Vikings Message Board.Com

Mothman wrote:

That's a pretty far cry from the hypothetical scenario I laid out above.

I'm sure Peterson is more than aware that his own actions are what led to him not playing in the first place. This idea that keeps coming up that he is somehow shifting blame for his actions to the Vikings in one way or another is has no basis in anything Peterson has said.
Then we'll just have to wait for an actual explanation instead of a hypothetical explanation I came up with based on what little information is available from the media. Considering how much time they've devoted to this story, they've reported remarkably little of substance.

Didn't AP call Jerry Jones about playing for the Cowboys before all this broke? Seems like he, (or his wife) wanted out and he is using the situation with Warren as an excuse for wanting to leave.

trade him too sunny Jacksonville if he wants out so bad. good weather, good team. lol he's should be thankful he has a job in my opinion.

Just Me wrote: http://www.neverendingfootsteps.com/201 ... idnt-know/

How can I take that movie seriously anymore.

Thanks for the link. Not a Pee Wee fan but always enjoy watching that movie.

The Breeze wrote: All the comments around what the Vikings did or did not do with cooperation of Goodells office are not to my point. Regardless of what they did or did not do, IF they knowingly lied to him in the process and have failed to convince him otherwise after the fact, I have the capacity to understand how he would be really pissed about it. And I do not think any of that is any more of a stretch than this all being about guarranteed monies or other stuff. Seems to me, if he just shows up and plays this season he's guarranteed about $13m.

OK, but that's my point unless AD somehow believes the Vikings could overrule Goodell? How can the Vikings lie about something when it was out of their control?

The Breeze wrote: I know exactly what's been made public, just like everyone else following the situation. Your counting of what's been made public and and subsequent dismissal of there being more to the story seems somewhat obtuse or convieniant to me.

Well, call it what you want, but the facts don't support the contention that the *Vikings* are at the core of AD's desire to play elsewhere. I just don't see why people are willing to jump to that conclusion based on what's been made public.

The Breeze wrote: My respect or lack of respect for him, AND the Wilfs (who have been convicted of jerking partners around in the past), and FOs in general, for that matter, is in terms of overall honesty and manipulation .

The Wilfs and their behavior are a strawman here. Who cares if they are criminals? As I stated, this was never in their power to decide once the league took it over. The only legit beef I could see AD having with the Wilfs is their backtracking on letting AD play in the 2nd game, but even there, it was very clear they were coming under intense pressure from sponsors and the league was not far behind. Even AD should be able to understand that.

The Breeze wrote: There is nothing legally binding that can force him to play. He does not want to play for the Vikings for whatever reason. Zimmer has stated unequivically that he does not want him on the team if he doesn't want to be there.

Zimmer can have his opinion, but in the end Spielman and the Vikings need to be made whole if they lose a key piece of their plan, and that's even more true since they lost him for most of last year as well. Cutting AD or a trade with insufficient compensation are not options at the team level. Zimmer could sit him out I suppose, but if Spielman can't get the compensation he needs in a trade, AD is showing up or sitting another year out. It's really as simple as that.

The Breeze wrote: If they REALLY want him back, I think playing hardball with this guy is a mistake.....especially if he was intentionally misled during the whole suspension/exempt issue. I think they should trade him and move on.

I'm not really sure how the Vikings expecting him to honor his contract is playing hardball with him. I suspect if Spielman can find the right offer for a trade he'll trade him, but only under that condition.

AD has no leverage. If he wants to dig in, be my guest. He can lose more time, more money, and more of his tattered reputation.

you are right he has no leverage and there is NO way he sits out another year. whether we like it or not it appears he will be in purple next year, unless this is all posturing and it somehow miraculously works. i've said this before a trade would have happened already i don't think anyone really wants him bad enough. the cardinals are insane not to offer even a 1st for him; they are such a good team he could make them instant contenders.

So ... Goodell is expecting to meet with Peterson on or before April 15th. I bet Peterson stiffs him just like he did last November. If Peterson did meet with Goodell to bring him up to date on his compliance with Goodell's mandated treatment and counseling program (where he micro-managed it to the point of selecting the psychologist) it would give the appearance that Peterson has accepted Goodell's disciplinary ruling that was completely reversed by Judge Doty in the NFLPA's lawsuit against the league.

Goodell is acting like Judge Doty's decision never happened. I wonder if Peterson even bothered doing what Goodell had mandated; wouldn't surprise me to find out that he waited until Doty's ruling before doing anything and since that ruling was in his favor he probably (rightly) ignored whatever Goodell required of him.

