Adrian Peterson Status Updates (1 Viewer)

[mbuehner]

This guy is still receiving game checks for doing nothing, right?

He's receiving checks for abiding by the contract he signed. Vikings could have cut him.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Some useful information on the exempt list:

The Minnesota Vikings took advantage of a rarely-used NFL protocol Wednesday, placing Adrian Peterson on the exempt/commissioner's permission list while the running back goes through the legal process after being indicted for child abuse last week. The list, used to allow players who are dealing with significant off-field situations, will allow the Vikings to remove Peterson from their 53-man roster.

Peterson will be barred from all team activities in the meantime, which sounds like a suspension except that Peterson will be paid during his leave. The decision whether to pay the player falls on the team. Players placed on the exempt list can be held with or without pay at the team's discretion.

Players must consent before being placed on the list, allowing the NFL Players Association to call Peterson's placement a "voluntary leave with pay."

As the name of the list suggests, players can only be placed on the exempt/commissioner's permission list with clearance from Roger Goodell. From the NFL Player Personnel Policy Manual:

The Exempt List is a special player status available to clubs only in unusual circumstances. The List includes those players who have been declared by the Commissioner to be temporarily exempt from counting within the Active List limit. Only the Commissioner has the authority to place a player on the Exempt List; clubs have no such authority, and no exemption, regardless of circumstances, is automatic. The Commissioner also has the authority to determine in advance whether a player's time on the Exempt List will be finite or will continue until the Commissioner deems the exemption should be lifted and the player returned to the Active List.

As the policy states, players are also removed from the list at the commissioner's discretion. In Peterson's case, he is expected to remain on the list until a resolution has been reached in his child abuse case.

The exempt list allows teams to get around the maximum four-game suspension or deactivation allowed by the Collective Bargaining Agreement for conduct detrimental to the team. In Peterson's case, legal proceedings are expected to extend past the next month.

Notably, Carolina Panthers defensive end Greg Hardy may also soon join Peterson on the exempt list. Hardy was convicted in July of assaulting and threatening an ex-girlfriend, but has appealed the decision. As the Vikings did with Peterson, the Panthers decided not to suspend Hardy as he goes through due process. The exempt list, again, would allow the team to get around the four-game maximum penalty for detrimental conduct.

The exempt/commissioner's permission list was used perhaps most notably in the past on Michael Vick when the quarterback finished serving his jail sentence and suspension in 2009 for his participation in a dogfighting ring. The list has been used in less dubious circumstances, however. For example, Jeff Demps was placed on the list in 2013 while the Tampa Bay Buccaneers running back was trying to make the U.S. Olympic track team.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Latest news makes me think he doesn't play this year.

 

[Sabertooth]

We shall see. But any playing this year is gravy.

 

[BigJim®]

NFL will now review Peterson for potential discipline Posted by: Matt Vensel Updated November 6th at 2:49pm 281822891

The Vikings are waiting for the NFL to make a decision regarding Adrian Peterson’s future before deciding whether to welcome him back to the team. It appears that decision could take a while.

The NFL advised the Vikings running back this afternoon that he will be reviewed for potential discipline under the NFL’s personal conduct policy after he entered into a plea agreement in Texas, avoiding jail time by pleading no contest to a misdemeanor for recklessly injuring his 4-year-old son.

The league has requested that Peterson “submit relevant information regarding his case and meet with designated experts who will make recommendations for the Commissioner’s consideration,” according to a league spokesman. Peterson will also have the opportunity to have a hearing with the NFL — presumably with commissioner Roger Goodell — before any discipline is handed down.

In the meantime, Peterson will remain on the commissioner’s exempt list, keeping his status for the Week 11 game against the Bears — and potentially the rest of the 2014 season — in doubt.

Peterson hasn’t played since Week 1. He still gets paid by the Vikings while on the exempt list.

Information requests, meetings with designated experts (as in plural), then expert recommendations being created and provided to Goodell, opportunity to meet with Goodell. Sounds like a contrived process to ensure sufficient delay to me....

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Latest news makes me think he doesn't play this year.

What news??

 

[snogger]

Latest news makes me think he doesn't play this year.

What news??

