by Kolby Solinsky
Editor, White Cover Magazine
I‘ve said this before, but it apparently needs refurbishing. Is that the right word? Refurbish? Restating?
So, I’ll say it again: Arian Foster is the best running back in the NFL.
Will he be the best, week-in and week-out, for every week of the 2012 NFL season? Will be undoubtedly lead the league in rushing this year? Will he go 17 games without an injury, or without Tweeting it to everybody?
No, we can’t be sure. But, isn’t that the same with anybody.
Canadian sports network, The Score, threw up a poll on their Facebook page today, and Foster finished second to the Vikings’ Adrian Peterson. No surprise there. Peterson is a beast, a myth, sometimes even a God. He doesn’t get the touches he deserves, and he’s still capable of accounting for his team’s entire offensive output in any given game.
If I had to take a guy on one play, it might be Adrian Peterson.
Hell, even AP thinks he’s the cat’s meow, or the viking’s horn:
“Not to sound cocky, but I would say yes.”
(*The question was, “Are you the best running back in football, even at 95%?”)
Oh yes, that’s right. Adrian Peterson is running on borrowed time. We may look back at him – sometime years from now – like we look back on Gale Sayers, who was capable of busting out a big run or game-changing play on a more routine basis than perhaps any running back in history.
If the “WOW Factor” ranked the best three backs of all-time? Gale Sayers, Barry Sanders, and then Adrian Peterson.
That’s no joke.
But, today, right now, right here, can anybody honestly say that Adrian Peterson is better than Arian Foster? Can anybody be counted on more than Arian Foster? Will anybody give you a higher floor?
Sure, he has a good backup in Ben Tate, who can carry some of his load. But, is that really a knock to Arian Foster? Does having a good teammate make him worse, individually? Would you say that Rob Gronkowski is worse because he has Aaron Hernandez, or that Jimmy Graham is worse because he has Marques Colston and Darren Sproles?
It’s not like Foster is some kind of Priest Holmes or Shaun Alexander-type running back, where the yards and touchdowns come by default because his team has no other options.
In Foster’s case, he blows through guys just like AP does. He cuts quick, and he rolls over you. Peterson is fragile. Foster is not. He’s bigger. He is occasionally faster.
With AP, you still hold your breath. Every game, every fantasy week, seems like we’re going to see a new player, or a new Adrian Peterson.
With Foster, it’s routine. He’s always incredible, perma-excellent.
This is just my opinion, but it should be yours.