Adrian Peterson, retired (2 Viewers)

[nastynate]

I mean, you sign a deal to go on the exempt list for as long as you have pending charges -- can the NFL F this up anymore?

The NFL obviously isn't set up to be a court of law...so stop with this garbage. Make some very clear boundaries and accompanying penalties, and stick with it.

 

[JimmyJabroni]

This really is turning into a joke. Dealing him a penalty or suspension or whatever is one thing, but hanging a player out in limbo like this while weeks go by is ridiculous.

 

[Tango]

Adrian Peterson's NFL status will be determined by Saturday, Nov. 22 at the latest.
Regardless, Peterson needs to remain on all fantasy rosters as the Nov. 22 date is one day before the Vikings host the Packers in Week 12.

How the heck does such a deadline get tied so tightly to the Packers game by this source? And who cares that the deadline is one day before a game. If he gets cleared one day before by the NFL, there is 0% chance he plays the next day. Moreover, the Vikings may not even want him back.

I hope he gets back sooner or later, but there are many dominoes that need to fall first. The NFL clearance is just step #1 and that should be stipulated in pieces like this.

 

[JimmyJabroni]

Adrian Peterson's NFL status will be determined by Saturday, Nov. 22 at the latest.
Regardless, Peterson needs to remain on all fantasy rosters as the Nov. 22 date is one day before the Vikings host the Packers in Week 12.

How the heck does such a deadline get tied so tightly to the Packers game by this source? And who cares that the deadline is one day before a game. If he gets cleared one day before by the NFL, there is 0% chance he plays the next day. Moreover, the Vikings may not even want him back.

I hope he gets back sooner or later, but there are many dominoes that need to fall first. The NFL clearance is just step #1 and that should be stipulated in pieces like this.

The source is the Collective Bargaining Agreement and the time table set forth in it for dealing with a grievance.

I would agree it would seem unlikely he'd play if cleared 1 day before the game. I would imagine they'd want him in for a week of practice.

As for them wanting him back, they made statements yesterday saying they did want him back but their hands were currently tied by this process.

 

[Tango]

Adrian Peterson's NFL status will be determined by Saturday, Nov. 22 at the latest.
Regardless, Peterson needs to remain on all fantasy rosters as the Nov. 22 date is one day before the Vikings host the Packers in Week 12.

How the heck does such a deadline get tied so tightly to the Packers game by this source? And who cares that the deadline is one day before a game. If he gets cleared one day before by the NFL, there is 0% chance he plays the next day. Moreover, the Vikings may not even want him back.

I hope he gets back sooner or later, but there are many dominoes that need to fall first. The NFL clearance is just step #1 and that should be stipulated in pieces like this.

The source is the Collective Bargaining Agreement and the time table set forth in it for dealing with a grievance.

I would agree it would seem unlikely he'd play if cleared 1 day before the game. I would imagine they'd want him in for a week of practice.

As for them wanting him back, they made statements yesterday saying they did want him back but their hands were currently tied by this process.

The CBA opines on what to do with your fantasy roster? Interesting...

The head coach said he wanted AP back. Ron Rivera said the same thing minutes before his guy got shelved for months. Ownership is what matters and, as we all expected, they're punting so far.

 

[JimmyJabroni]

Adrian Peterson's NFL status will be determined by Saturday, Nov. 22 at the latest.
Regardless, Peterson needs to remain on all fantasy rosters as the Nov. 22 date is one day before the Vikings host the Packers in Week 12.

How the heck does such a deadline get tied so tightly to the Packers game by this source? And who cares that the deadline is one day before a game. If he gets cleared one day before by the NFL, there is 0% chance he plays the next day. Moreover, the Vikings may not even want him back.

I hope he gets back sooner or later, but there are many dominoes that need to fall first. The NFL clearance is just step #1 and that should be stipulated in pieces like this.

The source is the Collective Bargaining Agreement and the time table set forth in it for dealing with a grievance.

I would agree it would seem unlikely he'd play if cleared 1 day before the game. I would imagine they'd want him in for a week of practice.

As for them wanting him back, they made statements yesterday saying they did want him back but their hands were currently tied by this process.

The head coach said that. Ron Rivera said the same thing before his guy got shelved. Ownership is what matters and, as expected, they're punting so far.

