Originally Posted by OldSkoolball#52
This guy has Curtis Martin a better RB than Peterson.
What a world this is.
No, actually I don't. I'm listing great RBs off the top of my head. The first list of guys I definitely have over Peterson. The others mentioned have an argument. And, yes... Martin has an argument.
Peterson has been in the league for six seasons. Martin is a HOFer, five time All Pro and was a key piece on a team that made the Super Bowl.
Peterson will end up being a higher ranked RB than Martin... or he could blow his knees out next week. Give him some time to create a legacy instead of just handing it to him.
And, Peterson would not have been as effective in that St. Louis offense as Faulk was. Part of the reason that offense was as dynamic as you say is BECAUSE of Faulk. Peterson is much more a conventional runningback that you need to feed with running plays. Faulk was a more versatile player.