The attributes these two backs possess are enviable to any team in the NFL: both Adrian Peterson and Michael Turner are freaks. Turner was invaluable to rookie QB Matt Ryan’s progress in 2008, and the Minnesota Vikings would have literally been nothing without Peterson carrying the ball for the last two seasons. But let’s see who is actually better – and Vikings fans, don’t scoff until you hear the argument.
Jim Brown was correct when he told Peterson in a recent interview that no one since Brown himself has combined sheer athleticism, power, and size the way Peterson does. No man that big (6′1″, 220) should be able to move that fast, change direction that fluidly, and make would-be defenders look that silly. Adrian Peterson performs in a way that if he played in a city like Dallas, Chicago or New York, he would be a multi-national superstar on par with LeBron James and Tiger Woods, not “just” an American household name like he is now.
Michael Turner, by contrast, is shorter at 5′10″ but brings a load with at 256 lbs. The thing that makes Turner remarkably effective is his quickness, an ability to accelerate and drive through a hole, and keep his momentum forward when tacklers make contact. Most of the time Turner carries several tacklers much bigger than he is 4 or 5 extra yards. He does this better than anyone else in the league, which makes him deadly in the red-zone and in short-yardage situations; he’s a fullback with halfback speed. “Wrecking Ball” is a word often used to describe Michael Turner, which normally doesn’t co-inside with a word like “Burner”, but that’s what the Atlanta tailback brings to the table.
Enough with the superlatives, let’s get down to stats: Adrian Peterson rushed for 61 more yards than Turner in 2008 (1,760 to 1,699), and showed his efficiency was superior as well, with a 4.8 per carry average compared to Turner’s 4.5. Both yardage numbers are outstanding, and neither can be touched by any other back in the league – including that princess LaDanian Tomlinson, the 2000’s version of Emmitt Smith. But Turner scored points where AP simply didn’t: 17 TD’s to Peterson’s 10. You’re telling me that the best back in the league only put up 10 scores?
The argument is there that Turner’s body and style better suits him for the red-zone. But you can’t in one breath say that Adrian Peterson is a man of freakish size, speed, agility and power and then in the next breath say that he’s not quite fit for short-yardage, goal-line situations. The best running back in the league should be handed the ball at any spot on the field and be able to show everyone why there is no one better than he is. The best running back in the league shouldn’t have weaknesses or be a liability, ever. Walter Payton, Jim Brown, and even the afore-mentioned Ms. Smith and Ms. Tomlinson didn’t get taken off the field in any situation, including passing situations.
The best running back in the NFL should also never be a liability when it comes to ball-security. Peterson’s fumbling issues are well-documented, with 9 of them last season alone. Michael Turner doesn’t have 9 fumbles in his 6-year career. This stat speaks for itself, and Peterson’s fans, if they are honest, will acknowledge that this is a completely legitimate knock on his reputation, and not one that Turner shares. The fumbling, along with serious pass-blocking problems, warrant criticisms on Peterson’s game – and what about Michael Turner can you knock? Not much, if anything. The guy gives his team tough yards and tough scores in every single situation. Peterson, to put it bluntly, doesn’t catch or block. And at times, like in the head-to-head matchup with Turner in ‘08, Peterson is flat-out Rashaan-Salaam-ish (76 yards, 3 fumbles, 0 TD’s in week 16 – at home).
Okay, enough AP bashing – if someone woke up from a 10-year coma and this post was the first thing they read, they’d think that Peterson was garbage and Turner was a superstar. Not the case. One element you can’t quantify with stats – or argue – is that Adrian Peterson not only carried more of his team’s burden on his back than Turner did, he carried it with defenses stacked against him. Neither Gus Frerotte or T-Jack gave the man room to run, therefore it simply cannot be argued that anyone did more with less than Peterson.
Not only that, he did it with a style that won’t be duplicated anytime soon, or probably ever. As Vikings’ play-by-play announcer Paul Allen puts it, sexy counts in the NFL, and if both guys were up for grabs in a draft next year, Peterson would be taken first every time. He puts butts in seats, period. If you’re gonna go watch either guy run against the worst defense in the league, who would you pick? The Purple Jesus will take you for a better ride than Burner Turner will, even if Turner might actually put up better numbers.
For all of his flaws, Peterson jump-starts the adrenal glands of every person in the stadium when he breaks one loose – and while I honestly think that Michael Turner’s game stands to be more productive in the end, no. 28 for the Vikings needs to be appreciated for his raw talent while it’s just that: raw.
Take a look at Chicago’s Gale Sayers: he only played six seasons and was a first-ballot lock for the Hall of Fame. His highlight reel and style still is unequaled – and that’s what we’re seeing with Adrian Peterson. Before you forget, take that DVR recording you’ve been saving of his first game against the Bears and burn it to a DVD. Because like Sayers, the pure magic will likely be gone after that first knee injury. And he won’t be among the select few like Barry Sanders, Jim Brown and Sweetness who never suffer a serious injury, so enjoy his game for what it is. Unique, artistic, and utterly memorable. Appreciate it, study it, remember it. His highlights in only two seasons are laughably superior to that of Smith or Tomlinson, the two all-time leaders in TD’s. So the 10 scores in 2008 can be excused. Shaun Alexander scored 28 in one season, and no one even remembers that guy 4 seasons later.
So okay, the scoffers were right.