That's true. They did release a statement yesterday but it didn't really mention if they supported him or not...

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

so probably on the field for week13, if there is no further punishment?

 

[JimmyJabroni]

so probably on the field for week13, if there is no further punishment?

It sounds that way. Unless the process goes a little quicker.

And assuming the Vikings management welcome him back.

 

[TDorBust]

I mean, you sign a deal to go on the exempt list for as long as you have pending charges -- can the NFL F this up anymore?

The NFL obviously isn't set up to be a court of law...so stop with this garbage. Make some very clear boundaries and accompanying penalties, and stick with it.

I still haven't seen the original agreement, has anyone?

Did it state he would be removed from the list at the completion of the case or did it just state he would stay on the list until the case was resolved with not definitive timeline around when he would be removed from the list?

I know its a small difference but that difference means all the world I guess at this time.

 

[I Am the Stig]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/11/10/nfl-says-peterson-discipline-will-be-determined-as-quickly-as-possible/

We have honored our commitment to Mr. Peterson and the NFLPA not to process or impose any discipline until the criminal charges pending in Texas were resolved. When Mr. Peterson decided not to contest criminal charges, we promptly advised both him and the NFLPA that we were prepared to consider what, if any, discipline should now be imposed under the Personal Conduct Policy. We asked Mr. Peterson and his representatives, including the NFLPA, for relevant information. We have not received any of the requested information, but remain prepared to schedule a hearing and make a determination as quickly as possible based on as much information as available.

In other words they want Peterson to do their work for them, and they want him to make that as a condition even though the contract says he met the conditions.

League is digging deeper and deeper.

Not to mention they are sealed records so Peterson CAN'T produce the information they want.

Is that so? Sealed records are sealed against the curiosity of a prying public, but not necessarily so against the access of a parent or guardian. Lots of potential variables here, custody determinations or legally recognized paternity, that the father is the alleged perpetrator, and Texas law. ,Do you have authority for your statement? I myself do not know. I'm sure the question must have come up and already been definitively answered somewhere.

They are sealed for the protection of the child. The NFL has no right to obtain portions of the information whether AP wants to hand it over it not. The NFL is jeopardizing a minors rights to privacy to protect themselves.

 

[Joe Summer]

I still haven't seen the original agreement, has anyone?

Did it state he would be removed from the list at the completion of the case or did it just state he would stay on the list until the case was resolved with not definitive timeline around when he would be removed from the list?

I know its a small difference but that difference means all the world I guess at this time.

The full text of the agreement has not been made public, but it was quoted in the grievance:"The player agrees that, effective as of yesterday (September 17, 2014), he is placed on the Commissioner-Exempt list with full pay until the criminal charges currently pending against him are adjudicated."

"adjudicated" is a fancy way of saying "settled". And since the criminal charges were adjudicated on November 5th, he should have been automatically removed from the Exempt List at that time.

 

[JoeyJoJoJuniorShabadoo]

so probably on the field for week13, if there is no further punishment?

It sounds that way. Unless the process goes a little quicker.

And assuming the Vikings management welcome him back.

As pointed before, the Vikings schedule is not too favorable to RBs on weeks 15 and 16. Pretty good otherwise (Jets, Panthers, and Bears on weeks 13, 14, and 17 respectively)

 

[Jerry Curl]

so probably on the field for week13, if there is no further punishment?

It sounds that way. Unless the process goes a little quicker.

And assuming the Vikings management welcome him back.

As pointed before, the Vikings schedule is not too favorable to RBs on weeks 15 and 16. Pretty good otherwise (Jets, Panthers, and Bears on weeks 13, 14, and 17 respectively)

Adrian Peterson cam back from a torn ACL in 5 months and ran for 2k yards and is one of the most feared RBs ever when he has the ball.

He could play against the 85 Bears after being gone 3 years and I would start him over anyone.

 

[JoeyJoJoJuniorShabadoo]

so probably on the field for week13, if there is no further punishment?

It sounds that way. Unless the process goes a little quicker.

And assuming the Vikings management welcome him back.

As pointed before, the Vikings schedule is not too favorable to RBs on weeks 15 and 16. Pretty good otherwise (Jets, Panthers, and Bears on weeks 13, 14, and 17 respectively)

Adrian Peterson cam back from a torn ACL in 5 months and ran for 2k yards and is one of the most feared RBs ever when he has the ball.

