder and then was essentially a backup.  He averaged 3.3ypc in his age 30 season.

 

[Nero]

I think a more interesting question is, who is the best NFL RB of the last 20 years (basically best RB to come into the league after Smith and Sanders did)? 

Has to be Faulk, Tomlinson or Peterson, and I would say Peterson is probably 3rd on that list.  Tough call between Faulk and Tomlinson for numero 1. 

Fred Taylor would be my answer.  I'd have Faulk 2.

 

[elguapo07]

LT/ Faulk 1a/1b

Edge James

ADP

Curtis Martin

 

[spider321]

Fred Taylor would be my answer.  I'd have Faulk 2.

Tell your brother we enjoyed watching him run the ball for the Jags.

 

[Nero]

Tell your brother we enjoyed watching him run the ball for the Jags.

Or maybe you didn't watch him.

 

[FF Ninja]

Imagine if Barry had ADP's o line.... 

I've never done the research, but I've heard several times that the insinuation that Barry didn't have a good line is revisionist history. The overall team was lacking, but the o-line was actually pretty damn good. But again, I haven't researched this. Just heard it from people who sounded like they knew what they were talking about

 

[Shutout]

It's a unique time with CJ, Priest, and LJ being arguably the best but just for a few years.

I don't think Faulk belongs. Curtis Martin passed him in rushing yards while they were playing, despite him having a year head start and  Martin finished with 2k more. Also, Edge was very similar and put did similarly well in the same offense. These don't give me a "best of" vibe.

I'd vote Tomlinson. I could throw out yards or touchdown stats but on an FF board please allow this- he was very often the top pick in every draft. We don't have a better barometer

Actually, the answer is Terrell Davis. It was a white hot shooting star that streaked across the sky and only seen for a moment but what he did in those 2-3 years when he was on was absolutely remarkable.

in that three year run:

5296 yards

49 (FORTY NINE) rushing TDs (and a few more receiving)

103 receptions

814 receiving yards

The others are all great...super great...but at the end of the day, Davis did everything they did in terms of production (and more), absolutely was THE BEAST in FF, and, oh by the way, along the way was THE key ingredient in two super bowl wins.

Hard to argue against that.

 

[cstu]

I've never done the research, but I've heard several times that the insinuation that Barry didn't have a good line is revisionist history. The overall team was lacking, but the o-line was actually pretty damn good. But again, I haven't researched this. Just heard it from people who sounded like they knew what they were talking about

Emmitt's production gets discounted because of the Cowboys' great OL so people make the assumption that Barry had a bad OL.  The truth is that he had one of the better OL's in the league most of his career, not close to the Cowboys but still good.

 

[Anarchy99]

Actually, the answer is Terrell Davis. It was a white hot shooting star that streaked across the sky and only seen for a moment but what he did in those 2-3 years when he was on was absolutely remarkable.

in that three year run:

5296 yards

49 (FORTY NINE) rushing TDs (and a few more receiving)

103 receptions

814 receiving yards

The others are all great...super great...but at the end of the day, Davis did everything they did in terms of production (and more), absolutely was THE BEAST in FF, and, oh by the way, along the way was THE key ingredient in two super bowl wins.

Hard to argue against that.

It's not that hard to argue against it. Davis had an insane workload (1106 carries over 3 seasons). And other DEN backs did well after Davis did (not as well, but still very well). When guys like Olandis Gary, Mike Anderson, Clinton Portis, Reuben Droughns, and Tatum Bell can step in and get 1.000-1.500 yards, that dilutes what Davis did to a certain extent.

There's no denying Davis was great for 3 seasons. But 3 seasons is not a career.

Since 1960, here were all the 3-year spans where a player had 40 or more rushing TDs . . .

