A. Peterson 14 carries for 3 yards (1 Viewer)

[Chief]

.....did someone steal his cleats? Did anyone watch the game...did he look as bad as the stats would indicate?

Haven't read all the replies, but I had to watch this game - no PIT/NE available on the home tv...but that is another story.The 49ers seemed to have a spy on Peterson. it seemed every time he was in the game, the safety would sell out and dive at his knees to take him out and AD crumpled to the ground. They may have been f'n with the rookie's head by going after his legs since its gimpy. Of course, it also seemed that every time AD was in the game, they were giving him the ball - so perhaps part of it was game planning on the part of the offense - not mixing up enough passes with him in the game to keep the Defense honest. The 9er defense has actually been decent against the run all year. and I am not a 9er fan saying this - I just live here and see many of the games. anyhow, that was my take on it.

 

[The Rook]

did he look as bad as the stats would indicate?

Worse if you can believe it. He looked like absolute garbage today. It'll happen to even the best of RBs but obviously Peterson owners didn't want it to happen in such a critical week of the season. He probably killed a lot of fantasy teams with his dog of a game today.

Well, I would think it's hard to run when you're met in the backfield on every play. Peterson got one hole all day and broke a 20 yard run only to have it come back for holding. If you're looking for someone to blame, blame Childress for not calling even ONE screen pass against a defense selling out on every play. Terrible.

The Vikings hardly ever throw to Peterson, though. That wasn't a surprise today. I agree the Niners sold out to stop him but I also thought Peterson ran very tentatively much of the time. He didn't attack the line of scrimmage like he normally does. Bad games happen to the best of RBs. It's just Peterson picked a horrible time to have his worst game of the season.

He did pick a horrible time given that it's the playoffs. Lucky MBIII saved my ###. As for attacking the line, you're supposed to hit the hole full speed, but when there is no hole what do you do? Clearly he was tentative, but there was noone but defenders waiting to meet him, what is he supposed to do?

Yes, Peterson hasn't been a big part of the passing game, which is why the screen plays would've been very effective. Selling out versus the run + not expecting them to pass to Peterson = big gains. I was dissappointed that they didn't at least try one or two. Even if they didn't work it might've stopped them from completely selling out.

I guess at this point I don't expect Peterson to suddenly become part of the passing game when he's barely been involved there the entire season. And yes, the Niners did a good job against him but the same defensive line was torn up by Taylor. So Peterson doesn't get a break from me with his performance today. He played bad and for his fantasy owners he picked an absolutely horrible time to do so.

Wrong, Taylor did nothing in the run game either other than the long run he had...which was also aided by about 60+ yards of downfield WR blocking...Not to mention whenever AP is in the game they give him the ball, no play action or nothing, the D knew he was getting the ball and he was hit in the backfield every time he touched the ball, and that is not an exaggeration...

Couple things:1. The last time I checked, Taylor's long run counted. So saying he did nothing other than that long run ignores the fact that was one helluva good run. And yes, the blocking downfield was good, but it was also a great run by Taylor. He exploded through the line (something Peterson did not do in any of his carries) and took off downfield. I see no reason to minimize what Taylor did. Both Taylor and Peterson faced the same run defense. Taylor did very well and Peterson stunk. It happens.

2. I didn't see much difference with the play-calling yesterday with Peterson then what we've seen in the past. The Vikings rarely use him in the passing game. When he's in the game, they call his number as a runner. That's how it has been in nearly every game this season. So the approach wasn't different. What was different was Peterson failed to generate anything when he carried the ball.

Again, this doesn't mean he sucks. He clearly doesn't. But I thought he had a very poor game. Yes, the Niners were geared up to stop him and they deserve credit for that, but I also thought he ran very tentatively and didn't show the aggression he normally runs with.

Very good posting. And another reason to like AP is he would agree. All of his comments have been about how he was disappointed in his own performance. No comment of defenders in the backfield or the defense keying on him. He just said he expects better of himself.

 

[vikingdave]

Just because Taylor and Peterson were playing against the same defensive team, doesn't mean they were playing against the same defensive plays.According to some articles I've read today (I'm too lazy to link) the 49ers were selling out to stop Peterson when he was on the field.I've read nothing to indicate they were playing the same defensive scheme when Taylor was the primary back.