That the Commish is delaying any action until they review the case.. And of course that review is under their own timelines so it could be complete next week, or next year..

Unlike Ray Rice who isn't getting paid.. ADP is getting paid and thus the Commish can take his own sweet time without having to worry about a lawsuit..

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

This is Schefter, almost an hour ago:

NFL advised Adrian Peterson this afternoon that following his plea agreement to resolve his criminal case in Texas his matter will now be reviewed for potential discipline under the NFL’s Personal Conduct Policy. As part of the process, the NFL has requested that Peterson submit relevant information regarding his case and meet with designated experts who will make recommendations for the Commissioner’s consideration. Peterson also will have the opportunity to have a hearing prior to the issuance of any discipline.
Pending completion of the process, Peterson's status on the Reserve/Commissioner Exempt list will remain unchanged.

 

[mnmplayer]

I am not saying that he planned this, of course he did not, but if he doesn't play another down this year the end result is:

1. He played one game and got paid for 16.

2. He saved a years worth of wear and tear on his body for next season and is a major positive selling point his agent will use in selling him to a new team. "Yea he is 30, but he missed a whole year of wear and tear last year."

3. Not only did he get paid, he got paid lucrative money. This isn't a situation where he is still needing to prove anything in a contract year to get paid (where he is currently under contract for peanuts), this is a guy already proven and receiving a huge salary, one that is paid to superstars in their prime. He has nothing to prove and if he just relaxes the rest of this year imo his football stock (strictly in football terms, not image) for next year actually goes up from where it might have been had he taken another year of risk to injury and wear and tear. Its like getting an extra year of prime time salary for doing nothing, and extra year of superstar salary with no risk to his body, because he has that much more in the tank for next season and his career.

4. I can already see the articles next season for FFB, "Peterson had a year off to get healthy, yeah he's 30 but he's playing as if he was only 29 this season."

"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose." Roman 8:28

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

NFL will now review Peterson for potential discipline Posted by: Matt Vensel Updated November 6th at 2:49pm 281822891

The Vikings are waiting for the NFL to make a decision regarding Adrian Peterson’s future before deciding whether to welcome him back to the team. It appears that decision could take a while.

The NFL advised the Vikings running back this afternoon that he will be reviewed for potential discipline under the NFL’s personal conduct policy after he entered into a plea agreement in Texas, avoiding jail time by pleading no contest to a misdemeanor for recklessly injuring his 4-year-old son.

The league has requested that Peterson “submit relevant information regarding his case and meet with designated experts who will make recommendations for the Commissioner’s consideration,” according to a league spokesman. Peterson will also have the opportunity to have a hearing with the NFL — presumably with commissioner Roger Goodell — before any discipline is handed down.

In the meantime, Peterson will remain on the commissioner’s exempt list, keeping his status for the Week 11 game against the Bears — and potentially the rest of the 2014 season — in doubt.

Peterson hasn’t played since Week 1. He still gets paid by the Vikings while on the exempt list.

Information requests, meetings with designated experts (as in plural), then expert recommendations being created and provided to Goodell, opportunity to meet with Goodell. Sounds like a contrived process to ensure sufficient delay to me....

That's not the article. There's good stuff in that article.

One likely scenario for Goodell would be to suspend Peterson retroactively for the eight games he has missed and then fine the running back an amount equal to the salary he earned during that time, said Michael McCann, the founding director of the New Hampshire-based Sports and Entertainment Law Institute.

While the move would cost Peterson millions in lost salary, McCann said, it would get the running back on the field quickly and allow Goodell to wash his hands of the matter while also appearing to take a tough stance.

“That’s a long suspension for a misdemeanor,” McCann said, adding that Peterson could balk at the deal. But with the other player discipline problems Goodell is facing, McCann added, the NFL commissioner would avoid having to “fight another player on a penalty.”

McCann said such an agreement could happen quickly, and even allow Peterson to play in the Vikings’ next game.

“There’s a good chance of that happening,” he said.

There is also this:

According to Richard Roth of the Roth Law Firm in New York, the NFL still could choose to punish Peterson even though he has pleaded no contest to a misdemeanor and already sat out eight games while his legal process played out. Roth, who has represented NFL players in matters of litigation and league discipline, said Goodell could opt to suspend Peterson additional games or impose a substantial fine.