@Edward
I regret having to respond from a phone where I can't easily view the prior posts or parce them up point by point, so I'll try and sum up where I've come to.
--
After Doty's ruling Spielman and Zimmer meet with AD in Houston. AD changes his Twitter backround to purple and gold afterward.
AD flies to NY to meet with ownership after which the climate cools so much that at some point AD requests his release. Denied....of course.
-
I'm not at all suggesting that the Vikings had any ability to plot the course that Goodell has taken, one way or the other. Whatever happened with Warren the Wilfs and the league is not likely to be made public. It's entirely possible that the Vikings knew what was coming down the pike well before it was announced. I would bet on it. Otherwise it would have been real easy to smooth out the miscommunications around it all in the NY meeting.
-
Whatever the true nature of AD's discontent with them may only amount to his word against theirs which means that it isn't likely to be made public either.
The fact that it couldn't be cleared up face to face, a request for release and further requests for meetings have been denied suggests to me that Peterson is done with the Vikings as a matter of principle.
-
My comment about the history of each side in terms of honesty was to suggest, that in a case of who said what, I'll take ADs word over the Wilfs in this matter.
-
If it's really only about money he'll have to play. And perhaps it is, based on the Vikings current stance and intent to use their leverage. I'm not claiming to have come to conclusion around it. I'm suggesting that if it's not about money and something more profoundly personal this could really get ugly. If they think they own his loyalty because of an NFL contract, which is somewhat being suggested IMO, everyone may wind up losing in this.

We should have traded AD to Dallas strait up for Demarco Murray when we had the chance. Hell, AD comes out on 3rd and long, can't pass protect, and doesn't catch passes out of the backfield. Those are serious Marks against him in my book. Wilf and Co are out of their minds believing a 30 year old AD is worth all this and all that Money. He's not

Pseudo Everything wrote:So ... Goodell is expecting to meet with Peterson on or before April 15th. I bet Peterson stiffs him just like he did last November. If Peterson did meet with Goodell to bring him up to date on his compliance with Goodell's mandated treatment and counseling program (where he micro-managed it to the point of selecting the psychologist) it would give the appearance that Peterson has accepted Goodell's disciplinary ruling that was completely reversed by Judge Doty in the NFLPA's lawsuit against the league.

Goodell is acting like Judge Doty's decision never happened. I wonder if Peterson even bothered doing what Goodell had mandated; wouldn't surprise me to find out that he waited until Doty's ruling before doing anything and since that ruling was in his favor he probably (rightly) ignored whatever Goodell required of him.

Dude,....what? oh...was distracted there for a minute....what?? MMMMMM....that girl....

Laserman wrote:We should have traded AD to Dallas strait up for Demarco Murray when we had the chance. Hell, AD comes out on 3rd and long, can't pass protect, and doesn't catch passes out of the backfield. Those are serious Marks against him in my book. Wilf and Co are out of their minds believing a 30 year old AD is worth all this and all that Money. He's not

THAT NEVER COULD HAVE HAPPENED! MURRAY WAS A FREE AGENT!

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

dkoby wrote: Dude,....what? oh...was distracted there for a minute....what?? MMMMMM....that girl....

It's mesmerizing

^^Its amazing how many people don't realize this (The post regarding Murray as a FA). Has anyone ever read the comments on the teams Facebook/Twitter fan questions? Or how about some of the fan questions that are asked? They are shockingly dumb. So, so, so many idiots out there on every subject. ( I'm no rocket doctor myself)

sorry got a little off topic.

Still want AP back. He will be real angry this year. Remember his Hulk Halloween costume? Yea, that, but actually will be hulk. The drama is getting tiring, but will be worth it.

(Not saying the guy quoted is an idiot.)

PurpleMustReign wrote: THAT NEVER COULD HAVE HAPPENED! MURRAY WAS A FREE AGENT!

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

I assume Laserman was talking about last offseason/season while he was still under contract with Dallas...

Either way, unless it was the offseason, I am fairly certain that being on the exempt list prohibits a team from trading a player on said list.

If Laserman was referring to the offseason in 2014, he wouldn't be incorrect. Thus, in theory, as Laserman said, we would have had a chance to trade for DeMarco.

HardcoreVikesFan wrote:I assume Laserman was talking about last offseason/season while he was still under contract with Dallas...

Either way, unless it was the offseason, I am fairly certain that being on the exempt list prohibits a team from trading a player on said list.

If Laserman was referring to the offseason in 2014, he wouldn't be incorrect. Thus, in theory, as Laserman said, we would have had a chance to trade for DeMarco.

What makes anyone think such a trade was ever on the table during the 2014 offseason and why would the Vikings have made that trade during the 2014 offseason? Prior to last season, Murray had one 1000+ yard season and zero seasons in which he'd played all 16 games. If they'd traded for him, they'd be getting a player one year away from free agency. Would Murray have been willing to negotiate a new deal at that point?

I'm beyond tired of the "Peterson can't block or catch" BS too. It's not 2007, folks. Pay attention.

Mothman wrote: What makes anyone think such a trade was ever on the table during the 2014 offseason and why would the Vikings have made that trade during the 2014 offseason? Prior to last season, Murray had one 1000+ yard season and zero seasons in which he'd played all 16 games. If they'd traded for him, they'd be getting a player one year away from free agency. Would Murray have been willing to negotiate a new deal at that point?

I'm beyond tired of the "Peterson can't block or catch" BS too. It's not 2007, folks. Pay attention.

I never said that I would have traded for Murray. I was attempting to show what I believe Laserman was trying to say in his previous post.

I have never really had a high opinion of DeMarco personally. I think he is a good back, but he isn't Peterson.

As far as Peterson not being able to catch, the first Vikings game I ever attended in person was also Peterson's first game in his NFL career. He caught a 60 yard swing pass against Atlanta for a touchdown. That was his first NFL touchdown as well. He can catch, he just hasn't been utilized in that role throughout his career.