He could play against the 85 Bears after being gone 3 years and I would start him over anyone.

Holy hyperbole. In the words of Mr. McKey, drugs are bad.

 

[mbuehner]

Whats being lost here is what this foot dragging reveals about the mindset of Goodell. If he was willing to see Peterson back on the field in the near future, he wouldn't have picked this fight with the NFLPA.

Whats important about that is that if Goodell absolutely does not want Peterson back on the field this season, he can almost certainly find some way to make that happen. If the NFLPA wins this round of arbitration, and it doesnt get further tied up in court somehow, Goodell can certainly drop the hammer with a suspension and start the whole legal process over again. The NFL has the money and the lawyers to keep AP off the field if thats what they intend to do.

It seems pretty clear that Goodell isnt ok with AP being back at this point, so the question is just how not ok is he. Either way, he seemed a lot more likely to play last week when it was speculated that APs lawyers and the NFL had a wink and a nod deal set up with the no contest plea. The legal merits arent really the deciding issue here in the next couple of months.

 

[shader]

This really is turning into a joke. Dealing him a penalty or suspension or whatever is one thing, but hanging a player out in limbo like this while weeks go by is ridiculous.

Poor guy. I feel really sorry for him. I mean, all he did was give one son a black eye and give another bloody marks all over their legs. But hey, those will heal, kids are resilient.

I mean, he can't play football this week? Poor guy. I guess he'll just have to cash his weekly check for 691,176.50 and try to put his head down and get through this tough time in his life.

 

[Tango]

This really is turning into a joke. Dealing him a penalty or suspension or whatever is one thing, but hanging a player out in limbo like this while weeks go by is ridiculous.

Poor guy. I feel really sorry for him. I mean, all he did was give one son a black eye and give another bloody marks all over their legs. But hey, those will heal, kids are resilient.

I mean, he can't play football this week? Poor guy. I guess he'll just have to cash his weekly check for 691,176.50 and try to put his head down and get through this tough time in his life.

hard to argue with this....

 

[LawFitz]

Whats being lost here is what this foot dragging reveals about the mindset of Goodell. If he was willing to see Peterson back on the field in the near future, he wouldn't have picked this fight with the NFLPA.

Whats important about that is that if Goodell absolutely does not want Peterson back on the field this season, he can almost certainly find some way to make that happen. If the NFLPA wins this round of arbitration, and it doesnt get further tied up in court somehow, Goodell can certainly drop the hammer with a suspension and start the whole legal process over again. The NFL has the money and the lawyers to keep AP off the field if thats what they intend to do.

It seems pretty clear that Goodell isnt ok with AP being back at this point, so the question is just how not ok is he. Either way, he seemed a lot more likely to play last week when it was speculated that APs lawyers and the NFL had a wink and a nod deal set up with the no contest plea. The legal merits arent really the deciding issue here in the next couple of months.

The other side of this same speculative coin is that Goodell & Co. are presenting the optics of a full and diligent investigative process before letting him back on the field. CYA style.

 

[shader]

The NFL needs to suspend him for the year and move on. Did you beat two kids? Yes? Well here's the deal, you are suspended a year. It's a sick travesty that Justin Blackmon is suspended for a year because he has a drinking problem, but Adrian Peterson beats his kid and might not lose any money and come back this year.

When you beat weaker members of the public, be it your wife, kids, girlfriend or random strangers, you need to get thrown out of the league for a year. I think the NFL finally realizes that this is illogical, and now the NFLPA and many writers, (like profootballtalk) are trying to take them to the woodshed for trying to be make an example of Peterson.

I don't get this, it's not rocket science. Hold a press conference and say "from now on if you physically assault someone, you are automatically suspended for a year. if you sexually assault someone, you are banned for life'. End of story.

 

[LawFitz]

This really is turning into a joke. Dealing him a penalty or suspension or whatever is one thing, but hanging a player out in limbo like this while weeks go by is ridiculous.

Poor guy. I feel really sorry for him. I mean, all he did was give one son a black eye and give another bloody marks all over their legs. But hey, those will heal, kids are resilient.

I mean, he can't play football this week? Poor guy. I guess he'll just have to cash his weekly check for 691,176.50 and try to put his head down and get through this tough time in his life.

hard to argue with this....