“The NFL has had occasion to actually punish football players for having misdemeanors,” Roth said. “The problem is multiple. For one, this is a very hot issue. You’ve got the Ray Rice thing and everything coming down on the NFL, so they’ve got to figure out what the heck to do about that. And number two, this isn’t just a misdemeanor. He hit his kid pretty hard. So it’s not just like walking into a store and stealing a bottle of mouthwash. It’s not an easy situation that Goodell is in.”

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/281670551.html?page=all&prepage=1&c=y#continue

Really a recap of the positions taken here. However I still think it behooves the NFL to maintain a distinction between Rice - whom the NFL claims personally lied to Goodell - and Peterson who has done everything in the process properly. I also think that domestic violence policy is paper thin with regards to this case, and I also believe Rog and the owners would very much like to keep him from testifying again. Anything that results in AP suing Rog and the NFL is not happening IMO.

 

[cstu]

Really a recap of the positions taken here. However I still think it behooves the NFL to maintain a distinction between Rice - whom the NFL claims personally lied to Goodell - and Peterson who has done everything in the process properly. I also think that domestic violence policy is paper thin with regards to this case, and I also believe Rog and the owners would very much like to keep him from testifying again. Anything that results in AP suing Rog and the NFL is not happening IMO.

The purpose of the domestic violence policy was to discourage players from hitting women. Goodell would have a difficult time proving that he meant it to apply to misdemeanor reckless discipline of children. Suspending him six more games would end Goodell in court defending himself.

 

[Shutout]

Really a recap of the positions taken here. However I still think it behooves the NFL to maintain a distinction between Rice - whom the NFL claims personally lied to Goodell - and Peterson who has done everything in the process properly. I also think that domestic violence policy is paper thin with regards to this case, and I also believe Rog and the owners would very much like to keep him from testifying again. Anything that results in AP suing Rog and the NFL is not happening IMO.

The purpose of the domestic violence policy was to discourage players from hitting women. Goodell would have a difficult time proving that he meant it to apply to misdemeanor reckless discipline of children. Suspending him six more games would end Goodell in court defending himself.

I don't buy that line of thinking. The intent of the policy was to address an area woefully lacking; violence initiated by players and deterring such acts. Its academic that it was violence against a child vs. a woman. That would be like the NFL instituting a specific policy on rape and then trying to argue that it was intended for women and not children. It still carries.

Just my opinion but what I said yesterday seems to be more and more the case to me-he was not suspended before and now he still has to satisfy that aspect of this, not buy his way out and serve one side (the money side). He was on paid leave, essentially. Now comes the "ok, we waited for the legal part to play out, where does that leave us in interpreting if he broke an NFL policy and, if so, what is the punishment."

The part Peterson has nowhere to hang his hat on is he hasn't been harmed. He can't say "I need to play because that is how I earn money". He is getting his money. Which, now, looks genius from the team and NFL standpoint because had they suspended him, awaiting outcome, he could say "I already served suspension time". He didn't If the team didn't pay him, he could argue hardship. But he can't. If ANYTHING, the NFL is doing him a favor....full pay with no injury risk. THey are HELPING him extend his career.

This thing can drag as long as is practical.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Dropped by Nike today, according to Darren Rovell.

 

[Gopher State]

Really a recap of the positions taken here. However I still think it behooves the NFL to maintain a distinction between Rice - whom the NFL claims personally lied to Goodell - and Peterson who has done everything in the process properly. I also think that domestic violence policy is paper thin with regards to this case, and I also believe Rog and the owners would very much like to keep him from testifying again. Anything that results in AP suing Rog and the NFL is not happening IMO.

The purpose of the domestic violence policy was to discourage players from hitting women. Goodell would have a difficult time proving that he meant it to apply to misdemeanor reckless discipline of children. Suspending him six more games would end Goodell in court defending himself.

I don't buy that line of thinking. The intent of the policy was to address an area woefully lacking; violence initiated by players and deterring such acts. Its academic that it was violence against a child vs. a woman. That would be like the NFL instituting a specific policy on rape and then trying to argue that it was intended for women and not children. It still carries.