Defenses have been selling out to stop Peterson for nearly the entire season. That's not something the Niners just came up with yesterday. Peterson has faced defenses geared up to stop him all season long and shredded nearly every one of them. And much of that was with a passing game barely on a Junior High level. Yesterday, he again faced a defense designed to stop him but had the added benefit of an improved passing game and yet he still put up brutal numbers. I'll say it again - bad games happen even to the best of RBs. But I see no reason to cut Peterson any slack here. He played poorly yesterday. Fortunately, for the Vikings Taylor and Jackson did not and the defense didn't and they won easily. But it's ok to be a fan of Adrian Peterson and still acknowledge he played poorly yesterday. I think this kid is a major talent but I have zero problems whatsoever calling him out for playing a bad game.

You obviously didnt watch the game, because if you did, you would know that every time AP got the ball he was met IN the backfield, EVERY time, he had no chance...

 

[vikingdave]

Just because Taylor and Peterson were playing against the same defensive team, doesn't mean they were playing against the same defensive plays.

According to some articles I've read today (I'm too lazy to link) the 49ers were selling out to stop Peterson when he was on the field.

I've read nothing to indicate they were playing the same defensive scheme when Taylor was the primary back.

Defenses have been selling out to stop Peterson for nearly the entire season. That's not something the Niners just came up with yesterday. Peterson has faced defenses geared up to stop him all season long and shredded nearly every one of them. And much of that was with a passing game barely on a Junior High level. Yesterday, he again faced a defense designed to stop him but had the added benefit of an improved passing game and yet he still put up brutal numbers. I'll say it again - bad games happen even to the best of RBs. But I see no reason to cut Peterson any slack here. He played poorly yesterday. Fortunately, for the Vikings Taylor and Jackson did not and the defense didn't and they won easily. But it's ok to be a fan of Adrian Peterson and still acknowledge he played poorly yesterday. I think this kid is a major talent but I have zero problems whatsoever calling him out for playing a bad game.

No, defenses have not been selling out to stop Peterson all season or else he wouldn't be having the season he's having.

I'm sorry, but defenses have absolutely been selling out to stop Peterson this season. The Packers, for example, made it their mission to stop him in both games - failing the first time, but succeeding in the second before he got hurt. For the majority of the season he's been the only offensive player of note. Despite that, he's had a banner season. That speaks volumes to his talent (and that of the Vikings' O line). What the Niners did yesterday was no different than what plenty of other defenses have done in terms of trying to stop Peterson. They were more successful due to their execution and, in my opinion, due to Peterson having his worst game of the season.

Absolutely wrong...

 

[vikingdave]

All RBs have rough days, including Wlater Payton, Barry Sanders, and LT.

You realize I've been making this point repeatedly, correct?And yes, I think when one RB has 50% of his carries go for positive yardage (meaning 4 yards or more) - including one back-breaking long TD run - and another has six negative rushing attempts and only 14% of his carries for positive yards then the former clearly had a MUCH better day than the latter.It's ok to acknowledge Peterson stunk. As I've been saying it doesn't mean he stinks. It means his performance did. Peyton Manning threw 6 INTs in a game this season. That wasn't one of his better games either and it's fair to say he stunk that night against the Chargers. It's ok to say Peterson stunk without it meaning you think he stinks.

You seriously think that with AP being stuffed 6 times out of 14 for negative yards that SF wasnt completely selling out on him? Thats probably more negative rushing plays than he has had all year, much less one game. Every single time he got a handoff Willis was in his face, he literally had no chance on any of his runs as far as I could see...

 

[_4_]

All these replies about SF "selling out" to stop Peterson....meeting him in the backfield whenever he got the ball etc....seem to be giving an awful lot of credit to a pretty awful defense vs. a pretty strong O line......

 

[encaitar]

All these replies about SF "selling out" to stop Peterson....meeting him in the backfield whenever he got the ball etc....seem to be giving an awful lot of credit to a pretty awful defense vs. a pretty strong O line......