LT 2004-06 63
Priest Holmes 2002-04 62
LT 2005-07 61
Emmitt 1994-96 58
S Alexander 2003-05 57
Priest Holmes 2001-03 56
Emmitt 1993-95 55
LT 2006-08 54
S Alexander 2004-06 50
Terrell Davis 1996-98 49
LT 2003-05 48
Emmitt 1992-94 48
Priest Holmes 2003-05 47
Larry Johnson 2004-06 46
S Alexander 2002-04 46
John Riggins 1983-85 46
Earl Campbell 1978-80 45
Jim Taylor 1960-62 45
LT 2002-04 44
S Alexander 2001-03 44
Eric Dickerson 1983-85 44
Barry Sanders 1989-91 43
Jim Taylor 1961-63 43
ADP 2009-11 42
Earl Campbell 1979-81 42
Leroy Kelly 1966-68 42
Arian Foster 2010-12 41
Emmitt 1995-97 41
John Riggins 1982-84 41
Emmitt 1990-92 40
ADP 2008-10 40
ADP 2007-09 40
Larry Johnson 2005-07 40
John Riggins 1981-83 40
Jim Taylor 1962-64 40

Davis was great for 3 years, but other backs have scored more rushing TDs than he did in a similar time frame. Davis ranks as the 10th best 3-year scoring stretch.

 

[steelers1080]

It's going to be a case of diminishing returns.  He needs ~6,700 yards.  The most likely scenario is that he starts to decrease in yards every year until he retires.  The trend could follow something like this:

1. 1600 yards (31 yrs old)
   
2. 1300 yards (32 yrs old)
   
3. 1100 yards (33 yrs old)
   
4. 700 yards (34 yrs old, injury)
   
5. 800 yards (35 yrs old, being crazy generous)
   
6. 400 yards (36 yrs old)
   
7. 300 yards (37 yrs old)
   

And this would land him still 500 yards short.  RBs over 30 get injured more often and remain sidelined for longer.  In this projection I assumed he didn't get injured/miss games for 3 years which is highly unlikely.  And giving him generous amounts of yards he still fell 500 yards short.  At some point a younger back will be performing better and he'll be shipped off probably to be a backup, or if he's lucky to act like Gore and assist what should be a contender.  He seemed to be slowing down at the end of last season, so I don't see him having 6-7 more seasons in him, and that's what I think it would take for him to reach the record.

 

[Anarchy99]

The other more simplified answer is that as ADP ages, there will be better, stronger, faster backs that will take carries and his skills will erode to a point where he won't have a job. Getting old isn't fun, but that's just a fact of life. It's unlikely a team (for now the Vikings) will want to hang on to an aging back for the sole purpose of him chasing a record that he probably will never hit multiple years down the road.

 

[TheFanatic]

Actually, the answer is Terrell Davis. It was a white hot shooting star that streaked across the sky and only seen for a moment but what he did in those 2-3 years when he was on was absolutely remarkable.

in that three year run:

5296 yards

49 (FORTY NINE) rushing TDs (and a few more receiving)

103 receptions

814 receiving yards

The others are all great...super great...but at the end of the day, Davis did everything they did in terms of production (and more), absolutely was THE BEAST in FF, and, oh by the way, along the way was THE key ingredient in two super bowl wins.

Hard to argue against that.

He had 4 more TD's through the air for totals of combined rushing and receiving of:

6110 yards from scrimmage and 54 TD's

Marshall Faulk from 99-01 had:

6765 yards from scrimmage and 59 TD's

And please don't say, "Well, he did all through the air." We can't ignore what he did catching the ball out of the backfield. If it were easy, then TD would have 22 receiving TD and 2600 yards through the air over 3 years. 

 

[Shutout]

It's not that hard to argue against it. Davis had an insane workload (1106 carries over 3 seasons). And other DEN backs did well after Davis did (not as well, but still very well). When guys like Olandis Gary, Mike Anderson, Clinton Portis, Reuben Droughns, and Tatum Bell can step in and get 1.000-1.500 yards, that dilutes what Davis did to a certain extent.

There's no denying Davis was great for 3 seasons. But 3 seasons is not a career.

Since 1960, here were all the 3-year spans where a player had 40 or more rushing TDs . . .

