Vikings RB Adrian Peterson indicted for child abuse; deactivated for Pats game at Minnesota

BradyFTW! · Sep 17, 2014

Wheelman said:
The Wilf family are pieces of ****. They talk about doing the "right" thing. They were never interested in doing the "right" thing. They're not doing the "right" thing now. They're deactivating Peterson again because pressure from sponsors and losing business. This is a business decision. If sponsors didn't start suspending their sponsorship they would have let Adrian Peterson play. They never cared about doing the "right" thing and they sure don't care right now. They had a chance to do the "right" thing and they blew it. They're the scum of the earth as far as I'm concerned. Greedy Bastards.

I'm starting to wonder how many more owners lack a moral compass, how many put business and making more money before doing the right thing. Goodell is a scumbag rat. But the owners and their "fraternity" are the real problem.

Honestly, I don't think they're inherently pieces of **** for caring more about their bottom line than making a moral stand. That makes them amoral at best and immoral at worst, but welcome to corporate America. Ethics only matters to these people when being unethical costs you money.

I just wish they would be honest about it. I wish that one single owner would come out and say "look, our players are a bunch of 20-30 year old men who play a violent sport. A lot of them do dumb, morally reprehensible stuff and get arrested for it. But we're not in the business of putting the most ethical team out on the field every week: we're in the business of trying to win, because winners make more money. So we'll play any player who helps us win and who is allowed--both the league and by the law--to play."

I would respect that owner 100x more than I'd respect someone who claims that he's trying to "do the right thing" when they conveniently unsuspend their admitted child-beating best player.

shmessy · Sep 17, 2014

Danger Zone said:
I suppose I could

Didn't Sports Illustrated report that Belichick was threatening Hernandez with release for a domestic disturbance that didnt even result in an arrest?

I vaguely remember hearing something along those lines.

Obviously SB39 is pulling a stunt that would probably work at a bowling alley in Iowa. But with people who actually KNOW the facts about the difference between how the Patriots handled the Hernandez indictment and how the Vikings handled the Peterson indictment, it simply fizzles.

It's funny he would even try that with people who can easily see the clear difference.

james87654 · Sep 17, 2014

mgteich · Sep 17, 2014

We disagree. This is not new, although we have agreed on almost all football issues lately.

THE PLAYERS WORK FOR THE TEAMS
You seem to disagree, and think that the NFL is an employer. The NFL is an association of owners. The players, through their union, have agreed that the NFL has the right to punish certain actions.

NFL
If the union agrees to a max 6 week suspension for spousal abuse, even if not adjudicated in any way by the courts, then so be it. The have not and will not agree to unlimited punishment for any conduct that Commissioner, in his sole discretion, determines damages the good name of the NFL. Such action is being appeal, and will continue to be appealed within the NFL process and in the courts.

TEAMS
The teams are free to fire people based on pressure from sponsors. Again, I do not believe that depriving a person a livelihood at the whim of an owner is sustainable in court. Obviously you disagree, thinking that owners have an unlimited right to fire a player. In any case, this is NOT the real issue. If MINN chooses to fire Peterson, he can get a job for another team. Unlimited suspension without pay is not allowed under the law.

MY EMPLOYER
would almost certainly suspended most of these players without pay. Counseling would have been required for some of these players, likely Rice and Peterson.

I find the Vick case especially ridiculous. Denying a person a livelihood because he abused animals seems very strange for those who do not live on the coasts, or those influenced by their media.

AndyJohnson said:
Of course they are the employer.
How is the NFL funded by public monies?
They are not punishing criminal offenses, they are punishing actions that are violation of their collectively bargained code of conduct.
Surely you can see the difference, even though some violations fit both criteria.

They are as free to have any rules they wish as any other employer.
Would your employer have fired Michael Vick, Hernandez, Rice, Hardy, Peterson, Stallworth?
That would be their decision and of course they can implement them as they see fit.

It was collectively bargained. It's been clear for quite some time that the league will punish actions that harm its reputation. They certainly have every right to do that.