No one is arguing that AP is a good guy or to be felt sorry for. Just that he's served his punishment and it's time to get back to football.

I learned years ago with Michael Vick to isolate character concerns to the field, save for suspension probabilities. As a pitbull owner and a dad, I abhor what these two #######s did. But these situations present a prisoner's dilemma for fantasy football owners, because if you choose not to roster these types of guys, you may be facing them in the playoffs when they go for 40 pts in the second half of week 15 against the Gmen.

 

[I Am the Stig]

The NFL needs to suspend him for the year and move on. Did you beat two kids? Yes? Well here's the deal, you are suspended a year. It's a sick travesty that Justin Blackmon is suspended for a year because he has a drinking problem, but Adrian Peterson beats his kid and might not lose any money and come back this year.

When you beat weaker members of the public, be it your wife, kids, girlfriend or random strangers, you need to get thrown out of the league for a year. I think the NFL finally realizes that this is illogical, and now the NFLPA and many writers, (like profootballtalk) are trying to take them to the woodshed for trying to be make an example of Peterson.

I don't get this, it's not rocket science. Hold a press conference and say "from now on if you physically assault someone, you are automatically suspended for a year. if you sexually assault someone, you are banned for life'. End of story.

I don't think anyone here has a problem with AP being punished. What is up for debate is the NFL not making ANY decision.

End of Story

 

[Rimez]

The NFL needs to suspend him for the year and move on. Did you beat two kids? Yes? Well here's the deal, you are suspended a year. It's a sick travesty that Justin Blackmon is suspended for a year because he has a drinking problem, but Adrian Peterson beats his kid and might not lose any money and come back this year.

When you beat weaker members of the public, be it your wife, kids, girlfriend or random strangers, you need to get thrown out of the league for a year. I think the NFL finally realizes that this is illogical, and now the NFLPA and many writers, (like profootballtalk) are trying to take them to the woodshed for trying to be make an example of Peterson.

I don't get this, it's not rocket science. Hold a press conference and say "from now on if you physically assault someone, you are automatically suspended for a year. if you sexually assault someone, you are banned for life'. End of story.

Whoa whoa whoa captain soapbox, this is a fantasy football forum, if you want to cry about violent people playing a violent sport doing violent things then go write a blog about it, or you could always turn off the tv and go protest in a stadium parking lot instead of tuning in on sundays and enabling their game checks.

 

[mbuehner]

Interesting that nobody seems to have a problem with the legal system giving AP probation, but the indignation of what his employers should be doing to him is off the chart.

 

[Insein]

The NFL could have reinstated him and he'd be back at practice getting ready for football. The story would been gone by next week. Instead they drag it out and tarnish the shield more. Because whether you're embarrassing yourself by showing how incompetent you are at handling a PR situation or showing the general non football public how bad your players are by increasing APs exposure for weeks longer, they are doing more damage to their image by prolonging this than moving to put it behind them.

 

[JimmyJabroni]

so probably on the field for week13, if there is no further punishment?

It sounds that way. Unless the process goes a little quicker.

And assuming the Vikings management welcome him back.

As pointed before, the Vikings schedule is not too favorable to RBs on weeks 15 and 16. Pretty good otherwise (Jets, Panthers, and Bears on weeks 13, 14, and 17 respectively)

Thanks for the info. But most owners who got him didn't have to give up much, only be first to take a chance on him. So anything he can get is good...especially since he'd be my 3rd RB and I'd be starting him in flex.

 

[Joe Summer]

Interesting that nobody seems to have a problem with the legal system giving AP probation, but the indignation of what his employers should be doing to him is off the chart.

Lots of people have a problem with AP getting probation. Lots of people can understand the thread title, too.

 

[4th&inches]

Thanks for the info. But most owners who got him didn't have to give up much, only be first to take a chance on him. So anything he can get is good...especially since he'd be my 3rd RB and I'd be starting him in flex.

Speak for yourself. I'm thinking most people either drafted him & have been burning a roster spot for him or used a good chunck of their FAAB budget to acquire him.

 

[JimmyJabroni]

This really is turning into a joke. Dealing him a penalty or suspension or whatever is one thing, but hanging a player out in limbo like this while weeks go by is ridiculous.