Just my opinion but what I said yesterday seems to be more and more the case to me-he was not suspended before and now he still has to satisfy that aspect of this, not buy his way out and serve one side (the money side). He was on paid leave, essentially. Now comes the "ok, we waited for the legal part to play out, where does that leave us in interpreting if he broke an NFL policy and, if so, what is the punishment."

The part Peterson has nowhere to hang his hat on is he hasn't been harmed. He can't say "I need to play because that is how I earn money". He is getting his money. Which, now, looks genius from the team and NFL standpoint because had they suspended him, awaiting outcome, he could say "I already served suspension time". He didn't If the team didn't pay him, he could argue hardship. But he can't. If ANYTHING, the NFL is doing him a favor....full pay with no injury risk. THey are HELPING him extend his career.

This thing can drag as long as is practical.

So now it's A.P. legal team vs the NFL, it take them weeks to resolve this, and since he's being paid no loss to him. He may not get suspended, but I guess we don't see him on the field before week 15, as the process plays out. Bad break to those who rushed out and picked him up for a week 11 start

 

[cstu]

So now it's A.P. legal team vs the NFL, it take them weeks to resolve this, and since he's being paid no loss to him. He may not get suspended, but I guess we don't see him on the field before week 15, as the process plays out. Bad break to those who rushed out and picked him up for a week 11 start

He was put on the exemption list pending the outcome of the trial, don't think they can (or want to) drag this out for weeks. Either suspend him 6 games or reinstate him.

 

[ryno1980]

If the new rule of 6 games applies to this case, I don't understand how they can force him to an exempt list for longer than that in the first place. Why wasn't he just suspended six games to begin with? Isn't that one point of the standard for rules, so there's not all this speculation about oh what's Goodell going to do?

 

[Rockchild]

So now it's A.P. legal team vs the NFL, it take them weeks to resolve this, and since he's being paid no loss to him. He may not get suspended, but I guess we don't see him on the field before week 15, as the process plays out. Bad break to those who rushed out and picked him up for a week 11 start

He was put on the exemption list pending the outcome of the trial, don't think they can (or want to) drag this out for weeks. Either suspend him 6 games or reinstate him.

They were quick to act to put him on the list so why can't they be just as quick to reinstate him.

 

[mbuehner]

So now it's A.P. legal team vs the NFL, it take them weeks to resolve this, and since he's being paid no loss to him. He may not get suspended, but I guess we don't see him on the field before week 15, as the process plays out. Bad break to those who rushed out and picked him up for a week 11 start

He was put on the exemption list pending the outcome of the trial, don't think they can (or want to) drag this out for weeks. Either suspend him 6 games or reinstate him.

They were quick to act to put him on the list so why can't they be just as quick to reinstate him.

There's a difference between can't and won't.

 

[General Tso]

"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose." Roman 8:28

Why?

Yeah, absolutely no debates about rel

 

[shader]

Peterson is getting paid. I don't see the rush here. Minnesota seems to be in no hurry to get him back. Nike dropped him. He still carries a stigma.

I know many of you Peterson owners really want him to save your season, but it isn't looking good. And why should it? He beat his kids bloody. If he spends a year getting paid and not getting beat up, it's not the end of the world for him and his career.

 

[AgentMulder]

So it's all over?!

 

[AgentMulder]

I need him to play!!!

 

[towney]

Dropped by Nike today, according to Darren Rovell.

That's not a good sign for sponsor's approval. Not looking good with Nike dropping him.

 

[weebs]

So it's all over?!

Nope just everyone giving their opinions on what will happen. I just come to this thread for facts and skim through all the trash tier opinions.

 

[Dizzy]

"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose." Roman 8:28

Why?

Because there's one in every crowd.

 

[White Lightning]

Rotoworld "quote"

NFL.com's Ian Rapoport reports Adrian Peterson's paid leave is "not considered discipline" by the NFL, and that a suspension "looms."