LT 2004-06 63
Priest Holmes 2002-04 62
LT 2005-07 61
Emmitt 1994-96 58
S Alexander 2003-05 57
Priest Holmes 2001-03 56
Emmitt 1993-95 55
LT 2006-08 54
S Alexander 2004-06 50
Terrell Davis 1996-98 49
LT 2003-05 48
Emmitt 1992-94 48
Priest Holmes 2003-05 47
Larry Johnson 2004-06 46
S Alexander 2002-04 46
John Riggins 1983-85 46
Earl Campbell 1978-80 45
Jim Taylor 1960-62 45
LT 2002-04 44
S Alexander 2001-03 44
Eric Dickerson 1983-85 44
Barry Sanders 1989-91 43
Jim Taylor 1961-63 43
ADP 2009-11 42
Earl Campbell 1979-81 42
Leroy Kelly 1966-68 42
Arian Foster 2010-12 41
Emmitt 1995-97 41
John Riggins 1982-84 41
Emmitt 1990-92 40
ADP 2008-10 40
ADP 2007-09 40
Larry Johnson 2005-07 40
John Riggins 1981-83 40
Jim Taylor 1962-64 40

Davis was great for 3 years, but other backs have scored more rushing TDs than he did in a similar time frame. Davis ranks as the 10th best 3-year scoring stretch.

So what you're saying is Davis had a heavy workload...and held up.  When did that become a negative? YOu still have to perform and I'd say that AVERAGING more than 1 TD per game for 3 straight years is performing. The entire "its a system thing" is ridiculous.  OBJ isn't downgraded because the Giants passing system made Steve Smith, Plaxico Burress and Victor Cruz have gaudy stats.  Aaron Rodgers isn't downgraded because of Favre.  COme on.

So you showed me a list of 10 guys (including Terrell Davis) that have had as good of a season.  And how many of those guys won two super Bowls in that period? And how many of them did it while playing with a hall of fame legend QB? 

I'm not going to take this thread off the rail because it's a good discussion. we don't need to be muddying it up.  But you're way off base arguing the point.  You can put 4-5 guys in the conversation and say they are all great and they are but if you can't give TD the recognition he deserves in terms of the production, the rings, and the fantasy impact in those three years (which was the entirety of what I said), then you just appear to be someone that wants to play lawyer and argue picked nits vs. just saying "yeah, pretty damned good run there".

 

[Shutout]

He had 4 more TD's through the air for totals of combined rushing and receiving of:

6110 yards from scrimmage and 54 TD's

Marshall Faulk from 99-01 had:

6765 yards from scrimmage and 59 TD's

And please don't say, "Well, he did all through the air." We can't ignore what he did catching the ball out of the backfield. If it were easy, then TD would have 22 receiving TD and 2600 yards through the air over 3 years. 

Yes, Faulk is the guy that had those numbers but, again, how many super bowls did he win in that period? 

I don't know why a couple of you guys seem to want to simply pull out the one aspect that you want to grind on. I clearly said combination of production, super bowl wins and fantasy impact.  Three things, not one. Not two. 

And FWIW, I think Faulk's run was phenomenal. In terms of pure numbers it was an amazing performance on a very special team and Faulk is a HOF largely in part of that. But as I said, I was looking at the whole picture because that is the important thing.  There are lots of years when a bad team kind of has a one man show and he does everything and its great numbers but it's out of context somewhat. What Davis did on a team that included an all time HOF QB and a LOT of other noteworthy talent WITHIN the context of them winning and winning superbowls is noteworthy. This wasn't some guy who threw for 5500 yards on a bad team in garbage time and they ended their season in week 17. This was a guy who was the focal point of a team with a target on his back and he achieved every possible thing you could ask for.

 

[Anarchy99]

I never said TD didn't have a great stretch for 3 years. It was one of the best. But we aren't posting in a "Can Terrell Davis get 10,749 yards to catch Emmitt Smith" thread. 

So we can debate the merits of giving him the biggest workload for a RB over three years in the history of the NFL (1310 carries including regular and post season) and whether that means he "held up" or not. 