This is where you are wrong. Morality is a part of virtually every employment contract in this country.
The league/teams have a right to employ whoever they want. Moral character is certianly an allowable criteria just as the ability to block or tackle is.

Once again, the courts determine LEGAL consequence. The league is not doing that.

Wouldn't you think that this is the decision of the employer who is paying those players millions of dollars? Why do they pay them millions of dollars? So they can make more millions. Its a business. If an employee costs a company money, they are gone. These players are damaging the ability of the NFL to make money, because CONSUMERS and advertisers are coming out and saying they do not want to support the team and league if those players are part of it.

If Hernandez got off on a technicality and the Patriots resigned him, do you not think that would damage the brand, and cost them money advertisers and fans?
You are arguing they would not have the right to not want that.

The state of Minnesota has no power in telling the Vikings what they can do. They can however, like advertisers and fans voice their opinion, and of course the team will take that into account, because public relations are vital to their financial success.

If this was the CEO of a major corporation, do you really think that he would still be employed?

primetime · Sep 17, 2014

BradyFTW! said:
"look, our players are a bunch of 20-30 year old men who play a violent sport. A lot of them do dumb, morally reprehensible stuff and get arrested for it.

I get what you're going for here and agree with the general thrust of your argument, but NFL players are less likely to get arrested, on average, than the typical American, and no more likely than any other person at the very top of the income distribution (where they all fall). Yes, the rich and famous are policed differently than others, but that's still important to note. The reason it seems NFL players are more inclined to break the law is because any offense committed by a professional football player instantly becomes newsworthy, even if it's the backup long snapper for the Jaguars.

SB39 · Sep 17, 2014

ctpatsfan77 said:
If the latter is true, how would the Patriots have known the former?

Because as the week progressed, every single person following this story knew the arrest was coming and it was only a matter of time.

Like I said, failing to be a top Patriots homer on this board is a very unpopular position, and I've discussed this enough and don't want to hijack the thread so I'll leave it at this. I just don't see them as deserving the amount of fawning we are seeing on this matter when what they did was literally wait until the guy was completely (and probably permanently) removed from society before they acted.

ctpatsfan77 · Sep 17, 2014

mgteich said:
The NFL is NOT the employer. It is an entity, partially funded by public monies, who has decided to set rules to punish criminal offenses.

Teams can indeed have its own policies. However, a team is NOT free to have any set of rules it wishes. For example, if Hernandez been exonerated, the patriots would likely have lost a very large lawsuit. Owners are free to take those risks.

One of the standard clauses for which players can be terminated is:

You have engaged in personal conduct which, in the reasonable judgment of the Club, adversely affects or reflects on the Club.

Being involved in events that lead up to a murder would certainly qualify. Even if he were to be completely exonerated of all charges, unless his lawyers could somehow prove that he was framed (e.g., that his cell phone made the trip to pick up Lloyd, but he, himself, did not), I can't see how he could possibly win a lawsuit here.

Moreover, if that were the case, why would teams be willing to cut "minor" players as soon as they were arrested, without bothering to give them even the benefit of the doubt?

shmessy · Sep 17, 2014

BradyFTW! said:
Honestly, I don't think they're inherently pieces of **** for caring more about their bottom line than making a moral stand. That makes them amoral at best and immoral at worst, but welcome to corporate America. Ethics only matters to these people when being unethical costs you money.

Amoral or immoral is irrelevant in the corporate world.

What the Wilf's showed was the worst thing you can be in that sphere: incompetent.

Many of us could see the end game on this the minute they made that completely stupid wrong turn on Monday.

primetime · Sep 17, 2014

"Your employer" analogies are kind of silly because no one posting in this thread is as important to their employer's bottom line, given the scale of that bottom line, as Adrian Peterson is to the Vikings - both positively and now, potentially, negatively.

mgteich · Sep 17, 2014

QUESTION 1

Peterson is guilty of child abuse in most jurisdictions in the US. What punishment SHOULD be (or should have been) enacted by the NFL? and by the Vikings?

