How much longer will the Saints tolerate Adrian Peterson?

[Eleazar]

How much longer will the Saints tolerate Adrian Peterson?

By Michael Rand
SEPTEMBER 15, 2017 — 8:19AM


It’s getting pretty close to Week 2 of the NFL season, but here we are still talking about the workload of a part-time running back in Week 1. We’re talking about it because he’s still talking about it.

“I didn’t sign up for nine snaps,” Adrian Peterson said Thursday, referring to his workload during his Monday debut with his new team, the New Orleans Saints, against his old team, the Vikings. Peterson added that he knew getting used to a more crowded backfield than he was used to in Minnesota would take some “adjusting” and said the way Monday’s game played out factored into how much he was used.

Peterson always wanted the ball during his decade in Minnesota, too. The difference is that he had earned all sorts of leverage with the Vikings by virtue of his performance. For the bulk of his career here, most fans, coaches and teammates probably agreed that the Vikings were best off in the running game when Peterson was getting a lot of touches. He is, after all, one of the best pure runners in the history of the league.

One of the problems now, though, is that Peterson clearly still sees himself as the same mid-20s running back in his prime that could shred defenses instead of the 32-year-old coming off a major injury that he actually is.

“Just whenever it’s in my hands, I know that’s an opportunity to take it to the house,” he said Thursday.

These days, Peterson is much more likely to take it for little or no gain. On Monday against the Vikings, he had six carries for 18 yards — nine on his first carry, nine more on his final five carries. The time share in the Saints backfield was almost comically equal. Mark Ingram, a 1,000-yard rusher last season, had six carries for 17 yards. Rookie Alvin Kamara had seven carries for 18 yards.

It’s hard to imagine any of those three guys was overjoyed with their output or opportunity.

What the Saints might be finding out, though, is what the Vikings learned in recent years: Because Peterson is a blocking and pass-catching liability relative to other running backs, there is an element of predictability when he’s in the game (or out of the game). He played nine snaps Monday and carried the ball six of those times.

The Vikings, in catering to an offense built around Peterson, often times also became quite predictable. They decided this offseason it was time to move on, and the Game 1 results — rookie Dalvin Cook ran for 122 yards, and the offense in general looked fluid and diverse — were encouraging.

One has to wonder if the Saints will come to the same conclusion sooner rather than later and move on from Peterson as well. During Monday’s game, he had a sideline exchange with coach Sean Payton that needed further explanation on Twitter. He was urging the coach to run the ball, and I’m sure the head coach of an historically very good offensive team loved the input.

Several days later, Peterson and playing time remained a topic of discussion.

Peterson might not have signed up for nine snaps, but if things keep trending this way it wouldn’t be surprising if the Saints decided zero snaps was a better number.

[Rain Man]

The Saints have decided that they won't cut him, but they're going to beat the living daylights out of him with a stick.

[TLO]

**** that whiny butt****er

[DJ's left nut]

The Saints were just such a terrible fit to begin with; it never made any sense.

Why does a pure RB (who has never been much of a blocker or a threat out of the backfield) go to one of the most dynamic passing offenses in the league when they already have a power RB in Ingram? He wasn't even a complementary back for what they already had.

Eh, it never ends pretty for great players. They're always the last to know when the music has stopped.

[Eleazar]

He has Jamaal Charles syndrome (thinks he's still in his prime), but with a bigger mouth

[Iowanian]

He'd beat defenses like a child if they'd just give him the rock....

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

The Saints were just such a terrible fit to begin with; it never made any sense.

Why does a pure RB (who has never been much of a blocker or a threat out of the backfield) go to one of the most dynamic passing offenses in the league when they already have a power RB in Ingram? He wasn't even a complementary back for what they already had.

Eh, it never ends pretty for great players. They're always the last to know when the music has stopped.

This. They would have been just fine with Ingram and Kamara.

[BlackOp]

He's just pissed that his former team looks better without him...kind of like the Charles must feel stuck on the Donks.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by Iowanian

He'd beat defenses like a child if they'd just give him the rock....

[NWTF]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

The Saints were just such a terrible fit to begin with; it never made any sense.

Why does a pure RB (who has never been much of a blocker or a threat out of the backfield) go to one of the most dynamic passing offenses in the league when they already have a power RB in Ingram? He wasn't even a complementary back for what they already had.

Eh, it never ends pretty for great players. They're always the last to know when the music has stopped.

I agree its a bad fit, but didnt the Saints end up being plan C,D,E.... I think it ended up being his only option

I remember early on he said hed like to play for the Raiders, but they werent interested and then he expressed interest in someone else and maybe another team after that but none were interested.

[dj56dt58]

It didn't sound bad in context to me..he was asked about the number of snaps and he said he didn't sign up for 9 snaps but that's the way the game played out. Obviously he didn't sign up for 9 snaps and I'm sure the Saints wouldn't want a guy that only wants 9 snaps

[WhiteWhale]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

The Saints were just such a terrible fit to begin with; it never made any sense.

Why does a pure RB (who has never been much of a blocker or a threat out of the backfield) go to one of the most dynamic passing offenses in the league when they already have a power RB in Ingram? He wasn't even a complementary back for what they already had.

Eh, it never ends pretty for great players. They're always the last to know when the music has stopped.

These were my thoughts. I never saw how AP fit what Payton and Brees do out there.

The worst thing about great players, particularly at skill positions, is that most of the time they don't 'gradually' lose it. They don't go from elite, to great, to good, to mediocre, to bad. One day, they just suddenly suck.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by dj56dt58

It didn't sound bad in context to me..he was asked about the number of snaps and he said he didn't sign up for 9 snaps but that's the way the game played out. Obviously he didn't sign up for 9 snaps and I'm sure the Saints wouldn't want a guy that only wants 9 snaps

You have to contextualize this with the "heated discussion" that you could see him having with the head coach on the sidelines during the game, and his similar behavior in Minnesota.

[Molitoth]

I really liked AP early in his career....

Thought he actually may even replace Barry Sanders as the GOAT. Nope, not even close.

[MahiMike]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

The Saints have decided that they won't cut him, but they're going to beat the living daylights out of him with a stick.

I see what you did there.