Adrian Peterson Sweepstakes ***Officially reinstated (again) and merged***

[tyke1doe]

No, they don't have all the leverage. When a player doesn't want to play for you and you MAKE him.. that can be an ugly situation. Peterson could go out there and only give 50% if he wanted and there isn't anything they can do about it. If some team offers a #1 for him, they would be fools not to take it.. hell, even a number 2. That teams needs to rebuild badly.. Peterson's salary is an anchor around their necks. They can kill 2 birds with one stone by getting rid of his salary and getting a top 3 round pick for him. That is why they are going to trade him.

I doubt Peterson would only give 50 percent. And if the coaching staff detected that, they could suspend him or find some other way to make him suffer.

Again, I think you underestimate the stubbornness of owners and franchises, particularly people who have power and can and will exercise it.

 

[jnday]

How can everybody be so sure that AP is not going to decline quick after rejoining a team? He is not super human. He is a 30 year old RB that has a good chance of being rusty. Nobody knows what kind of shape AP will be in. He could also be injury prone as old age sets in. Is this really the type of player that is worth high draft picks and a big cap hit? Five years ago, he was. Today , he is far from a sure thing.

 

[esloan]

You and the other what 3...hboy, jarjarbinks (mjames), Jim (doors dude) continue to add things after you have been trumped...you cant use the second offense or compare it to AD cause he has only had one...you made a statement no team would stand by him...your wrong its your opinion and nothing more..i provided one exampe of a team standing by a player..stick with the facts...we are talking about one offense per player..not one for x player and two for y player...and to come out and say you will "laugh" at another cowboys fan for wanting the team we root for to get better is just upsurd..and quite frankly not a real fan...fans can debate, have differences, and even disagree but REAL fans stick together and want the same common goal and that is for thier team to hoist that trophy over their head...that is a fan...if AD comes here i am not going to come on here like some childish kid and laugh..what good does that do? If I am wrong I have already stated I have no qualm admitting that like I did with Hardy...I was wrong I did not think he would be brought in...so be it...but you know what come Sunday I am going to be cheering the kraken on not making statements about laughing at my brothers and sisters...i guess that is the difference in my generation and yours...stick with the facts.

LOL. Your generation and mine? Hell, I bet we are pretty close to the same age. I will also cheer AP on if he comes here. I have said it numerous times in this thread that if they can get him for a 3rd rounder or less and he comes with a 2-3 year contract for little guaranteed and $5-6 million a year that I am all for it. Any more than that and I think he hurts the team in the long term.

 

[tyke1doe]

If he is on the roster for the first game I think, he is guaranteed 13 million.....I think thats the case? Staserhoo posted the date in this thread .......somewhere. I think I read that.

And he doesn't want to be with the team.,,,,

I don't think Minny wants a malcontent as the face of the franchise, and they don't want to eat 13 million. So, they are going to play ball. But, I don't think AP can then turn around and ask them to take a lesser offer from one team, so he can play at the team of his choice. Forcing Minny to take less then market value for him. I am not sure how that is going to play out. Maybe Minny just gets tired of it and trades him to Dallas for a 4th round pick. Or maybe they get so bent out of shape, that they make an example of AP and eat the money and force him to set out. Set out a year of the precious years he has left....

Unless APs team(cough Cowboys) get close to what the other team is offering. If that happens, then everybody is happy. Minny gets something for their trouble, AP gets to play where he wants, and Dallas gets a bellcow and immediately changes the entire outlook. Energizes this franchise like no other player.

We'll see how it plays out. But, giving it more consideration, I don't think AP is leaving Minnesota unless someone blows them out of the park with a trade scenario they can't refuse or if they ask for a first and get a first or get something close to what they're looking for.

 

[khiladi]

When the Vikings reversed their original decision to let Peterson play and approached the league about putting him on the commissioner's exempt list, though, Peterson felt stung. He called it an "ambush" Thursday, and he certainly noticed how quiet the Vikings were about him from Sept. 17 -- when he was placed on the exempt list -- to the end of the season. There's no doubt Peterson's actions set the ball in motion, and he's apologized for those actions. But he felt his commitment to the Vikings had earned him more support than he'd received. There's an issue there that runs deeper than money, and it's common to more players than just Peterson; in a business where employees put their well-being on the line, public backing carries untold weight.

