Vikings Message Board.Com

Remember. Mr chattermouth also volunteered to smokin weed. That is another her league violation that will need to b adressed

J. Kapp 11 wrote: Agree with Jim. Well said.

My hope for him as a person is that he doesn't see a plea to a lesser charge as vindication for his actions. I hope he's learned that punishment to the degree he administered it isn't appropriate. No matter what any of us think of the method, I think most of us can agree that he went too far with this child.

I think it all comes down to where his head is at now, as opposed to where it was at on Sept 12th when this all came down. As you probably remember, he made mention that he was shocked that he was indicted over this which looking back probably has a touch of red flag to it. It's fairly complex, because we are now getting into the human mind. We all know athletes develop some pretty hard wired sense of entitlement, starting from when he was running for 90 yard TDs in Texas. Will he be thinking, to hell with you all trying to tell me how I discipline my kids, or will he really have remorse? So I don't know if it would actually be viewed as vindication, and back to the same behavior, at least I hope not. I would guess his eyes are open now, to whatever he may have been taught to believe about discipline. Because I'm fairly certain this was learned, these things normally are.

chicagopurple wrote:Remember. Mr chattermouth also volunteered to smokin weed. That is another her league violation that will need to b adressed

That's unlikely unless some proof of his marijuana use emerges. The test results were never released and at this point, his alleged comment remains nothing more than unsubstantiated hearsay.

Mothman wrote: That's unlikely unless some proof of his marijuana use emerges. The test results were never released and at this point, his alleged comment remains nothing more than unsubstantiated hearsay.

And I think, but I could be wrong, that the test would have to be one administered by the NFL to be accepted by the players union. Because whoever administers it is most likely pre agreed upon per the contract.

PurpleHalo wrote: I think it all comes down to where his head is at now, as opposed to where it was at on Sept 12th when this all came down. As you probably remember, he made mention that he was shocked that he was indicted over this which looking back probably has a touch of red flag to it. It's fairly complex, because we are now getting into the human mind. We all know athletes develop some pretty hard wired sense of entitlement, starting from when he was running for 90 yard TDs in Texas. Will he be thinking, to hell with you all trying to tell me how I discipline my kids, or will he really have remorse? So I don't know if it would actually be viewed as vindication, and back to the same behavior, at least I hope not. I would guess his eyes are open now, to whatever he may have been taught to believe about discipline. Because I'm fairly certain this was learned, these things normally are.

Just to be clear, I'm not worried about whether OTHERS will view it as vindication. I'm worried that HE will view it as vindication.

Like you said, it's a hope he won't say, "To hell with you all trying to tell me how to discipline my kid." My hope is that he doesn't use the lesser plea to add, "See, I'm not guilty of anything that bad."

People are generally forgiving, and I consider myself in that camp. But for me, it's conditional upon a true apology, which involves both contrition and repentance. You have to admit that what you did was wrong and express sorrow for it (contrition), then do your best to change (repentance). Anybody who does that, I am happy to forgive.

I understood your vindication comment completely, when I said viewed as, I meant viewed as it by Adrian himself. My wording in that area may not have sounded clear.

J. Kapp 11 wrote:People are generally forgiving, and I consider myself in that camp. But for me, it's conditional upon a true apology, which involves both contrition and repentance. You have to admit that what you did was wrong and express sorrow for it (contrition), then do your best to change (repentance). Anybody who does that, I am happy to forgive.

Sorry-- not trying to wage a religious war here-- just a couple thoughts....

Christ said 'Father forgive them for they know not what they do...' Not 'Father, forgive them as long as they are contrite and repent'.

Contrition/repentance is for the benefit of the sinner, not the forgiver.

Forgiving someone who has *not* repented is difficult, but better than offering a conditional forgiveness such as you describe. I used to have that attitude, and it is certainly easier to forgive someone who is both contrite and repentant. But what I've come to learn is that it is *not* a condition on the ability to forgive.

I think you are trying to talk about atonement (being 'at one' with AP agian-- being in his corner, supporting him cheering for him, etc.). For this I do think contrition/repentance is key. But that is a step beyond forgiveness IMO. Here we are talking restoration, etc.

But you and I are in complete agreement I think that we both would want Adrian to change for the better through this ordeal rather than simply using any outcome to become more resolute in his position that he did nothing wrong. For me to embrace him as the face of the franchise again, and defend him and really cheer for him, I need to see that change and growth and contrition and repentance.

But don't sell forgiveness short. Forgiveness is for *us*-- not him-- it lets us breath not him. Contrition/repentance is for him-- it lets him grow/improve-- ultimately it will be his oxygen. The combination is atonement-- I'd really like to get back to that point, but we'll have to see how things play out-- but regardless of his actions, I can still forgive and be better off for it.

PurpleHalo wrote: And I think, but I could be wrong, that the test would have to be one administered by the NFL to be accepted by the players union. Because whoever administers it is most likely pre agreed upon per the contract.

You're probably right about that.

Dammit Adrian, you idiot. We could be competing for a playoff spot with you out there.

Purpnation wrote:

Dammit Adrian, you idiot. We could be competing for a playoff spot with you out there.

This is the part that gets me. I have the feeling that if our running game was absolutely horrendous AP might be sitting back going "Nyuck Nyuck Nyuck" It was almost scripted. I start hearing stats about how "the vikings run game is starting to produce about the same as AP behind center" and then suddenly "AP considering plea deal (to get back on the field sooner)"


I know he'll say all the right things but part of me thinks this is nothing but a job security move on AP's part. I don't like it.

mondry wrote:Hopefully it means he's back on the field next week!

This. I want this so bad. I just hope the suspension he was due to receive from the league is retroactive to week 2 when he first sat. That's a good 8 game suspension.

IrishViking wrote:
This is the part that gets me. I have the feeling that if our running game was absolutely horrendous AP might be sitting back going "Nyuck Nyuck Nyuck" It was almost scripted. I start hearing stats about how "the vikings run game is starting to produce about the same as AP behind center" and then suddenly "AP considering plea deal (to get back on the field sooner)"


I know he'll say all the right things but part of me thinks this is nothing but a job security move on AP's part. I don't like it.

Interesting take.
Or maybe he sees the vast improvement on defense, the possibilty of a window opening once the offense can stabalize and he wants to get in on it. He's been a huge piece of this franchise his whole career. A bit of his identity is at risk also.

The Breeze wrote: Interesting take.
Or maybe he sees the vast improvement on defense, the possibilty of a window opening once the offense can stabalize and he wants to get in on it. He's been a huge piece of this franchise his whole career. A bit of his identity is at risk also.

... or maybe he just wants to plea down to a misdemeanor and get on with his life. If I were in his position, I'd sure be eager to put all of this behind me.

Even if this is a "job security move" by Peterson, what the heck is wrong with that? Isn't job security something to value?

Perhaps the NFL considers the 8 games he missed (with pay) as 'time served', and rather than barring him from playing in any more games, simply fine him the equivalent of 8 game checks (which he would have lost had the eight games he missed been a 'traditional suspension'), and allow him to be active going forward. All this contingent on whether or not he does in fact reach a plea agreement.

My initial thought anyway.

Because it rings to me of not learning your lesson, not wanting to help the team, but to act for your own "survival" (I put quotes because lets face it, most people could probably manage to live for decades off of what he makes per game.)

If it seems to you to be totally above board and reasonable fine


But IMO it looks like he is doing it for all the wrong reason.


Also, I think its pretty selfish to only want to come back one the team that pays you almost 1 million per game proves to you they can win. If that is the case he needs to go. That is not a team attitude.