When will we see AP back in a Vikings uniform?

[VikingLord]

Here's what I don't understand. Why are the Vikings still paying him if they're eventually going to release him? They could have suspended him and saved a million dollars a week.

I'd appreciate y'all's responses on this. I'm stumped.

Cause I don't think the Wilfs want to release him or intend to release him. Look at what they did immediately following the revelation that Peterson was under indictment. They suspended him for a single game and then almost immediately reinstated him. They only backed off that once it became clear there would be serious repercussions from sponsors and I'm sure they also came under heavy pressure from the league. Keeping him under contract, while expensive, retains their exclusive rights to him. I think they figure this will eventually blow over and he will either return to the field for them, or they might be able to trade him (with a renegotiated contract) to a team like Dallas.

This reminds me a lot of the Josh Freeman situation last year. The Vikes kept paying him despite his relatively high cost so they could keep exclusive rights to him. Apparently Spielman believed whatever was wrong with Freeman could be fixed, and the pricetag for non-performance would eventually be outweighed by Freeman solving the QB conundrum. That didn't turn out, and I suspect that once the legal system is finished with AD, Goodell will just be getting started. Rice got a lifetime ban many think will eventually be relaxed, but I'm not so sure about that. People are still calling for Goodell's head and, if it turns out he was aware of the elevator video when he handed out the 2-game suspension, he's going to be under tremendous pressure to make a strong statement with AD.

[84BreaksAnkles]

Never...let's just face facts and move on.

We all loved him to varying degrees, and now its over.

Let's turn the page

[BGM]

I will be honest, I don't want him back. He is not a monster, he is not evil, but what he did crosses a line with me. I don't believe he is contrite, because he has already stated that he believes that what he did was reasonable. Let that sink in for a moment... in his mind, hitting a four year old hard enough bruise him and to cut his skin is ok. I don't care if you were born in the North or South or East or West, that isn't acceptable. The child was four years old.

For those who claimed that they were raised that way, I am sorry you had to endure that. But your reaction to your own situation does not make what Peterson did acceptable in any way shape or form. What he did does not lie in the simple prerogative of a parent's right to discipline his child, it lies in the duty of the community to defend that child. It is exceedingly disturbing that, in the NFL, spousal and child abuse has historically received a pass in the name of winning. It is one of the big things informing my doubt about remaining a fan of the NFL.

I always said if the Vikings ever signed Michael Vick, I could never cheer for the Vikings. I now feel the same about Peterson. And that breaks my heart more than you could know.

[APAllDay28]

AP was a high dollar cap hit, and it never translated to a deep playoff run so he's gone. Good luck in Dallas AP

[The Breeze]

After thinking on this for a bit, I've come to the conclusion that people who've done what AD has done should all be rounded up onto island and nuked.

[Raptorman]

Something I find interesting. The press is taking Peterson to task on this. Yet, I have not seen one story that is critical of the Texas laws that allow this type of punishment to be administered in schools. If the press is so outraged by what Peterson did, where is the outrage for the ability of schools in TX to administer corporal punishment. Why has the press not pushed that issue?

[The Breeze]

Something I find interesting. The press is taking Peterson to task on this. Yet, I have not seen one story that is critical of the Texas laws that allow this type of punishment to be administered in schools. If the press is so outraged by what Peterson did, where is the outrage for the ability of schools in TX to administer corporal punishment. Why has the press not pushed that issue?

Because very little of the actual reflection about what's going wrong and more importantly how to resolve it in an evolved way seems to contain any authenticity?

I find it pretty interesting that there is a sub-culture of what appears to be predominately african -americans, in the deep south, carrying out what amounts to whippings to obtain obedience.

Kinda funky to suggest that Adrian Peterson pay for it....suggesting it's only wrong once you are exposed.

Hopefully there can be some shifts in the culture there and I don't think the best way to start that dialogue is by throwing one person under the bus that many are riding regularly.