This personal conduct policy to me just demonstrates the hypocrisy of the league, so I don't take anything seriously that comes from the mouth of Goodell and the organization. The reality is the Vikings were still paying him while he was on the exempt list, meaning for free. If they weren't standing by him, why did they not make it a big deal to pay him? He essentially got a good deal. Pay, but no work. That is why I personally think the Vikings probably came to that decision with the NFL behind closed doors.

So I can't really argue that the Vikings were at fault. Whatever happened afterwards, including his suspension, was dictated solely by the NFL and the NFL was just waiting for Peterson to go through his court proceedings. At the same time, they saved themselves a bigger PR nightmare having AP play at a time all this negative press was coming down on them.

If AP was really honest in his protest, than instead of targetting the Vikings he should target the NFL as a whole. But we know he isn't going to do that.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have him here.

 

[tyke1doe]

This is not accurate. Ask Jerry about who had the leverage when Rat and Orton sulked and who had to eat an astronomically worse deal.

What's not accurate? That teams haven't allowed players to sit because they don't want to trade them? This has happened before in the history of the NFL so it is quite accurate.

Now, it may not happen in this case. But this is a speculation thread. None of us knows for certain what will happen. I'm just offering my perspective.

But time will tell.

 

[Silver N Blue]

How can everybody be so sure that AP is not going to decline quick after rejoining a team? He is not super human. He is a 30 year old RB that has a good chance of being rusty. Nobody knows what kind of shape AP will be in. He could also be injury prone as old age sets in. Is this really the type of player that is worth high draft picks and a big cap hit? Five years ago, he was. Today , he is far from a sure thing.

Several reports have surfaced he is in excellent shape...when has AD never been in shape....the most recent report came from Alfred Blue last week who is training with him this offseason....stating..AD is in excellent shape and he would not want to be in his way...as for big contract..not one of the supporters on this thread have stated we support a big contract and it has not been reported anywhere that is what he is seeking....the only financial terms reported came from his agent and that statement included a willingness to rework his current deal IF traded. Sounds to me there is a willingness on the AD team to take less money for the right situation.

 

[Stash]

How can everybody be so sure that AP is not going to decline quick after rejoining a team? He is not super human.

He's proven to be exceptional already. And I see a year off from punishment as a plus for him, not a minus.

He is a 30 year old RB that has a good chance of being rusty.

Can you elaborate on this? What does this mean exactly? Did he forget how to run? If he's participating in offseason activities, how is he 'rusty'?

Nobody knows what kind of shape AP will be in.

From all photos and reports, that shape would be phenominal.

He could also be injury prone as old age sets in.

'Old age'. Sorry but that term looks like a huge stretch and an assumption based on your stance on the topic. Anyone this team puts out there might be 'injury prone'. Heck, the guy that just left was 'injury prone'.

Is this really the type of player that is worth high draft picks and a big cap hit? Five years ago, he was. Today , he is far from a sure thing.

Nobody is a sure thing. But this guy has a proven hall of fame track record that no other option does.

And you'll have to clearly define your terms here. Define 'high draft picks' and define 'big cap hit'.

Then we can more intelligently debate the pros and cons.

 

[Cowboys22]

Who even knows if it has gone nowhere or not? Further, Ratliff hasn't done anything for the Bears, even when given time to rest. Maybe Dallas has said it's not worth pursuing anyways. Maybe they have gotten some money back that we haven't heard about.

First off, we would have heard about it because that would be a huge story. The beat writers would be all over that. Second, the fact that he hasn't done much is irrelevant. We are talking about who has the ultimate power and I contend that Ratliff showed it's the players if they are willing to do what it takes to get what they want. No team is going to waste a precious roster spot and pay $12 million to a player that is making it crystal clear he doesn't want to be there. That could be by showing up and claiming to get hurt or by showing up and simply playing like crap. It's the player's talent that the team wants and if he withholds that talent, the team will be forced to move on. He can show up and simply not be worth $12 million, cause a few headaches in the lockeroom, and eventually he will get what he wants.

 

[superonyx]

Yes. I think it was worse in some ways. What Brent did was horrible, no doubt, but he did what thousands of people do nightly and drive after drinking too much. In addition, the person he killed also drank too much and chose to get in the car with him. It resulted in his death. It was bad but it was an accident.

What Peterson did was intentional. He beat a child so badly that marks were still present over two weeks after the beating. In addition, the child claims he punched him in the face, though that was not proven in court due to him pleading no contest.

