Everyone knows Chris Johnson is the best running back in the NFL, right?
Apparently not. I recently read an article that said that Adrian Peterson was better. The guy who wrote it was obviously a Minnessota homer, as he lauded Adrians "skills" while saying CJ was just a track star with a good O-line.
This article is obviously false and I am here to prove it. CJ is the better RB than AD, Period.
The writers first argument was that AD may fumble more (an understatement), but that CJ scored less so it equals out. Using his mathematical skills he subtracted the number of lost fumbles from AD's and CJ's touchdown total, AD still had more than CJ.
So AD had more TD's, ok. CJ isnt a goal line back like AD. In the redzone the Titans used Vince Young's skills, and to a lesser degree Lendale White's. So he scored more TD's, big deal. Last year CJ scored one less TD than AD and CJ's backup Lendale scored five more than AD.
The writer of this article also said that CJ was'nt as complete a back as AD, his only explemation being that AD can run over defenders better and is more powerful. Ok whatever floats your boat, but CJ had more yards with his speed than your "power".
Also complete means overall skills. AD can not catch CJ can. I will admit AD did get better this year, but he still wasnt as good as Chris. Besides he's not even an everydown back, that's pretty embarrising for the "best runningback in the league".
So no AD is not a more complete back. in fact seven-hundred yards seperate these two. There really shouldnt be a comparison. The only reason this is still a debate is because of the bitter Minnessota fans. Sorry Minny