Please give me some proper perspective....

**sirweeze** · 03-07-2008, 08:03 PM

Vikings lifers:

I know this is a sore subject for many, but I was 7 years old when the Vikings traded for Herschel Walker in 1989.
While I remember being really excited to get his football card in a pack mere days later (which I thought was surely an omen, at the time), obviously it never dawned on my prepubescent brain how lopsided this trade was.

So I ask this... what is the modern day equivalent of that trade? (Considering "inflation", so to speak)
Which running back does Herschel most compare to that's playing now?
Help me understand why the Vikes would've made this trade almost 20 years ago.

(The reason I ask is because of all the ridiculous trade offers I see floating around to acquire guys like Julius Peppers and Chad Johnson)

**Schutz** · 03-07-2008, 08:14 PM

Think Willie Parker of the Steelers, although it was a different era too.
Basically the Vikings really thought they needed a RB and got all googly eyed and gave up the future.

**6-KINGS** · 03-07-2008, 08:22 PM

I would almost say Adrian Peterson.
Big fast back, that seemed unstoppable with a talent for the dramatic.

**singersp** · 03-07-2008, 08:23 PM

"Schutz" wrote:

Think Willie Parker of the Steelers, although it was a different era too.
Basically the [s]Vikings[/s] Mike Lynn really thought they needed a RB and got all googly eyed and gave up the future.

Now it's correct.

**Schutz** · 03-07-2008, 08:24 PM

I will also say Walker wasn't a bad back, he kept the same rushing average most his career.
It's just that the Vikings decided they didn't want to hammer with the running back they gave up a crap load for.

**singersp** · 03-07-2008, 08:31 PM

"Schutz" wrote:

I will also say Walker wasn't a bad back, he kept the same rushing average most his career.
It's just that the Vikings decided they didn't want to hammer with the running back they gave up a crap load for.

Not to mention they forced him to change the way he ran the ball. Instead of being more steps back behind the line, they moved him closer preventing him from hitting the line at a faster speed.

It wasn't broke, but they tried to fix it when they should have left well enough alone.

I was at that first game when he had that huge run against the Packers & lost his shoe along the way. It never slowed him down one iota.

**VikingMike** · 03-07-2008, 08:39 PM

You want some perspective? In terms of what one team got versus what the other team got, that trade was on a par with Lou Brock for Ernie Broglio.

**Marrdro** · 03-08-2008, 05:50 AM

"singersp" wrote:

"Schutz" wrote:

Think Willie Parker of the Steelers, although it was a different era too.
Basically the [s]Vikings[/s] Mike Lynn really thought they needed a RB and got all googly eyed and gave up the future.

Now it's correct.

I thought the Head Coach brought him in.......

**kevoncox** · 03-08-2008, 09:21 AM

People forget that up until 1995, the league was dominated by the running back. With out a flagship back, your team was believed to be heading no where(minus Sanfran). The run game was the key to sucess. The issue as it was mentioned was the crappy job coaches did of using the player we had......Now where have i heard that before???

**jmcdon00** · 03-08-2008, 09:44 AM

Maybe the vikings should be shopping Peterson. If they could get a boat load of picks and players they could build a dynasty much the way the cowboys did. Seriously though think about it. I love AD but I would love a Superbowl even more. I bet you could get minimum of 3 first round picks for him.