Rotoworld "analysis"

We're actually not so sure about this, as there's been chatter Peterson could reach a settlement with the NFL where he gains credit for time served and pays a fine, thereby making his previous suspension paid. Either way, Rapsheet reports it "could be weeks" before the matter is resolved. We'd guess Peterson plays football again this season, but it's unclear when.

 

[RealReactions]

I'm just hoping vikings push for him to come back seeing they are competitive in their division still.

 

[Jerry Curl]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/vikings-discussing-whether-to-let-adrian-peterson-play-pending-league-action-201429905.html

We could be seeing the wheels in motion for Adrian Peterson returning to active duty in the NFL. The questions we currently have: When will Peterson be active? And will the Minnesota Vikings want him back?

With Peterson entering into a plea agreement in Texas for his child-abuse case, thus avoiding jail time, the matter now rests in the hands of the NFL and commissioner Roger Goodell. At this point, only Goodell can reinstate Peterson from the commissioner’s exempt list, which he was placed on — with pay — after Peterson was charged a count of child injury.

According to the Star Tribune, the Vikings are discussing internally whether to bring Peterson back and let him play this season.

The Vikings can't make a decision on that until the NFL makes a decision on Peterson first. Goodell has met this week with Ray Rice and likely will want to do the same with Peterson before any decision is made.

The NFL released a statement Friday saying that it will be reviewing Peterson's case.

"The NFL advised Adrian Peterson this afternoon that following his plea agreement to resolve his criminal case in Texas his matter will now be reviewed for potential discipline under the NFL's Personal Conduct Policy," the statement reads. "As part of the process, the NFL has requested that Peterson submit relevant information regarding his case and meet with designated experts who will make recommendations for the Commissioner's consideration.

"Peterson also will have the opportunity to have a hearing prior to the issuance of any discipline. Pending completion of the process, Peterson's status on the Reserve/Commissioner Exempt list will remain unchanged."

The third wheel in this situation: the NFLPA. Will the players union feel the need to step in and pressure the league for an expedious process for Peterson? Some of the anti-Peterson fervor has died down, but the union still would be putting itself in the position of defending a player who has admitted to harming his child.

As for the Vikings, they clearly have not made any decisions on the short- or long-term status of the second-leading rusher in franchise history. They built the team this offseason with the idea that Peterson, who has three more years left on his deal after this season, would be a member of the team.

But a lot has changed the past few months. We could see Peterson back on the field, but right now we have no indication that the NFL is in a hurry to rule on his status.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Dropped by Nike today, according to Darren Rovell.

That's not a good sign for sponsor's approval. Not looking good with Nike dropping him.

That's different than the Vikes' sponsors. Radisson was the one that got the Vikes' attention in September.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Rotoworld "quote"

NFL.com's Ian Rapoport reports Adrian Peterson's paid leave is "not considered discipline" by the NFL, and that a suspension "looms."

Rotoworld "analysis"

We're actually not so sure about this, as there's been chatter Peterson could reach a settlement with the NFL where he gains credit for time served and pays a fine, thereby making his previous suspension paid. Either way, Rapsheet reports it "could be weeks" before the matter is resolved. We'd guess Peterson plays football again this season, but it's unclear when.

This is the actual report:

Rapoport spoke with a league source who said it could take anywhere from days to weeks to resolve Peterson's case depending on how fast he provides information.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000423866/article/nfl-reviewing-adrian-peterson-case

The exact language at ~1:29 of the video is:

this will take days, maybe weeks, depending on how quickly Adrian Peterson adheres to these conditions.

The conditions are the requests for information the NFL has issued to AP. - So again pretty much nothing more than what's been said here. Could be days. Could be weeks.

 

[Scoresman]

where's the thread to go to to if i want to debate about child rea

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

where's the thread to go to to if i want to debate about child rea

Hopefully it's in the Free For All.

 

[Insein]

Let's be honest. Vikings at 4-5 want him back yesterday. So they can say all the right things to the public but they want him back.

Goodell is the wild card. This decision very much affects his personal legacy. A lot of moving parts. An owner whom he serves most likely in his ear to get it resolved quickly. A public that may or may not be waning on the topic. A league that lost a lot of luster on its shield this September. A players union that wants a clear set of rules on what is and is not punishable.