That's because using 7 guys to block 8 or 9 who are blitzing for the running back on every play isn't exactly easy. It's no wonder the middle of the field was WIDE OPEN in the passing game. I don't understand how anyone could have watched this game and thought that Peterson should have done more when he was met in the backfield on almost every play. I don't think anyone's denying that Peterson had an off day. 3 yards isn't good no matter the situation. I, as a Vikings fan, am perfectly fine with teams bringing 7, 8, or 9 on every play if the Vikings can continue to take advantage in the passing game.

 

[eoMMan]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

 

[Sabertooth]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

I am seriously pondering inserting Earnest Graham over him.

 

[Pygmy Marmoset]

.....did someone steal his cleats? Did anyone watch the game...did he look as bad as the stats would indicate?

Haven't read all the replies, but I had to watch this game - no PIT/NE available on the home tv...but that is another story.The 49ers seemed to have a spy on Peterson. it seemed every time he was in the game, the safety would sell out and dive at his knees to take him out and AD crumpled to the ground. They may have been f'n with the rookie's head by going after his legs since its gimpy. Of course, it also seemed that every time AD was in the game, they were giving him the ball - so perhaps part of it was game planning on the part of the offense - not mixing up enough passes with him in the game to keep the Defense honest. The 9er defense has actually been decent against the run all year. and I am not a 9er fan saying this - I just live here and see many of the games. anyhow, that was my take on it.

Aren't they giving up almost 125 per game on the ground?

 

[Warehouse Nasty]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

Yes.

 

[CanadianNFLJunkie]

Here's my take:Chester started the game and was in on almost every play it seemed, except for the occasional AD substitution. It almost appeared that they were giving Peterson spot duty to spell Taylor, which I just don't understand. Admitedly, Taylor had only 4 more touches that AD but, he seemed to get alot more PT and was able to work into the flow of the game alot more. Meanwhile, when AD came in, the defense seemed ready to pounce all over the line and overplay the run.As to Taylor's TD run: he showed good patience and vision, but he didn't look explosive or fast to me at all. He had a fantastic hole open up and then trotted between 3 or 4 blockers the rest of the way. I'm going to assume that Childress wants Peterson to be out of the game whenever the game is well in hand to keep him healthy. This may be a good strategy when a guy like Taylor can carry the load when needed, but I feel it could come back to haunt him. Peterson needs to get into a flow like any other player, and if he's the stud he's billed to be, you need to put him in the game.

Hmm ok, from what I heard about the game, the 49ers had their CB's blitzing a lot taking away the outside. Also that AP felt a bit of pain in the 2nd half so they sat him for most of the 2nd half since they had the game in hand already.As for my one team that has AP, luckily for me I still have Randy, TO and LT that saved my bacon.

 

[snogger]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

I am seriously pondering inserting Earnest Graham over him.

At home, "fast" surface", on National T.V. vs. The Bears.Now way would I bench him this week.

 

[Sabertooth]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

I am seriously pondering inserting Earnest Graham over him.

At home, "fast" surface", on National T.V. vs. The Bears.Now way would I bench him this week.

I probably won't. The Bears got beaten badly by ADP last time, they just didn't appear to have the speed to catch him. Several guys had shots at him but just couldn't close. Aren't the Bears pretty dinged along the defensive line as well? I know Urlacher struggles with blockers in his face sometimes too. I've got to pick two between Graham, ADP, and Westbrook so I think I am ok no matter what. Being it's the playoffs however, the stakes couldn't be higher.

 

[Kirby]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

I am seriously pondering inserting Earnest Graham over him.

At home, "fast" surface", on National T.V. vs. The Bears.Now way would I bench him this week.

I probably won't. The Bears got beaten badly by ADP last time, they just didn't appear to have the speed to catch him. Several guys had shots at him but just couldn't close. Aren't the Bears pretty dinged along the defensive line as well? I know Urlacher struggles with blockers in his face sometimes too. I've got to pick two between Graham, ADP, and Westbrook so I think I am ok no matter what. Being it's the playoffs however, the stakes couldn't be higher.

I have AD, Graham and Addai... I'm probably going to sit the one that blows up.

 

[Biabreakable]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

I am seriously pondering inserting Earnest Graham over him.

Seriously? :(

 

[teamroc]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

I am seriously pondering inserting Earnest Graham over him.

That's awesome. You don't even need the "can I join your league" stuff, it just writes itself.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

I am seriously pondering inserting Earnest Graham over him.

