What, no Peterson thread - Re-instated

[cctekguy]

Agree!

But as Miller pointed out earlier, he should have to forfeit his game circles too!

 

[mudloggerone]

Adrian Peterson's NFL status will be determined by Saturday, Nov. 22 at the latest.

PFT's Mike Florio points out that under Article 43 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, a hearing on an expedited grievance must occur within seven days of the filing (Nov. 17 in this case). The case must then be resolved within five days after the hearing. Of course, things could go faster than that but the NFL appears to be dragging its heels here in an effort to keep Peterson off the field. A source tells ESPN's Ed Werder that the case between the NFLPA and the NFL "could get ugly."

rotoworld

 

[Phicinfan]

By all reports, Minny may cut ties, and I don't see anyone signing him this year, so he will be like Ray rice til next year.

 

[mudloggerone]

Only a hail of a lot better.

 

[JScott]

By all reports, Minny may cut ties, and I don't see anyone signing him this year, so he will be like Ray rice til next year.

Definitely not all reports because I've only read the opposite, that they welcome him back.

And if the NFL reistates him and MIN does cut him, he will ABSOLUTELY be grabbed up by another team. He is not Ray Rice production-wise.

 

[Remote Controller]

I hope the piece of $h!+ is bound and beaten.

 

[mudloggerone]

I read that the coaches want him back and the front office isn't sure if they do or not. Further I've read that the NFL is stalling to give the Viking brass time to decide what to do. I still do not think that he plays this year, anywhere.

 

[Phicinfan]

I read that the coaches want him back and the front office isn't sure if they do or not. Further I've read that the NFL is stalling to give the Viking brass time to decide what to do. I still do not think that he plays this year, anywhere.

I agree, by what I read, players and coaches were fine, but GM and ownership was not, due to expected loss of sponsors if they bring him back. Which is also why I don't think any other team picks him up this year. They all bow to the almighty $$$$

 

[ExperiencedRookie]

I agree, by what I read, players and coaches were fine, but GM and ownership was not, due to expected loss of sponsors if they bring him back. Which is also why I don't think any other team picks him up this year. They all bow to the almighty $$$$

Someone should tell the sponsers that we the fans are over it. I'm not going to boycott the Vikings over rostering any player who has paid his dues and served his punishment. He's settled his wrong doing in the court of law and has already been prematurely punished by the team this season. As far as I'm concerned, he's done his time

 

[Phicinfan]

Someone should tell the sponsers that we the fans are over it. I'm not going to boycott the Vikings over rostering any player who has paid his dues and served his punishment. He's settled his wrong doing in the court of law and has already been prematurely punished by the team this season. As far as I'm concerned, he's done his time

Understand your point, but alot of us, and me included are not there. I happen to think his punishment is no where near enough for what he did. So yeah, I think the Ownership has a good reason to be nervous about this.

 

[ExperiencedRookie]

Understand your point, but alot of us, and me included are not there. I happen to think his punishment is no where near enough for what he did. So yeah, I think the Ownership has a good reason to be nervous about this.

Guess your beef is with the US Judicial system them. It's not the job of American employers to punish US citizens for breaking the law.

 

[Phicinfan]

Guess your beef is with the US Judicial system them. It's not the job of American employers to punish US citizens for breaking the law.

IF this were a normal employment situation, it wouldn't be a sponsor issue. Have to be realistic here. Owners don't make money off nothing, they need sponsorship and fans in stands. Public opinion is a major issue.

 

[mudloggerone]

It's not rosy in Minny...

cbssports.com

Although he has a grievance hearing set for Monday, Vikings running back Adrian Peterson missed an even "more significant" disciplinary hearing on Friday in connection to his violation of law in an incident of family violence. Peterson previously agreed to attend the meeting before backing out, a league source told Adam Schefter of ESPN Saturday.
According to the report, Peterson would not give the league an alternative date and it appears as if the NFL and NFLPA have reached a stalemate. NFLPA spokesperson George Atallah criticized the league's handling of Peterson's ban in an email to Schefter on Saturday.