So Roger holds all the cards but the longer he waits, the more it looks like he doesn't know what he's doing. A clear decisive answer either way is what's needed now so he can regain some semblance of control.

 

[cstu]

If the new rule of 6 games applies to this case, I don't understand how they can force him to an exempt list for longer than that in the first place. Why wasn't he just suspended six games to begin with? Isn't that one point of the standard for rules, so there's not all this speculation about oh what's Goodell going to do?

He was put on the exemption list because he was charged with a felony that could drag into next year and land him in prison like Vick.

 

[BigJim®]

Let's be honest. Vikings at 4-5 want him back yesterday. So they can say all the right things to the public but they want him back.

Respectfully disagree with this opinion. I don't think the Vikes want anything whatsoever to do with this situation, and would do cartwheels down the hallway if they don't need to do a thing until the offseason.

 

[tjnc09]

Let's be honest. Vikings at 4-5 want him back yesterday. So they can say all the right things to the public but they want him back.

Respectfully disagree with this opinion. I don't think the Vikes want anything whatsoever to do with this situation, and would do cartwheels down the hallway if they don't need to do a thing until the offseason.

Why haven't they cut him then? The pictures were released. The Ravens immediately cut ties with Ray Rice and the same went with Aaron Hernandez back with NE. Do you think they are simply trying to trade him next year? Otherwise, why would they continue to pay him when they could have cut him already.

 

[ryno1980]

Let's be honest. Vikings at 4-5 want him back yesterday. So they can say all the right things to the public but they want him back.

Respectfully disagree with this opinion. I don't think the Vikes want anything whatsoever to do with this situation, and would do cartwheels down the hallway if they don't need to do a thing until the offseason.

The Vikings' coaches and players want him on the field, I can guarantee you that.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Rice and the NFL Players Association contend the league's indefinite suspension constitutes an enhanced punishment for the same violation and thus violates labor law.

From the Ray Rice story. Maybe they do intersect here. If this judge rules for RR then how does the NFL continue to add on extra games for AP?

That issue would be the same for AP. The NFL can claim his being out for 9 weeks is not punishment but it is. The NFL is going to "exempt" him and then suspend him as well?

 

[ryno1980]

Statement released:

[SIZE=12pt]"Our union worked with the NFL, the Minnesota Vikings and Adrian’s representatives on a mutual agreement pending the adjudication of his legal case. Now that his legal matter is resolved, we believe it is Adrian’s right to be treated in a manner that is consistent with similar cases under our collective bargaining agreement. We will pursue any and all remedies if those rights are breached."[/SIZE]

​

[SIZE=12pt]-- NFL Players Association[/SIZE]​

 

[fatness]

Dropped by Nike today, according to Darren Rovell.

Nike's concerned about the reaction of the customers now that Peterson struck a plea deal instead of being found not guilty.

Money talks. Companies listen.

 

[Jerry Curl]

Albert Breer ‏@AlbertBreer 14m14 minutes ago
NFLPA says it will "pursue any and all remedies if (Peterson's CBA) rights are breached". Which obviously leaves open chance for lawsuit.

 

[BigJim®]

Let's be honest. Vikings at 4-5 want him back yesterday. So they can say all the right things to the public but they want him back.

Respectfully disagree with this opinion. I don't think the Vikes want anything whatsoever to do with this situation, and would do cartwheels down the hallway if they don't need to do a thing until the offseason.

The Vikings' coaches and players want him on the field, I can guarantee you that.

Don't forget the fans, many of them want him back on the field also. Unfortunately, none of these have any say in it.

The ones who will be deciding are the ones who are fielding calls from sponsors, and having to step into the spotlight explaining the decision. Those same people who were humiliated publically for reinstating Peterson in September. I just don't see the Wilf Bros or Spielman, who uttered the words "we want to get it right" roughly 6 dozen times while publically apologizing after the Radisson backlash, risking any new backlash. Not to get one or two wins more in Petersons last year with the Vikings. Not when they are next in line for turdish local sportswriters composing articles like this. I could be wrong. Hell, I hope I'm wrong.

 

[ryno1980]

Let's be honest. Vikings at 4-5 want him back yesterday. So they can say all the right things to the public but they want him back.