So, yeah, I think what Peterson did was worse. It was intentional and it was to his own child.

Well then Peterson did was the same thing that thousands of people do each night also. They discipline their children. Using a switch is not the best way but it is still him disciplining a child. Child abusers runs much deeper than using a switch on a child. My parents would use switches on us at times as children...however we were not abused. I knew a boy in my neighborhood that was abused....it's much deeper than we need to discuss here...the point is that Peterson was intended to discipline his son not abuse him. Just like Brent was not attempting to kill his best friend...you are saying that Peterson was intending to abuse his child...how could you possibility know what his intentions were? It sounds to me like Peterson intentions were to discipline his child not abuse him.....I wish more Fathers disciplined their children...didn't say abuse...

 

[khiladi]

First off, we would have heard about it because that would be a huge story. The beat writers would be all over that. Second, the fact that he hasn't done much is irrelevant. We are talking about who has the ultimate power and I contend that Ratliff showed it's the players if they are willing to do what it takes to get what they want. No team is going to waste a precious roster spot and pay $12 million to a player that is making it crystal clear he doesn't want to be there. That could be by showing up and claiming to get hurt or by showing up and simply playing like crap. It's the player's talent that the team wants and if he withholds that talent, the team will be forced to move on. He can show up and simply not be worth $12 million, cause a few headaches in the lockeroom, and eventually he will get what he wants.

Why? I'm not aware of a majority of proceedings that go on behind closed doors.

The Cowboys thought it was a medical issue and the Cowboys filed a petition when they found out Ratliff could play with the Bears. He was also supposedly bi-polar or had mental issues. This isn't the case with AP. The guy just came off2000 yards rushing and a year of relaxation.

Plus, Ratliff also sucked with the Bears. If they got burned and Ratliff ended up great with the Bears, you think they would fall for the same thing again and let the next guy demand a trade?

 

[iceberg]

He's proven to be exceptional already. And I see a year off from punishment as a plus for him, not a minus.

stash - i'm not picking on you or trying to start anything, but i am curious as til now i've heard your side many many times (as well as my own and everyone elses, to be sure but you see almost everything as a plus. do you see *any* negatives that would make you want to stop this or NOT want him here?

what *are* is faults at this stage in his career? not looking for a "here's a talking point for the other side and here's why i disagree" - just what do *you* see as the potential negatives that could give you pause in all this if you focused on them as much as the positives?

no, not asking you to change your mind or stance. i don't have that kind of time and reality doesn't have that kind of server storage - just what are some negatives in all this you see.

 

[esloan]

Well then Peterson did was the same thing that thousands of people do each night also. They discipline their children. Using a switch is not the best way but it is still him disciplining a child. Child abusers runs much deeper than using a switch on a child. My parents would use switches on us at times as children...however we were not abused. I knew a boy in my neighborhood that was abused....it's much deeper than we need to discuss here...the point is that Peterson was intended to discipline his son not abuse him. Just like Brent was not attempting to kill his best friend...you are saying that Peterson was intending to abuse his child...how could you possibility know what his intentions were? It sounds to me like Peterson intentions were to discipline his child not abuse him.....I wish more Fathers disciplined their children...didn't say abuse...

What Peterson did was beyond using a switch. I had a switch used on me as a child, those marks did not look like that and certainly not after 2 weeks. It was way beyond what is acceptable as a punishment. Also, there is the claim that Peterson hit the child in the face. Thousands of people discipline their children, thousands of people do NOT leave marks like that.

 

[Silver N Blue]

Can we move away from physical punishment..he has been reinstated...can we not keep this to a will he or won't he come to Dallas thread...

 

[superonyx]

What Peterson did was beyond using a switch. I had a switch used on me as a child, those marks did not look like that and certainly not after 2 weeks. It was way beyond what is acceptable as a punishment. Also, there is the claim that Peterson hit the child in the face. Thousands of people discipline their children, thousands of people do NOT leave marks like that.

The problem is you are judging intent just based on switch marks. I agree that his actions of even using a switch was wrong....however this alone does not automatically constitute abuse or make him a child abuser. A child abuser is the man who beat his other son to death.....HUGE difference....yet one that doesn't fit your agenda to make.

 

[Stash]

stash - i'm not picking on you or trying to start anything, but i am curious as til now i've heard your side many many times (as well as my own and everyone elses, to be sure but you see almost everything as a plus. do you see *any* negatives that would make you want to stop this or NOT want him here?

