Alright /sp/, your friendly neighborhood /k/omrade here. I don't know much about the NFL, in depth as least, but who's a better running back, Marshawn Lynch or Adrian Peterson. I'll just address some arguments here, feel free to tell me why I'm wrong.
>Peterson has more yards. >Lynch doesn't get the ball as often.
>Peterson has more career yards. >Lynch wasn't always the center of his offense.
And of course if you're a Bradyfag and think rings are relevant. >Lynch has a ring, Peterson doesn't.
Peterson, what that guy can do at 30 and after an acl tear is just stupid.
well peterson averages 4.9 ypc and lynch averages 4.3, so both your arguments are stupid
lynch is a great running back, maybe borderline hall of fame, but peterson is an all time great
peterson>lynch
>>64706044
>Averages
Does that make Jamaal Charles better than Peterson almost every year Charles ever played?
>>64706148
peterson has more attempts than lynch AND a higher YPC, and more touchdowns despite playing fewer years
there is literally no argument for lynch over peterson
>but peterson got more carries
because he was a better running back on a team with no other option
say what you want about russell wilson and matt hasselbeck, but they're both worlds ahead of christian ponder
>>64706306
>Fewer years
>They both got drafted in 2007.
I agree that Ponder was worse than Hasselback and Wilson, and statistically Peterson is a better running back than Lynch, but statistically Wilson is a better running back than Lynch this season as well, any "Who" can become good if you give them the ball enough. Don't get me wrong, I think Peterson is a better running back than Lynch, but not by miles like I've seen a lot of people think.
>>64706502
Peterson didnt play last year though due to memes.
Currently or over their careers? LeVeon Bell (when not being injured by the Bengals) is currently the best RB in the NFL. Among those two, Peterson is better now, and has had the better overall career.
Neither are as elite as Peyton Hillis
>>64706502
>any "Who" can become good if you give them the ball enough
do you not get that despite getting the ball more often, peterson puts up a better average than lynch? stuff like mentioning wilson or charles as having better averages only factors in when you don't take into account carries, but even tho peterson has more carries than lynch, he has a better average gain
obviously peterson isn't better by "miles" but he is statistically and objectively better
>>64706946
I see no proof that Peterson is objectively better, again, the team is built around him. If the Hawks built the team around Lynch and not Wilson, Lynch is going to put up just as good stats as Peterson. I do have one question though, are fumbles really that big? As stated, I'm just a /k/omrade that barely knows anything about the NFL, but Peterson fumbles a lot more than Lynch.
>>64706677
Dubs never lie. He was the only reason to watch the Clowns. I really want Belicheck'em to pick him up.
>>64707346
jesus christ you really just aren't willing to accept facts are you
in 2012, peterson was literally the only method of attack for the vikings offense
they had the second worst passing offense in the league, a mediocre defense, and literally every opposing defense knew peterson was going to be getting the ball, so they could stack the box against him most plays
he averaged 6.0 ypc and rushed for 2000 yards, the year after TEARING HIS ACL
you're confusing "built the team around him" with "he is the only thing we have on this team so we need to give him the ball"
if the vikings had wilson, or the seahawks defense they would have gone to the super bowl in 2012
i'll sum it up one more time: despite being on worse teams, being the only option on offense for the majority of his career, and not having a QB that can rush to take the pressure of him, peterson scores more touchdowns per touch and averages more yards per touch
>>64707545
Alright, now imagine it was Marshawn Lynch in Petersons position, you'd get near the same results because they're equal running backs. Peterson gets more yards, Lynch fumbles less, Peterson is slightly faster and bigger, Lynch tends to be harder to bring down.
To sum up.
Peterson is on the slightly worse team with no other options, which is why he has the better stats. Lynch has a lot less pressure with a much better team that's not going to give him the ball every play, and still manages to do amazing. Personally I'll take Lynch over Peterson any day though simply because Lynch is more interesting in my opinion, and I'm a disgusting Seafagg fan.