Respectfully disagree with this opinion. I don't think the Vikes want anything whatsoever to do with this situation, and would do cartwheels down the hallway if they don't need to do a thing until the offseason.

The Vikings' coaches and players want him on the field, I can guarantee you that.

Don't forget the fans, many of them want him back on the field also. Unfortunately, none of these have any say in it.

The ones who will be deciding are the ones who are fielding calls from sponsors, and having to step into the spotlight explaining the decision. Those same people who were humiliated publically for reinstating Peterson in September. I just don't see the Wilf Bros or Spielman, who uttered the words "we want to get it right" roughly 6 dozen times while publically apologizing after the Radisson backlash, risking any new backlash. Not to get one or two wins more in Petersons last year with the Vikings. Not when they are next in line for turdish local sportswriters composing articles like this. I could be wrong. Hell, I hope I'm wrong.

The sportswriter does make a strong argument. It's Peterson's first offense, I dont' see how they can essentially suspend him an entire season without getting sued.

 

[shader]

Let's be honest. Vikings at 4-5 want him back yesterday. So they can say all the right things to the public but they want him back.

Respectfully disagree with this opinion. I don't think the Vikes want anything whatsoever to do with this situation, and would do cartwheels down the hallway if they don't need to do a thing until the offseason.

The Vikings' coaches and players want him on the field, I can guarantee you that.

What the players want is not all that important.

 

[shader]

Let's be honest. Vikings at 4-5 want him back yesterday. So they can say all the right things to the public but they want him back.

Respectfully disagree with this opinion. I don't think the Vikes want anything whatsoever to do with this situation, and would do cartwheels down the hallway if they don't need to do a thing until the offseason.

The Vikings' coaches and players want him on the field, I can guarantee you that.

Don't forget the fans, many of them want him back on the field also. Unfortunately, none of these have any say in it.The ones who will be deciding are the ones who are fielding calls from sponsors, and having to step into the spotlight explaining the decision. Those same people who were humiliated publically for reinstating Peterson in September. I just don't see the Wilf Bros or Spielman, who uttered the words "we want to get it right" roughly 6 dozen times while publically apologizing after the Radisson backlash, risking any new backlash. Not to get one or two wins more in Petersons last year with the Vikings. Not when they are next in line for turdish local sportswriters composing articles like this. I could be wrong. Hell, I hope I'm wrong.

The sportswriter does make a strong argument. It's Peterson's first offense, I dont' see how they can essentially suspend him an entire season without getting sued.

Probably because he hasn't been suspended so far. He's made millions doing nothing. You think he's going to sue??

 

[ryno1980]

Let's be honest. Vikings at 4-5 want him back yesterday. So they can say all the right things to the public but they want him back.

Respectfully disagree with this opinion. I don't think the Vikes want anything whatsoever to do with this situation, and would do cartwheels down the hallway if they don't need to do a thing until the offseason.

The Vikings' coaches and players want him on the field, I can guarantee you that.

Don't forget the fans, many of them want him back on the field also. Unfortunately, none of these have any say in it.The ones who will be deciding are the ones who are fielding calls from sponsors, and having to step into the spotlight explaining the decision. Those same people who were humiliated publically for reinstating Peterson in September. I just don't see the Wilf Bros or Spielman, who uttered the words "we want to get it right" roughly 6 dozen times while publically apologizing after the Radisson backlash, risking any new backlash. Not to get one or two wins more in Petersons last year with the Vikings. Not when they are next in line for turdish local sportswriters composing articles like this. I could be wrong. Hell, I hope I'm wrong.

The sportswriter does make a strong argument. It's Peterson's first offense, I dont' see how they can essentially suspend him an entire season without getting sued.

Probably because he hasn't been suspended so far. He's made millions doing nothing. You think he's going to sue??

Uh yeah, the NFLPA will sue. Being forced from the team for 7 or whatever it is games sure sounds like a suspension to me. Suspension: a temporary debarment, as from position, privilege, etc.

He's been removed from his position with the team.

 

[Insein]

Let's be honest. Vikings at 4-5 want him back yesterday. So they can say all the right things to the public but they want him back.

