Vikings Message Board.Com

soflavike wrote: So what? He was paid millions of dollars for 10 games and he only played one... does that make it any better?

I never said it makes it any better, but opinions are more meaningful when based on fact instead of falsehood. I feel like my post was reasonable, especially in light of TSonn admitting that he forgot that he had lost game checks and thanked me for reminding him.

mansquatch wrote:DK you are omitting a critical point from your statement: AP wasn't paid because of actions AP took that lead the NFL to punish/ suspend him. NONE of that was the Vikings doing something to AP.

I didn't omit anything; that has nothing to do with the actual amount of games he was paid for. I'm not saying that he deserved those checks and I'm certainly not saying that this is the Vikings fault. All I am saying is that there are enough things to be upset about without making up new things.

MikethePurple wrote:I agree that based on the facts we know Adrian's ire should be directed at the league's policies and Vincent's misleading promises but what I was trying to speculate on was the reason he is so upset with the Vikings. Specifically, that they may have played a larger part (along with the league) in convincing him to take a plea deal with the incentive that he would be able to get back on the field for a portion of the season. Under those assumptions, he pleaded guilty and afterwards he saw the Vikings play a part in keeping him off the field. I have no knowledge that this was the case, it was just speculation on why AD might be angry with the Vikings. Its just as, if not more, likely that his anger is totally misguided and he is completely in the wrong, hence the reasons I highlighted his previous issues with questionable judgment. I was just trying to think of a plausible scenario that could explain a reasonable justification for AD's antipathy towards playing for the Vikings.

I would say a lot of what has come out from AD's side has not added up given the information that has been made public and my post was to try to make some sense of what his camp has been thinking with some possible justifications (in their eyes) of the reasons behind these actions based on previous events. The problem is we don't know some of the facts and haven't been in on the conversations that have gone on between all parties. It was speculation based on previous statements and actions in the context of the past year's developments.

If this isn't just about getting guaranteed money and Peterson genuinely has a problem with the team, here's how it probably adds up:

— Peterson took the plea deal thinking that, as Troy Vincent told him, he'd get a two game suspension, be fined and get back on the field in 2014.

— 2 weeks later, he was suspended indefinitely by Goodell, fined, and given a list of requirements he had to fulfill to receive consideration for reinstatement in April.

— A few days after that, in an extensive interview, he told Tom Pelissero of USAToday: "I would have to get back in the community and get a feel," Peterson said. "I know who loves me. The coaches and the players, it's not going to be a problem. I've felt so much support from those guys. The organization, I know there's people in the organization that support me and there's people that I know internally that has not been supporting me."

— A few days after that, Adam Schefter posted the quote I just reproduced above (in my reply to VikingLord) about Kevin Warren working with the NFL to make sure Peterson did not return this season.

— It seems likely that's the source of Peterson's beef with the Vikings and for those out there who haven't thought about exactly what that means, it means a Vikings representative was working with the league to deprive Peterson of the opportunity to play in 4 or 5 games. That cost him millions of dollars (and saved the Vikes millions—don't forget that) and potentially hundreds of rushing yards, something that probably matters to a guy whose dream is to one day become the all-time rushing leader). On top of that, as Mike has pointed out above, it means Peterson accepted a plea deal to return to a team that didn't really want him to return and actually worked against his return, thus giving up an opportunity to have his day in court.

Again, we don't have the facts but that's a scenario, based on reports, that hopefully helps make a little sense of what may be going on between Peterson and the Vikings.

Mothman wrote: If this isn't just about getting guaranteed money and Peterson genuinely has a problem with the team, here's how it probably adds up:

— Peterson took the plea deal thinking that, as Troy Vincent told him, he'd get a two game suspension, be fined and get back on the field in 2014.

— 2 weeks later, he was suspended indefinitely by Goodell, fined, and given a list of requirements he had to fulfill to receive consideration for reinstatement in April.