Poor guy. I feel really sorry for him. I mean, all he did was give one son a black eye and give another bloody marks all over their legs. But hey, those will heal, kids are resilient.

I mean, he can't play football this week? Poor guy. I guess he'll just have to cash his weekly check for 691,176.50 and try to put his head down and get through this tough time in his life.

No one is saying to feel sorry for him. People are saying, make a decision and go by the processes that all players have to go by instead of acting like a dictator and making up whatever rules he wants on whatever whim he has. If that decision is a suspension based on some policy, so be it.

 

[Tango]

The NFL could have reinstated him and he'd be back at practice getting ready for football.

The NFL reinstating him does not get AP on the field. The Vikings ownership has not made up their mind of what they want to do with him.

Instead they drag it out and tarnish the shield more. Because whether you're embarrassing yourself by showing how incompetent you are at handling a PR situation or showing the general non football public how bad your players are by increasing APs exposure for weeks longer, they are doing more damage to their image by prolonging this than moving to put it behind them.

No. While I am no fan of the NFL or RG, at the very least the NFL must put on a dog-and-pony to look diligent in attempting to gather all of the facts before rendering any kind of decision. You're suggesting they repeat some of the key mistakes of the Rice investigation...Not. Going. To. Happen. They will do everything they can to appear as if they have done their due diligence.

 

[JimmyJabroni]

Thanks for the info. But most owners who got him didn't have to give up much, only be first to take a chance on him. So anything he can get is good...especially since he'd be my 3rd RB and I'd be starting him in flex.

Speak for yourself. I'm thinking most people either drafted him & have been burning a roster spot for him or used a good chunck of their FAAB budget to acquire him.

Maybe. I don't remember what his ownership percentage was but I know lots dropped him and then there was a rush last week to get hiim. That's what I was speaking too. What difference does it make? If you held him or spent a lot of FAAB to get him, or got him for next to nothing in the wire rush last week, I still think he's a start regardless of his matchup, or else what was the point in getting him or holding him.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

The NFL could have reinstated him and he'd be back at practice getting ready for football. The story would been gone by next week. Instead they drag it out and tarnish the shield more. Because whether you're embarrassing yourself by showing how incompetent you are at handling a PR situation or showing the general non football public how bad your players are by increasing APs exposure for weeks longer, they are doing more damage to their image by prolonging this than moving to put it behind them.

I think you are way off here, draggin it out does not tarnish the shield at all. Sure it hurts our magic football teams.

But ADP not being on the field doesnt hurt the shield one bit and if anything appeases some sponsors

 

[JimmyJabroni]

Hearing is set for Monday the 17th

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11859236/adrian-peterson-grievance-hearing-nfl-set-monday-nov-17

 

[4th&inches]

Thanks for the info. But most owners who got him didn't have to give up much, only be first to take a chance on him. So anything he can get is good...especially since he'd be my 3rd RB and I'd be starting him in flex.

Speak for yourself. I'm thinking most people either drafted him & have been burning a roster spot for him or used a good chunck of their FAAB budget to acquire him.

Maybe. I don't remember what his ownership percentage was but I know lots dropped him and then there was a rush last week to get hiim. That's what I was speaking too. What difference does it make? If you held him or spent a lot of FAAB to get him, or got him for next to nothing in the wire rush last week, I still think he's a start regardless of his matchup, or else what was the point in getting him or holding him.

Oh, I agree 100%. All I was saying is that I'd think he'd be a RB1 or RB2 at worst on most people's teams. Regardless, once he's back (hopefully) I can't see a matchup where you wouldn't start him.

 

[TDorBust]

The NFL could have reinstated him and he'd be back at practice getting ready for football. The story would been gone by next week. Instead they drag it out and tarnish the shield more. Because whether you're embarrassing yourself by showing how incompetent you are at handling a PR situation or showing the general non football public how bad your players are by increasing APs exposure for weeks longer, they are doing more damage to their image by prolonging this than moving to put it behind them.

I think you are way off here, draggin it out does not tarnish the shield at all. Sure it hurts our magic football teams.

But ADP not being on the field doesnt hurt the shield one bit and if anything appeases some sponsors

I think it appeases sponsors and the people who the NFL is scared of losing are also appeased. Be serious is the NFL worried about their image for you or me? Or the fair weather fan who might watch the Super Bowl and hear about the NFL on their local radio/tv?