I've seen some speculation that he's simply leveraging to get more guaranteed money from the Vikings. If that's actually true, I'd pull out of this whole deal and let him rot there. I have no interest in being used just to get him more guaranteed money. But at this point, I don't believe that to be true.

what *are* is faults at this stage in his career? not looking for a "here's a talking point for the other side and here's why i disagree" - just what do *you* see as the potential negatives that could give you pause in all this if you focused on them as much as the positives?

I see where folks have concerns regarding money and draft picks. But what I take issue with is the grey area the other side seems to hide in. I've stated that I wouldn't give up a 1st rounder, the folks against just say 'high draft picks'. I've stated that I would be OK with a 3 year deal for $25 million. Others just say "I'm not paying big money".

no, not asking you to change your mind or stance. i don't have that kind of time and reality doesn't have that kind of server storage - just what are some negatives in all this you see.

I can state that, despite my being on the 'pro' side, I do have my limits and wouldn't want to see the team overpay in either picks or money.

What I would like to see is more of the 'con' side make the effort to clearly define their positions rather than dealing in vague terms.

I see the worries about the number '30', but I would hope people factor in the year off from wear and tear as well.

I see the 'injury' worry, but I hope people factor in his amazing recovery ability and exceptional genetics.

If I'm totaling up the plusses and minuses, I see a lot more plusses than minuses. As long as the draft and financial compensations aren't out of hand.

 

[Stash]

Can we move away from physical punishment..he has been reinstated...can we not keep this to a will he or won't he come to Dallas thread...

Yeah, I wish we could leave that alone before we get the thread shut down unnecessarily.

 

[Silver N Blue]

Yeah, I wish we could leave that alone before we get the thread shut down unnecessarily.

Exactly my point man.

 

[KalEl]

Let me ask you this; throwing out that it is Peterson involved in this. Throwing out that it could possibly be the Cowboys who benefit. Do you really want players to be able to get away with this and benefit from this? Do you really want to see the NFL cave to players who try to dictate to a team who they will play for regardless of whether they are under contract or not? I don't want to see that happen. Not at all.

I don't want to see Peterson benefit from this because I don't want to see other players pulling it in the years to come. Switch it around. What if Dez decides he wants to go to another team in 3 years, even after signing a long term contract? I think Peterson getting what he wants harms the NFL in the long term. Yeah, it may help the Cowboys in the short term or Tampa Bay or whatever team gets him but long term, I think it harms the game.

Think about the possibility that the Vikings asked him for a pay cut already and that's one of the reasons he wants out. I think there's some truth to that possibility because of a tweet yesterday that quoted him saying he would play in MIN for a guaranteed 13 mil. That signals to be that he indeed was asked to reduce his salary. No team not even the Vikings want to pay that salary.

So if there is merit to that and I think there is. This is no different than the Carr situation. I have no problem with players digging their heels in and demanding the teams live up to the contract they agreed upon.

 

[phildadon86]

Brent was accused of a drunk driving accident that killed another man. I am sorry but that is different from intentionally beating your child bad enough that it leaves marks two weeks later. Once those pictures were released, there is not a single team that would have stood by Peterson. Those pictures were damning. There is now way a team is going to go on record supporting a player after pictures like that come out. Especially when that player straight up admitted that the marks were made by him.

Additionally, the Vikings were about as sensitive as one could be about the incident. Their statement indicated the seriousness of the issue but said that Peterson deserved a presumption of innocence. I am not sure what else you or Peterson expected from them.

Today’s decision was made after significant thought, discussion and consideration. As evidenced by our decision to deactivate Adrian from yesterday’s game, this is clearly a very important issue. On Friday, we felt it was in the best interests of the organization to step back, evaluate the situation, and not rush to judgment given the seriousness of this matter. At that time, we made the decision that we felt was best for the Vikings and all parties involved.

To be clear, we take very seriously any matter that involves the welfare of a child. At this time, however, we believe this is a matter of due process and we should allow the legal system to proceed so we can come to the most effective conclusions and then determine the appropriate course of action. This is a difficult path to navigate, and our focus is on doing the right thing. Currently we believe we are at a juncture where the most appropriate next step is to allow the judicial process to move forward.

We will continue to monitor the situation closely and support Adrian’s fulfillment of his legal responsibilities throughout this process.

Lol. So involuntary murder and child abuse are on par with each other in your books? Makes sense.