Respectfully disagree with this opinion. I don't think the Vikes want anything whatsoever to do with this situation, and would do cartwheels down the hallway if they don't need to do a thing until the offseason.

The Vikings' coaches and players want him on the field, I can guarantee you that.

Don't forget the fans, many of them want him back on the field also. Unfortunately, none of these have any say in it.The ones who will be deciding are the ones who are fielding calls from sponsors, and having to step into the spotlight explaining the decision. Those same people who were humiliated publically for reinstating Peterson in September. I just don't see the Wilf Bros or Spielman, who uttered the words "we want to get it right" roughly 6 dozen times while publically apologizing after the Radisson backlash, risking any new backlash. Not to get one or two wins more in Petersons last year with the Vikings. Not when they are next in line for turdish local sportswriters composing articles like this. I could be wrong. Hell, I hope I'm wrong.

Winning cures all in pro sports. If the vikings finish 10-6 and make he playoffs, no one cares. And those that do are marginalized. Not saying it's right or wrong. It just is what it is. Its happened before. It will happen again.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Being forced from the team for 7 or whatever it is games sure sounds like a suspension to me.

Some useful information on the exempt list:

The Minnesota Vikings took advantage of a rarely-used NFL protocol Wednesday, placing Adrian Peterson on the exempt/commissioner's permission list while the running back goes through the legal process after being indicted for child abuse last week. The list, used to allow players who are dealing with significant off-field situations, will allow the Vikings to remove Peterson from their 53-man roster.

Peterson will be barred from all team activities in the meantime, which sounds like a suspension except that Peterson will be paid during his leave. The decision whether to pay the player falls on the team. Players placed on the exempt list can be held with or without pay at the team's discretion.

Players must consent before being placed on the list, allowing the NFL Players Association to call Peterson's placement a "voluntary leave with pay."

As the name of the list suggests, players can only be placed on the exempt/commissioner's permission list with clearance from Roger Goodell. From the NFL Player Personnel Policy Manual:

The Exempt List is a special player status available to clubs only in unusual circumstances. The List includes those players who have been declared by the Commissioner to be temporarily exempt from counting within the Active List limit. Only the Commissioner has the authority to place a player on the Exempt List; clubs have no such authority, and no exemption, regardless of circumstances, is automatic. The Commissioner also has the authority to determine in advance whether a player's time on the Exempt List will be finite or will continue until the Commissioner deems the exemption should be lifted and the player returned to the Active List.

As the policy states, players are also removed from the list at the commissioner's discretion. In Peterson's case, he is expected to remain on the list until a resolution has been reached in his child abuse case.

The exempt list allows teams to get around the maximum four-game suspension or deactivation allowed by the Collective Bargaining Agreement for conduct detrimental to the team. In Peterson's case, legal proceedings are expected to extend past the next month.

Notably, Carolina Panthers defensive end Greg Hardy may also soon join Peterson on the exempt list. Hardy was convicted in July of assaulting and threatening an ex-girlfriend, but has appealed the decision. As the Vikings did with Peterson, the Panthers decided not to suspend Hardy as he goes through due process. The exempt list, again, would allow the team to get around the four-game maximum penalty for detrimental conduct.

The exempt/commissioner's permission list was used perhaps most notably in the past on Michael Vick when the quarterback finished serving his jail sentence and suspension in 2009 for his participation in a dogfighting ring. The list has been used in less dubious circumstances, however. For example, Jeff Demps was placed on the list in 2013 while the Tampa Bay Buccaneers running back was trying to make the U.S. Olympic track team.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Let's review facts: He was never "suspended" by the league no matter how much it "feels" like it, or incorrectly assumed to have been punished. Peterson voluntarily accepted to be put in the exempt list with pay after close consultation with the NFLPA. He's been getting full compensation of his salary for all the games he was away. No one coerced him to go on the exempt list nor were there any legally binding deals promised to him once he got past the legal process. So explain again how Peterson is being wronged or had a leg to sue the NFL. I'm all ears.

 

[nastynate]

He's going to be starting for the Vikings by 11/20. He'll pay a big fine and get time served within the next week or so. I'm sure he's in great shape and ready to go.