I feel by actually putting up a fight they make it look like they are fighting for the right, even if they care less.

 

[Insein]

The NFL could have reinstated him and he'd be back at practice getting ready for football. The story would been gone by next week. Instead they drag it out and tarnish the shield more. Because whether you're embarrassing yourself by showing how incompetent you are at handling a PR situation or showing the general non football public how bad your players are by increasing APs exposure for weeks longer, they are doing more damage to their image by prolonging this than moving to put it behind them.

I think you are way off here, draggin it out does not tarnish the shield at all. Sure it hurts our magic football teams.But ADP not being on the field doesnt hurt the shield one bit and if anything appeases some sponsors

Let's look at his realistically. Not in a moral scope but a view of the masses and their attention span. No one cared about Rice until the video. Few even knew what he did. The video was a game changer but even now, only 2 months later, the majority of people either don't care or do but don't feel like wasting the energy getting angry again.

That's how most PR crisis blow over. You address it in a definitive matter, let the public react and then watch it fade away. If you keep it in the public's face though, you give them a reason to stay angry. Those that want AP done for the year are angry he's not suspended yet. Those that want him back are angry because you're hurting their magic football and they only mildly know what he did.

Quick decisive action is the way to go. That's how you handle a PR crisis.

 

[JimmyJabroni]

Looks like 6 more days of speculation and arguments in this thread before any new info

 

[Sabertooth]

I'll just be happy that he's going to #### or got off the pot before the fantasy playoffs.

 

[Tango]

The NFL could have reinstated him and he'd be back at practice getting ready for football. The story would been gone by next week. Instead they drag it out and tarnish the shield more. Because whether you're embarrassing yourself by showing how incompetent you are at handling a PR situation or showing the general non football public how bad your players are by increasing APs exposure for weeks longer, they are doing more damage to their image by prolonging this than moving to put it behind them.

I think you are way off here, draggin it out does not tarnish the shield at all. Sure it hurts our magic football teams.But ADP not being on the field doesnt hurt the shield one bit and if anything appeases some sponsors

Let's look at his realistically. Not in a moral scope but a view of the masses and their attention span. No one cared about Rice until the video. Few even knew what he did. The video was a game changer but even now, only 2 months later, the majority of people either don't care or do but don't feel like wasting the energy getting angry again.

That's how most PR crisis blow over. You address it in a definitive matter, let the public react and then watch it fade away. If you keep it in the public's face though, you give them a reason to stay angry. Those that want AP done for the year are angry he's not suspended yet. Those that want him back are angry because you're hurting their magic football and they only mildly know what he did.

Quick decisive action is the way to go. That's how you handle a PR crisis.

Wait, what?

You're suggesting the NFL "quickly and decisively" reinstate him?...without trying to obtain or understand the known evidence that is out there? Or are you saying quickly suspend him? Of those two options, the suspension thing is the only logical one but I suspect they'd need more evidence to do so.

The reinstate him "quickly and decisively" idea is, if it's that you're suggesting....WILL. NOT. HAPPEN.

Because if they did reinstate him w/o trying to gather the known facts that are in a sealed envelope somewhere....when the evidence eventually does become available b/c TMZ or whomever outscoops the NFL yet again, and who-knows-what is revealed, ...if it's damaging, then that could result in Ray Rice Scandal x1000 b/c it will prove to all of the do-gooders out there that the NFL learned absolutely nothing from the Ray Rice case. Holy moly.

 

[mbuehner]

Interesting that nobody seems to have a problem with the legal system giving AP probation, but the indignation of what his employers should be doing to him is off the chart.

Lots of people have a problem with AP getting probation. Lots of people can understand the thread title, too.

As you jump in and do it yourself. Good times.

 

[cstu]

Wait, what?

You're suggesting the NFL "quickly and decisively" reinstate him?...without trying to obtain or understand the known evidence that is out there? Or are you saying quickly suspend him? Of those two options, the suspension thing is the only logical one but I suspect they'd need more evidence to do so.

The reinstate him "quickly and decisively" idea is, if it's that you're suggesting....WILL. NOT. HAPPEN.