I think people's outrage over this kind of thing is tough to gauge. Why is it happening at all if it's so outrageous.
I'm sure it's deeply rooted and complicated ....but I like the point you bring up and it is an interesting topic going forward.

I just would hate to see the continued public condemnation of individuals for actions many are taking part in while the rest is swept back under the carpet, leaving the foolish public satiated that the monster is gone.

It needs to be exposed and talked about ....just like the crap at PennState.

2 cents and whateva.....but I'd entertain a discussion on it as I 've got a couple days of down time.

[fiestavike]

Because very little of the actual reflection about what's going wrong and more importantly how to resolve it in an evolved way seems to contain any authenticity?

I find it pretty interesting that there is a sub-culture of what appears to be predominately african -americans, in the deep south, carrying out what amounts to whippings to obtain obedience.

Kinda funky to suggest that Adrian Peterson pay for it....suggesting it's only wrong once you are exposed.

Hopefully there can be some shifts in the culture there and I don't think the best way to start that dialogue is by throwing one person under the bus that many are riding regularly.

I think people's outrage over this kind of thing is tough to gauge. Why is it happening at all if it's so outrageous.
I'm sure it's deeply rooted and complicated ....but I like the point you bring up and it is an interesting topic going forward.

I just would hate to see the continued public condemnation of individuals for actions many are taking part in while the rest is swept back under the carpet, leaving the foolish public satiated that the monster is gone.

It needs to be exposed and talked about ....just like the crap at PennState.

2 cents and whateva.....but I'd entertain a discussion on it as I 've got a couple days of down time.

Breeze, thanks for posting that.

I agree that the dialogue about this has been largely unproductive and a little dishonest. This is a very widespead practice. It makes more sense to discuss the big issue than just attack Peterson. I'm not saying this is the forum for that conversation. Its not. But I think its a piece of context that would be helpful for any discussion about Peterson.

[Mothman]

Here's someone who is trying to start the dialogue:

http://www.cbssports.com/general/writer ... hild-abuse

It's honest and I think it's worth reading.

[fiestavike]

Here's someone who is trying to start the dialogue:

http://www.cbssports.com/general/writer ... hild-abuse

It's honest and I think it's worth reading.

Thanks Jim,

I could do without Chris Kluwe's typically derogatory comment about those he disagrees with (toothless), but otherwise a good read.

One thing I will say is that shame has gotten a bad name in our society. The author is appalled that he made his son feel ashamed, and yet it is his own shame that caused him to change his perspective. In the right circumstances and to the right degree, shame is an important and good thing. There are things we do that we should be ashamed of. I think Peterson should be ashamed that he went that far, that he injured his son more significantly than he intended. He probably is ashamed of that. And its not inappropriate, in my opinion, for a child to feel ashamed when they are behaving very poorly or disappointing their parents in some circumstances. The same might be said for fear as well.

For some reason we have taken things that are good and appropriate in their right place and made it a point of dogma in society that they are "bad". They can be. But they can also be good.

[Mothman]

Thanks Jim,

I could do without Chris Kluwe's typically derogatory comment about those he disagrees with (toothless), but otherwise a good read.

I had exactly the same reaction.

One thing I will say is that shame has gotten a bad name in our society. The author is appalled that he made his son feel ashamed, and yet it is his own shame that caused him to change his perspective. In the right circumstances and to the right degree, shame is an important and good thing. There are things we do that we should be ashamed of. I think Peterson should be ashamed that he went that far, that he injured his son more significantly than he intended. He probably is ashamed of that. And its not inappropriate, in my opinion, for a child to feel ashamed when they are behaving very poorly or disappointing their parents in some circumstances. The same might be said for fear as well.

For some reason we have taken things that are good and appropriate in their right place and made it a point of dogma in society that they are "bad". They can be. But they can also be good.

Well said!

Sorry, I'm just not sure what to add to that other than I agree that sometimes shame can actually be beneficial.