 

[Nero]

It's going to be a case of diminishing returns.  He needs ~6,700 yards.  The most likely scenario is that he starts to decrease in yards every year until he retires.  The trend could follow something like this:

1. 1600 yards (31 yrs old)
   
2. 1300 yards (32 yrs old)
   
3. 1100 yards (33 yrs old)
   
4. 700 yards (34 yrs old, injury)
   
5. 800 yards (35 yrs old, being crazy generous)
   
6. 400 yards (36 yrs old)
   
7. 300 yards (37 yrs old)
   

And this would land him still 500 yards short.  RBs over 30 get injured more often and remain sidelined for longer.  In this projection I assumed he didn't get injured/miss games for 3 years which is highly unlikely.  And giving him generous amounts of yards he still fell 500 yards short.  At some point a younger back will be performing better and he'll be shipped off probably to be a backup, or if he's lucky to act like Gore and assist what should be a contender.  He seemed to be slowing down at the end of last season, so I don't see him having 6-7 more seasons in him, and that's what I think it would take for him to reach the record.

This is not a plausible scenario for AD.  He is a dominant two down back;  once he is no longer a dominant two down back, he will be replaced. He is going to have a hard time finding someone willing to pay him anything substantial for two down work in short order.

 

[Bri]

Actually, the answer is Terrell Davis. It was a white hot shooting star that streaked across the sky and only seen for a moment but what he did in those 2-3 years when he was on was absolutely remarkable.

in that three year run:

5296 yards

49 (FORTY NINE) rushing TDs (and a few more receiving)

103 receptions

814 receiving yards

The others are all great...super great...but at the end of the day, Davis did everything they did in terms of production (and more), absolutely was THE BEAST in FF, and, oh by the way, along the way was THE key ingredient in two super bowl wins.

Hard to argue against that.

First off, I thought their D was not Super bowl special but opportunistic(which is all that matters). Elway and Sharpe, Easy Ed and Rod....they had some players. I like "missing piece" better than "key" to describe him.

He might not be in the post Emmitt timeline, but whatever, it's interesting.

I forget how TD compares to Priest and LJ in short spans. Each of them rocked.

Tomlinson had 4 and 5 TD games or 3 and a passing TD or somesuch where he would get you half of the other team's FF points all by himself. IIRC He had 30? 29? TDs one year so I would guess he stacks up a little better than TDs 49. 

In the post you quoted I discounted Faulk because Edge looked similar in the same O. I don't know if Olandis Gary and Mike Anderson hurt TD here. They did well without Sharpe (unsure of Ed and Rod) and with Greasy tripping over his dog. Shanny's system was famous for us in FF and I wonder if people will discount some of TDs success due to theirs.

 

[TheFanatic]

Yes, Faulk is the guy that had those numbers but, again, how many super bowls did he win in that period? 

I don't know why a couple of you guys seem to want to simply pull out the one aspect that you want to grind on. I clearly said combination of production, super bowl wins and fantasy impact.  Three things, not one. Not two. 

And FWIW, I think Faulk's run was phenomenal. In terms of pure numbers it was an amazing performance on a very special team and Faulk is a HOF largely in part of that. But as I said, I was looking at the whole picture because that is the important thing.  There are lots of years when a bad team kind of has a one man show and he does everything and its great numbers but it's out of context somewhat. What Davis did on a team that included an all time HOF QB and a LOT of other noteworthy talent WITHIN the context of them winning and winning superbowls is noteworthy. This wasn't some guy who threw for 5500 yards on a bad team in garbage time and they ended their season in week 17. This was a guy who was the focal point of a team with a target on his back and he achieved every possible thing you could ask for.

TD went to two superbowls and won them both. Faulk went to 2 SB's in that time won one of them and lost the other on a last second kick by 3. There really is no distinction here.

Both had HOF QB's.

Both had the same scrutiny from opposing teams. 

In the same length of time, Faulk had 10% more yards and almost 10% more TD's. 

TD had a great run, and was truly a treat to watch, but Faulk had a better three year span. 

So basically, they both went to the same number of super bowls, but one had more fantasy impact as well as more production. So on one scale it's a wash and the other two Faulk is clearly the winner. 

 

[Hawkeye21]

In this age of football it will not happen.  I predict he will be retired within 3 years and still be at least 3,000 yards short.

 

[Sinrman]

That's three miracle 2000+ yard seasons to catch that, which puts him near his mid-30's.  Not a chance.