Because if they did reinstate him w/o trying to gather the known facts that are in a sealed envelope somewhere....when the evidence eventually does become available b/c TMZ or whomever outscoops the NFL yet again, and who-knows-what is revealed, ...if it's damaging, then that could result in Ray Rice Scandal x1000 b/c it will prove to all of the do-gooders out there that the NFL learned absolutely nothing from the Ray Rice case. Holy moly.

You made a good case and I can see where he's coming from now. He'd rather deal with the fallout of handling this poorly then the fallout if the records do get make public and there's something shocking in there. At least he can tell the do-gooders now that he tried but the court made him re-instate him.

 

[Insein]

The NFL could have reinstated him and he'd be back at practice getting ready for football. The story would been gone by next week. Instead they drag it out and tarnish the shield more. Because whether you're embarrassing yourself by showing how incompetent you are at handling a PR situation or showing the general non football public how bad your players are by increasing APs exposure for weeks longer, they are doing more damage to their image by prolonging this than moving to put it behind them.

I think you are way off here, draggin it out does not tarnish the shield at all. Sure it hurts our magic football teams.But ADP not being on the field doesnt hurt the shield one bit and if anything appeases some sponsors

Let's look at his realistically. Not in a moral scope but a view of the masses and their attention span. No one cared about Rice until the video. Few even knew what he did. The video was a game changer but even now, only 2 months later, the majority of people either don't care or do but don't feel like wasting the energy getting angry again.That's how most PR crisis blow over. You address it in a definitive matter, let the public react and then watch it fade away. If you keep it in the public's face though, you give them a reason to stay angry. Those that want AP done for the year are angry he's not suspended yet. Those that want him back are angry because you're hurting their magic football and they only mildly know what he did.

Quick decisive action is the way to go. That's how you handle a PR crisis.

Wait, what?

You're suggesting the NFL "quickly and decisively" reinstate him?...without trying to obtain or understand the known evidence that is out there? Or are you saying quickly suspend him? Of those two options, the suspension thing is the only logical one but I suspect they'd need more evidence to do so.

The reinstate him "quickly and decisively" idea is, if it's that you're suggesting....WILL. NOT. HAPPEN.

Because if they did reinstate him w/o trying to gather the known facts that are in a sealed envelope somewhere....when the evidence eventually does become available b/c TMZ or whomever outscoops the NFL yet again, and who-knows-what is revealed, ...if it's damaging, then that could result in Ray Rice Scandal x1000 b/c it will prove to all of the do-gooders out there that the NFL learned absolutely nothing from the Ray Rice case. Holy moly.

The Ray Rice problem again from a PR perspective is that they backtracked on their previous position. If they suspended Rice 6 games from the get go and then the video came out, there's a backlash but you stand firm and it goes away. Even with the 2 games, if they stood firm, it would have gone away. I'm not saying that's right or wrong it just is what it is.

Look at politics. Those that address an issue and get in front of it take the initial backlash but then its over. Those that don't deal with it and try to hide it or change their positions get worse PR hits. Just the way the masses work.

We have so many things in our lives that we have to worry about. Our kids, our jobs, eat, sleep, what to watch on TV tonight, goto the gym, veg on the couch, does the chick from accounting dig me or that mail room guy (whatever your persuasion), commute to work, what to wear tomorrow, gifts for family for the holidays, am I getting too fat, get a haircut, walk the dog, feed the cat, why does my neighbor park in front of my house, etc. So we have very little additional time saved for our outrage at social issues. We may be righteously angry at first but out of sight out of mind. If still in our sight though, the easier it is to stay outraged... At least until the new Dancing with the Stars comes on.

Get it done quickly and decisively and then move on with either decision. NFL will f that up hough.

 

[JoeyJoJoJuniorShabadoo]

so probably on the field for week13, if there is no further punishment?

It sounds that way. Unless the process goes a little quicker.

And assuming the Vikings management welcome him back.

As pointed before, the Vikings schedule is not too favorable to RBs on weeks 15 and 16. Pretty good otherwise (Jets, Panthers, and Bears on weeks 13, 14, and 17 respectively)

Thanks for the info. But most owners who got him didn't have to give up much, only be first to take a chance on him. So anything he can get is good...especially since he'd be my 3rd RB and I'd be starting him in flex.

In my 3 leagues the owner has held on to him waiting this out.