"The League office seems more focused on creating an arbitrary disciplinary process for Adrian instead of honoring a signed agreement to remove him from the Commissioner's list," Atallah said.

 

[JScott]

There's more of this article on ESPN.com and although it initially sounds like Peterson skipped the meeting, as you read on it was a planned, announced decision. And the NFLP Union also announced the same to the NFL. Bottom line is the NFL is playing games, not Peterson and the NFLPA. The NFL is saying the Peterson camp won't give them the docs they requested, but Peterson's lawyer told them under Texas law that he can't and the Texas courts agree with him and told the NFL as much. So the NFL is trying to use that to stall. I don't blame Peterson's camp for not going to the meeting. They've done what's been agreed to but the NFL is not. Regardless of your opinion of Peterson, the NFL signed a contract and they're not living up to it and are making things up as they go along (again).

 

[mudloggerone]

Bottom line is that Peterson still isn't cleared to play football.

 

[MongerKhan]

Should be.

 

[JScott]

“The report that I backed out of a meeting with the NFL is just not true,” Peterson said in the statement. “When Roger Goodell’s office asked that I attend the ‘hearing’ on Friday, I consulted with my union and learned that this ‘hearing’ was something new and inconsistent with the CBA. On Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday of this past week, my union sent emails, letters, and had conversations with his office on my behalf asking about the nature of the hearing, how it was to occur, who would participate, and its purpose. We repeatedly asked them to respond quickly to my questions because I want to cooperate and get back on the field, but they didn’t respond until late Wednesday evening, and even then they didn’t answer important questions about their proposed ‘hearing.’”

Peterson says he has informed the NFL that he will participate in the ordinary process for players who are facing discipline under the league’s personal-conduct policy. But he will not take part in something that he sees as little more than the NFL making up new rules to keep him off the field.

“After consulting with the union, I told the NFL that I will attend the standard meeting with the Commissioner prior to possible imposition of discipline, as has been the long-term practice under the CBA, but I wouldn’t participate in a newly created and non-collectively bargained pre-discipline ‘hearing’ that would include outside people I don’t know and who would have roles in the process that the NFL wouldn’t disclose,” the statement said. “At this point, I’ve resolved my matter in the criminal court; I’ve worked to make amends for what I’ve done; I’ve missed most of the season, and I stand ready to be candid and forthcoming with Mr. Goodell about what happened. However, I will not allow the NFL to impose a new process of discipline on me, ignore the CBA, ignore the deal they agreed to with me, and behave without fairness or accountability. The process they are pushing is arbitrary, inconsistent, and contrary to what they agreed to do, and for those reasons, I never agreed to the hearing. I’m sorry for all of this, but I can’t excuse their refusal to be fair.”

 

[JScott]

NFL announced this morning that he's suspended for the rest of the season (until April) based on the conduct code and extenuating circumstances, but that's just the conduct ruling. And Peterson has already filed an appeal of it. There's also the grievance ruling from the arbitrator, expected tomorrow. That's for Peterson to be removed immediately from the Commissioner's Exempt list.

As I heard it this morning, IF he's removed from the Exempt list and while he's appealing the Conduct ruling he could technically play but MIN would have to also okay that, and that's where the court of public opinion (and especially sponsor $) will come into play.

So I'd say if you have him in a redraft league, don't drop him yet but there's still hurdles to get over before he sees the field.

 

[mudloggerone]

I still do not think that he plays this year, anywhere.

.

 

[MongerKhan]

Its not quite over yet.

The shot is long but its still there..



For comparison purposes....

What if Ray Lewis committed murder in the present NFL?

How about Stallworth and his vehicular homicide?

Or Josh Brent. He killed his teammate driving drunk and everyone is giving him a pass..

Or Big Ben and his rape case?

There are plenty more examples but I am interested to hear the replys.