Seriously?

Not only is it not laughable, but i would start Graham over Peterson. There are not many RB's that i would start over Graham this week. Home vs. Atalnta is a fantastic matchup for guy who is assured to get at least 20-25 touches. While Peterson is more talented, Graham WILL be getting all the goalline touches. Graham is completly healthy, will not be splitting carries and will be involved in the passing game. Not to mention, He has been playing really well this year.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

I am seriously pondering inserting Earnest Graham over him.

That's awesome. You don't even need the "can I join your league" stuff, it just writes itself.

Are you telling me you think Peterson will be THAT much better than Graham this week, that it is a decision that should not even be considered?

 

[Kirby]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

I am seriously pondering inserting Earnest Graham over him.

That's awesome. You don't even need the "can I join your league" stuff, it just writes itself.

I started Graham over ADP last week... was that funny?

 

[Burning Sensation]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

I am seriously pondering inserting Earnest Graham over him.

At home, "fast" surface", on National T.V. vs. The Bears.Now way would I bench him this week.

I probably won't. The Bears got beaten badly by ADP last time, they just didn't appear to have the speed to catch him. Several guys had shots at him but just couldn't close. Aren't the Bears pretty dinged along the defensive line as well? I know Urlacher struggles with blockers in his face sometimes too. I've got to pick two between Graham, ADP, and Westbrook so I think I am ok no matter what. Being it's the playoffs however, the stakes couldn't be higher.

I have AD, Graham and Addai... I'm probably going to sit the one that blows up.

I would love to have AD starting for me in some of my leagues this week. However, that would not be the case if i had Addai and Graham to choose from. With the exception of maybe LT, and Westy in PPR, those two are the best starts of the week at RB.

 

[Sabertooth]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

I am seriously pondering inserting Earnest Graham over him.

That's awesome. You don't even need the "can I join your league" stuff, it just writes itself.

Really, that funny huh? Well, let's look at the facts shall we. ADP is still recovering from injury, no? By his own admission he "tweaked" his knee last week. He plays the Bears and the mighty Kyle Orton this week. This means the Vikes will be up for most of the game as I don't see the Bears crossing the 50 very often. I wouldn't expect the Bears offense to score more than 13 points. If the Vikes are up, with a score of say 27-13, why would they keep ADP in there? Now, Earnest Graham has been the 5th best fantasy back over the last 6 weeks. Ahead of Addai, Barber, Sjax. But behind Chester Taylor, who has been the 4th best back. Earnest Graham plays the Falcons this week. Yes the team without a coach or a prayer. The Falcons may very well just pack it in for the season like their gutless coach did. The Falcon's rush D 123.7 ypg and 9 rushing scores this season so far. And that was when they had something to fight for. Aaron Stecker posted 100 yards on them last week and as a team the Saints approached 150. Now I realize that it sounds crazy but if your look at the fluctuation in ADP and Graham, it isn't close. Graham is consistently getting between 15-23 ppg in PPR leagues. He got 19 vs the Falcons last time in the dome and that was coming in list as questionable. Brian Westbrook is my other option but he doesn't sit...unless of course he is hurt. SO it comes down to fantasy playoffs and you have a choice. Take the "pretty safe" 20 points from Graham or shoot for the moon and play ADP who may get you 50 and win your game for you, but may just as easily get 10 carries and net you 5-10 points.

 

[tietzjd]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

I am seriously pondering inserting Earnest Graham over him.

That's awesome. You don't even need the "can I join your league" stuff, it just writes itself.