— A few days after that, in an extensive interview, he told Tom Pelissero of USAToday: "I would have to get back in the community and get a feel," Peterson said. "I know who loves me. The coaches and the players, it's not going to be a problem. I've felt so much support from those guys. The organization, I know there's people in the organization that support me and there's people that I know internally that has not been supporting me."

— A few days after that, Adam Schefter posted the quote I just reproduced above (in my reply to VikingLord) about Kevin Warren working with the NFL to make sure Peterson did not return this season.

— It seems likely that's the source of Peterson's beef with the Vikings and for those out there who haven't thought about exactly what that means, it means a Vikings representative was working with the league to deprive Peterson of the opportunity to play in 4 or 5 games. That cost him millions of dollars (and saved the Vikes millions—don't forget that) and potentially hundreds of rushing yards, something that probably matters to a guy whose dream is to one day become the all-time rushing leader). On top of that, as Mike has pointed out above, it means Peterson accepted a plea deal to return to a team that didn't really want him to return and actually worked against his return, thus giving up an opportunity to have his day in court.

Again, we don't have the facts but that's a scenario, based on reports, that hopefully helps make a little sense of what may be going on between Peterson and the Vikings.

This should be a sticky. Or something.

Here's a thing:

@clarencehilljr @ProFootballTalk @NBCSportsRadio Zimmer talked to Peterson agent last night late night at hotel

Mothman wrote: If this isn't just about getting guaranteed money and Peterson genuinely has a problem with the team, here's how it probably adds up:

— Peterson took the plea deal thinking that, as Troy Vincent told him, he'd get a two game suspension, be fined and get back on the field in 2014.

— 2 weeks later, he was suspended indefinitely by Goodell, fined, and given a list of requirements he had to fulfill to receive consideration for reinstatement in April.

— A few days after that, in an extensive interview, he told Tom Pelissero of USAToday: "I would have to get back in the community and get a feel," Peterson said. "I know who loves me. The coaches and the players, it's not going to be a problem. I've felt so much support from those guys. The organization, I know there's people in the organization that support me and there's people that I know internally that has not been supporting me."

— A few days after that, Adam Schefter posted the quote I just reproduced above (in my reply to VikingLord) about Kevin Warren working with the NFL to make sure Peterson did not return this season.

— It seems likely that's the source of Peterson's beef with the Vikings and for those out there who haven't thought about exactly what that means, it means a Vikings representative was working with the league to deprive Peterson of the opportunity to play in 4 or 5 games. That cost him millions of dollars (and saved the Vikes millions—don't forget that) and potentially hundreds of rushing yards, something that probably matters to a guy whose dream is to one day become the all-time rushing leader). On top of that, as Mike has pointed out above, it means Peterson accepted a plea deal to return to a team that didn't really want him to return and actually worked against his return, thus giving up an opportunity to have his day in court.

Again, we don't have the facts but that's a scenario, based on reports, that hopefully helps make a little sense of what may be going on between Peterson and the Vikings.

Jim, you always have a great take on things and this is no different. After reading a few of your posts, it is clear that you have to handle on this and it is insightful how you put it all in a box with a nice bow on it and the you make the most sense out of anyone on the board. Hats off.

dead_poet wrote:This should be a sticky. Or something.

I humbly agree.

Here's a thing:

Hey, that IS a thing! Now, did they pass in the hallway and say "hello" or did they TALK?

CbusVikesFan wrote:Jim, you always have a great take on things and this is no different. After reading a few of your posts, it is clear that you have to handle on this and it is insightful how you put it all in a box with a nice bow on it and the you make the most sense out of anyone on the board. Hats off.

Thank you!

It seems likely that's the source of Peterson's beef with the Vikings and for those out there who haven't thought about exactly what that means, it means a Vikings representative was working with the league to deprive Peterson of the opportunity to play in 4 or 5 games.

And don't forget the Vikings promoted the guy recently.

Wish someone, his agent included, would just explain to the guy in a way he'd understand *why* Warren did what he did. Maybe a pop up book? Coloring book? Baby Einstein?