[maembe]

I think you may have misunderstood what Kluwe was saying. He said, "Sure, you've seen the toothless commentary of people, 'Oh I got beat that bad as a kid, I turned out fine, it's not such a big deal.' Thing is, it is a big deal, because people look up to AP and they may honestly not know it's wrong."

In that context he is referring to the argument (I got beat as a kid and I turned out okay), as being toothless (without merit, ineffectual), which it is. I can see how that would be confusing though.

[fiestavike]

I think you may have misunderstood what Kluwe was saying. He said, "Sure, you've seen the toothless commentary of people, 'Oh I got beat that bad as a kid, I turned out fine, it's not such a big deal.' Thing is, it is a big deal, because people look up to AP and they may honestly not know it's wrong."

In that context he is referring to the argument (I got beat as a kid and I turned out okay), as being toothless (without merit, ineffectual), which it is. I can see how that would be confusing though.

Yes, you may be right. That's not how I understood it on my first read.

[Mothman]

I think you may have misunderstood what Kluwe was saying. He said, "Sure, you've seen the toothless commentary of people, 'Oh I got beat that bad as a kid, I turned out fine, it's not such a big deal.' Thing is, it is a big deal, because people look up to AP and they may honestly not know it's wrong."

In that context he is referring to the argument (I got beat as a kid and I turned out okay), as being toothless (without merit, ineffectual), which it is. I can see how that would be confusing though.

I think you're right. We clearly misunderstood him. Thanks!

[The Breeze]

I agree that the dialogue about this has been largely unproductive and a little dishonest. This is a very widespead practice. It makes more sense to discuss the big issue than just attack Peterson. I'm not saying this is the forum for that conversation. Its not. But I think its a piece of context that would be helpful for any discussion about Peterson.

Not to be disagreeable...but I actually believe that this is one of many forums where it's appropriate to have this particular dialogue. Context is key...we're not preaching, just talking about what's happening in our larger community.

Often people who meet me in the meat-world do a double take when they find out that I follow sports at all. Many peeps in a lot of the circles I encounter dismiss sports as just the Bread and Circus distraction for the masses. Of these people, most never really participated in sports growing up and as a result fail to grasp the positive impact that sports have on our communities, youth and social harmony.
Without going into a big dissertation, just highlighting the enormous impact of professional athletes on the issues of racism (Jackie Robinson), womens equality, drug awareness, national health issues etc etc, as well as working to help create better foundations for at risk youth by providing mentors and structure and facilities. And I know you totally understand this....

Then there is the fact that sporting events bring together, on a regular basis, birds of many feathers into one point of focus for an afternoon or evening. It is a huge pulpit and medium for evolved intervention of deeply seated social issues, provided the members of the community can learn how to be disciplined and constructive in the way they communicate with one another. Then, through that communication, become aware of their radiating impact on how the people in charge make the decisions they do.

This forum, in particular, VMB, IMO has some profoundly thoughtful, sensitive and articulate individuals...too many for me to name actually. Often times football is just an excuse for me to come here and engage with some of these individuals because they are part of my larger community and have influenced me in how I seek to express my views to others.

GLG's recent actions have shown me that there are many here who don't post that are reading and are definitely part of our community. The Vikings ownership and NFLs recent actions have shown me, (not that any of us didn't know) that their main concern is for the "community of consumption" and dollars. That means, to me, that the most effective body in the whole situation is the body of fans who make up these communities and forums, online and off.
I feel we have a responsibility to discuss these things in some focalized depth and that the solution to the discord lies more in how we communicate about the issues than any end result. It (the dialogue) would serve to lend a more credible voice to the larger community rather than just being labelled as "fanatics".

Transgressions and consequences seem to be dynamic and may be best handled on a case by case basis, whereas, at least to me, our focus on consistency is best served in the realm of how we communicate with one another.

Sorry for being so verbose I'm in the midst of writing a book on whatever this subject is.