Really, that funny huh? Well, let's look at the facts shall we. ADP is still recovering from injury, no? By his own admission he "tweaked" his knee last week. He plays the Bears and the mighty Kyle Orton this week. This means the Vikes will be up for most of the game as I don't see the Bears crossing the 50 very often. I wouldn't expect the Bears offense to score more than 13 points. If the Vikes are up, with a score of say 27-13, why would they keep ADP in there? Now, Earnest Graham has been the 5th best fantasy back over the last 6 weeks. Ahead of Addai, Barber, Sjax. But behind Chester Taylor, who has been the 4th best back. Earnest Graham plays the Falcons this week. Yes the team without a coach or a prayer. The Falcons may very well just pack it in for the season like their gutless coach did. The Falcon's rush D 123.7 ypg and 9 rushing scores this season so far. And that was when they had something to fight for. Aaron Stecker posted 100 yards on them last week and as a team the Saints approached 150. Now I realize that it sounds crazy but if your look at the fluctuation in ADP and Graham, it isn't close. Graham is consistently getting between 15-23 ppg in PPR leagues. He got 19 vs the Falcons last time in the dome and that was coming in list as questionable. Brian Westbrook is my other option but he doesn't sit...unless of course he is hurt. SO it comes down to fantasy playoffs and you have a choice. Take the "pretty safe" 20 points from Graham or shoot for the moon and play ADP who may get you 50 and win your game for you, but may just as easily get 10 carries and net you 5-10 points.

I could see you looking at Graham .I took 3 backs in 1st 4 rounds and have same type problem to slove. I can not sit Addai vs OAK so it's Mcghee vs Mia or Peterson VS CHi...... Sigh tough choice.

 

[Sabertooth]

Is he still a must start this week against Chicago?

:X I am seriously pondering inserting Earnest Graham over him.

That's awesome. You don't even need the "can I join your league" stuff, it just writes itself.

Really, that funny huh? Well, let's look at the facts shall we. ADP is still recovering from injury, no? By his own admission he "tweaked" his knee last week. He plays the Bears and the mighty Kyle Orton this week. This means the Vikes will be up for most of the game as I don't see the Bears crossing the 50 very often. I wouldn't expect the Bears offense to score more than 13 points. If the Vikes are up, with a score of say 27-13, why would they keep ADP in there? Now, Earnest Graham has been the 5th best fantasy back over the last 6 weeks. Ahead of Addai, Barber, Sjax. But behind Chester Taylor, who has been the 4th best back. Earnest Graham plays the Falcons this week. Yes the team without a coach or a prayer. The Falcons may very well just pack it in for the season like their gutless coach did. The Falcon's rush D 123.7 ypg and 9 rushing scores this season so far. And that was when they had something to fight for. Aaron Stecker posted 100 yards on them last week and as a team the Saints approached 150. Now I realize that it sounds crazy but if your look at the fluctuation in ADP and Graham, it isn't close. Graham is consistently getting between 15-23 ppg in PPR leagues. He got 19 vs the Falcons last time in the dome and that was coming in list as questionable. Brian Westbrook is my other option but he doesn't sit...unless of course he is hurt. SO it comes down to fantasy playoffs and you have a choice. Take the "pretty safe" 20 points from Graham or shoot for the moon and play ADP who may get you 50 and win your game for you, but may just as easily get 10 carries and net you 5-10 points.

I could see you looking at Graham .I took 3 backs in 1st 4 rounds and have same type problem to slove. I can not sit Addai vs OAK so it's Mcghee vs Mia or Peterson VS CHi...... Sigh tough choice.

Yeah, that's tough. McGahee did come out of the game last week for a while. Not sure if he's hurt or not. But that is a toughy. Obviously Addai goes. Good luck. The nice thing is, both options are appealling as opposed to choosing between two unappealling options.

 

[Liquid Tension]

did he look as bad as the stats would indicate?

Worse if you can believe it. He looked like absolute garbage today. It'll happen to even the best of RBs but obviously Peterson owners didn't want it to happen in such a critical week of the season. He probably killed a lot of fantasy teams with his dog of a game today.

Well, I would think it's hard to run when you're met in the backfield on every play. Peterson got one hole all day and broke a 20 yard run only to have it come back for holding. If you're looking for someone to blame, blame Childress for not calling even ONE screen pass against a defense selling out on every play. Terrible.

Not comparing the two, but when this happened to Cedric Benson all the time everyone called him garbage. Can't people see that all RB's look better than they are when the line is opening up huge holes and all RB's look worse when they are getting nailed behind the LOS. Interestingly in the same game Chester Taylor went off...Also of note A. Peterson from Chicago has about averaged 2.6 ypc since Benson got hurt. While the Chicago Peterson is not a good RB, he is doing worse than Benson did.My only point here is that people need to have perspective on players and I think too many get too much credit or too much blame when things go bad. Football is the ultimate team sport