Quote:It's not a stretch.  History supports my premise.  It doesn't back yours up at all.  As far as this new "generational talent" thing goes, pump the brakes.  Being a "generational talent" doesn't make him immune to anything.  Talent can't overcome physical limitations as the body starts to fail, and Peterson is due. 

 

 

Message board bets?  What are you?  12?  I'll go with the over just to spoil your bet.  That doesn't make him a must have for this team, especially if we're giving up a draft pick or multiple picks to land an aging $15 million veteran.  With the improvements on our offensive line and the scheme itself, if we secure one of the better backs in the draft, we could see equal production for what?  1/3 or less of the cost? 

 

I didn't say that being a generational makes him immune to anything. I said that being a generational talent greatly increases his odds of being able to produce for the next few years. Why didn't work horse backs like Payton, Smith, Martin, and Dorsett hit a wall at 30? Are they "superhuman"?

 

Do you agree that it makes more sense to compare Peterson's trajectory to former elite RBs instead of mid and low tier backs? The elite backs can lose a step or two and still be very, very good backs. If an average back loses a step or 2 at age 30, he becomes below average. Surely we can both agree on this, right?

---