Mothman wrote: I humbly agree.
Hey, that IS a thing! Now, did they pass in the hallway and say "hello" or did they TALK?

Or maybe one of them sneezed and the other said, "God Bless You."

Or one of them said "The stars at night, are big and bright!!" And the other clapped and said "Deep in the heart of Texas!!"

Mothman wrote: If this isn't just about getting guaranteed money and Peterson genuinely has a problem with the team, here's how it probably adds up:

— Peterson took the plea deal thinking that, as Troy Vincent told him, he'd get a two game suspension, be fined and get back on the field in 2014.

— 2 weeks later, he was suspended indefinitely by Goodell, fined, and given a list of requirements he had to fulfill to receive consideration for reinstatement in April.

— A few days after that, in an extensive interview, he told Tom Pelissero of USAToday: "I would have to get back in the community and get a feel," Peterson said. "I know who loves me. The coaches and the players, it's not going to be a problem. I've felt so much support from those guys. The organization, I know there's people in the organization that support me and there's people that I know internally that has not been supporting me."

— A few days after that, Adam Schefter posted the quote I just reproduced above (in my reply to VikingLord) about Kevin Warren working with the NFL to make sure Peterson did not return this season.

— It seems likely that's the source of Peterson's beef with the Vikings and for those out there who haven't thought about exactly what that means, it means a Vikings representative was working with the league to deprive Peterson of the opportunity to play in 4 or 5 games. That cost him millions of dollars (and saved the Vikes millions—don't forget that) and potentially hundreds of rushing yards, something that probably matters to a guy whose dream is to one day become the all-time rushing leader). On top of that, as Mike has pointed out above, it means Peterson accepted a plea deal to return to a team that didn't really want him to return and actually worked against his return, thus giving up an opportunity to have his day in court.

Again, we don't have the facts but that's a scenario, based on reports, that hopefully helps make a little sense of what may be going on between Peterson and the Vikings.

Thanks Jim, for breaking it down in a concise and coherent fashion:)

— Peterson took the plea deal thinking that, as Troy Vincent told him, he'd get a two game suspension, be fined and get back on the field in 2014.

I don't think what Vincent said had any bearing at all on Peterson's (and Rusty Hardin's) decision to accept the plea deal that was offered by the DA. Had he gone to trial Peterson was at risk of a felony conviction. I think Hardin was legitimately concerned about going to trial and that Peterson did whatever Rusty told him to do.

J. Kapp 11 wrote: Interesting, isn't it?

The man who taught Adrian Peterson how to discipline a child by thrashing him with a switch now cares deeply about his child's well-being.

Greedy much, Nelson?

Now you really have to like your post Kapp..

Souhan: Hey, Adrian: Enough of you and the camel you rode in on

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikin ... um=twitter

I feel like he's going to get it worse from the media than Moss, Harvin, and anyone else who left on bad terms.

dead_poet wrote:

As long as we are using correct facts: http://oupacademic.tumblr.com/post/6039 ... pid-things

In his address to the 1988 Republican National Convention, Ronald Reagan introduced a section of his speech with the words:


Before we came to Washington, Americans had just suffered the two worst back-to-back years of inflation in 60 years. Those are the facts, and as John Adams said, ‘Facts are stubborn things.’

This paragraph, and the following four paragraphs, finished with Adams’s words. However, at the end of the third paragraph, Reagan made a verbal slip, which he immediately corrected. A transcript of the speech reads,


'Facts are stupid things – stubborn things, should I say. [Laughter].’

However, despite its origin as a slip of the tongue, ‘Facts are stupid things’ has taken on a life of its own in the world of quotations.

There is no basement in the alamo.

Am I taking Crazy pills?


stressing not to jump to conclusions about Adrian's actions, motives, goals


immediately concluding, without evidence, Warren's actions, motives, goals.


No one knows anything. EVERYONE gets the benefit of the doubt or no one does.