 

[tjnc09]

Goodell purposely moving all decisions to after week 11 so the six game suspension covers weeks 12-17

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Goodell purposely moving all decisions to after week 11 so the six game suspension covers weeks 12-17

:X Getting a sickening feeling you're right. Only question is if the Union will be able to stop it.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

It may end up being a six-game suspension but I don't think that's the only possibility. The new domestic violence policy states:

Effective immediately, violations of the Personal Conduct Policy regarding assault, battery, domestic violence or sexual assault that involve physical force will be subject to a suspension without pay of six games for a first offense, with consideration given to mitigating factors, as well as a longer suspension when circumstances warrant. Among the circumstances that would merit a more severe penalty would be a prior incident before joining the NFL, or violence involving a weapon, choking, repeated striking, or when the act is committed against a pregnant woman or in the presence of a child.

One could argue (a) that beating a child falls under the circumstances that would merit a more severe penalty, or (b) that this policy doesn't apply to beating a child at all, in which case Peterson would just be getting punished under the Personal Conduct Policy, in which case I think Goodell would have more leeway in determining the length of the suspension (shorter or longer).

I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up being six games, spanning weeks 12-17, but I don't think we should be getting hung up on the number six as if it's that or nothing.

 

[General Tso]

Roger Goodell is one of the most incompetent leaders I think I've ever seen. Indecisive, capricious, unfair, doesn't stay true to his word... Good leaders are described with the exact opposite qualities.

 

[Lascelle]

Roger Goodell is one of the most incompetent leaders I think I've ever seen. Indecisive, capricious, unfair, doesn't stay true to his word... Good leaders are described with the exact opposite qualities.

So what you're saying is that we need the Roger Goodell from Bizzaro World to be the commissioner of the NFL.

I wonder if he would also make $44 million a year for doing such an excellent job.

 

[MaxThreshold]

Does everyone understand what "sealed" records are? especially in the case of a juvenile? We got some posters that still think they can be handed over to the NFL, Peterson or anyone else besides "the public". That's simply not the case. The judge is NOT going to release the records because of the age of the child, and certainly not to the NFL.

I don't know how the NFL can even ask Peterson for them. The NFL simply has no grounds to keep him off the field anymore. They have ZERO case.

Yes, I am a Peterson owner.

 

[I Am the Stig]

Does everyone understand what "sealed" records are? especially in the case of a juvenile? We got some posters that still think they can be handed over to the NFL, Peterson or anyone else besides "the public". That's simply not the case. The judge is NOT going to release the records because of the age of the child, and certainly not to the NFL.

I don't know how the NFL can even ask Peterson for them.

Who in this forum led you to believe that the sealed records could be turned over? Because it is a argument I haven't seen anyone state.

 

[BigJim®]

I actually don't have a problem with how the NFL is playing this out, even considering the agreement between NFL/NFLPA/Vikings. JMHO, people are completely ignoring the final sentence of the NFLPAs own description of the agreement:

“The player agrees that, effective as of yesterday (September 17, 2014), he is placed on the Commissioner-Exempt list with full pay until the criminal charges currently pending against him are adjudicated. No discipline will be processed or imposed against the player, by the Club or the League, until after the pending criminal charges are adjudicated.”

So, the league has promised not to "process" discipline until after the legal resolution, which is exactly what it is doing.

After the Ray Rice debacle, the NFL and Ravens were rightfully pummeled for not even attempting to get a tape that existed, and then it wound up on TMZ. Consequently, the NFL is (wisely I'd say) trying to get the facts that would otherwise have become public at trial, and could certainly become public, which makes sense. The NFL undoubtedly expects to be denied access to the AP evidence, but last thing the NFL needs is to decide not to punish AP based on assumption it won't have access, and then lo and behold 'unavailable' new photos are released by TMZ. Then the NFL is crucified for, not once but twice in the same season, failure to use all efforts possible to seek evidence. If they are denied the info legally, they have cover. Just as they'd have had cover if they had better proof of demand and denial of that Rice video.

Any event, to read the NFL/NFLPA/Viking agreement and conclude the NFL had to act immediately after this case was settled behind closed doors with sealed records is not logical. It's plainly agreed the NFL could not begin processing possible discipline until the legalities were adjudicated, and that is exactly what they are attempting now. That processing is complicated by limited access to the types of information the NFL should absolutely be considering, given the alleged/admitted abuse of a 4 year old child.