QUESTION 2

Rice is clearly guilty of spousal abuse. What punishment SHOULD be (or should have been) enacted by the NFL? by BALT?

Clearly you all think that the NFL and its member teams should punish these behaviors, independent of any action by society through its legislature, police and courts. I understand that.

So, let's go beyond all the criticism of the NFL and the teams. What SHOULD be done?

Joker · Sep 17, 2014

well, don't worry about a thing Shmessy...it'll all blow over in 24 hours...or is that 240 hours?...2400?...24,000 hours?...whatever ,it's all going away and we can all get back to tra la la'ing down Goodell Lane once again.

shmessy · Sep 17, 2014

SB39 said:
Because as the week progressed, every single person following this story knew the arrest was coming and it was only a matter of time.

Like I said, failing to be a top Patriots homer on this board is a very unpopular position, and I've discussed this enough and don't want to hijack the thread so I'll leave it at this. I just don't see them as deserving the amount of fawning we are seeing on this matter when what they did was literally wait until the guy was completely (and probably permanently) removed from society before they acted.

Authorities had made NO move on Hernandez until the day they arrested him. The Patriots cut him within minutes, never to look back, voiding his contract and absorbing cap hits for the next 2 years.

Authorities indicted and arrested Peterson on Thursday. The Vikings deactivated him on Friday. The Vikings activated him on Monday. The Vikings deactivated him on Tuesday. They have not voided his contract and are still paying him.

YOU see this as the Patriots not acting as decisively as the Vikings.

Unbelievable, but thank you for the comedy.

*****Post edit: You forgot - BEFORE he was even arrested, he was barred from Gillette:

http://nesn.com/2013/06/report-aaro...-patriots-asked-to-leave-by-team-on-thursday/

"...The Patriots appear to be steering clear of the Aaron Hernandez situation until details are sorted out. When the tight end showed up at Gillette Stadium on Thursday, staff was waiting for him and told him to leave, according to the Boston Herald. Hernandez had showed up for a workout. Patriots vice president of media relations Stacey James told the Herald that no coaches were at the facility. Multiple news helicopters followed Hernandez’s journey from his North Attleboro, Mass., home to Foxboro. After Hernandez left Gillette, he stopped at a gas station before heading to Boston to see his attorney.

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2013/06/report-aaro...-patriots-asked-to-leave-by-team-on-thursday/

.

SB39 · Sep 17, 2014

AndyJohnson said:
The team is the employer. They do not all have to have the same view on who they want to employ.

I'm not sure. This topic is such a hot button teams may just avoid him and sign a different RB.

People (unfortunately) have short memories. By next season this won't be as much of a hot button issue because we all will have moved on. Ray Rice's poor performance last year will be a bigger impediment to getting signed than his domestic violence charge (assuming he stays out of trouble between now and then)

mgteich · Sep 17, 2014

ctpatsfan77 said:
One of the standard clauses for which players can be terminated is:

Being involved in events that lead up to a murder would certainly qualify. Even if he were to be completely exonerated of all charges, unless his lawyers could somehow prove that he was framed (e.g., that his cell phone made the trip to pick up Lloyd, but he, himself, did not), I can't see how he could possibly win a lawsuit here.

Moreover, if that were the case, why would teams be willing to cut "minor" players as soon as they were arrested, without bothering to give them even the benefit of the doubt?

You quote the rule correctly.

Apparently folks here believe that is REASONABLE to believe that the proper way to protect against adverse affect on the club is to fire anyone that is accused of a crime. THAT position can be tested on appeal to the NFL, and in the courts.

Personally, I do NOT believe that it is reasonable to believe that MINN keeping Peterson as an employee is less adverse than firing him. But I understand that this is a business decision with which I disagree. BTW, shmessy has pointed out that Peterson is still getting paid. The issue seems to be whether he is activated to play on Game Day. This put a different light on the issue for me.

My bottom line is that I'm OK with his firing. I would expect other teams to hire him. Ditto with regard to Rice.
======

Actions by the NFL are very, very different. They are not employers.

mgteich · Sep 17, 2014

shmessy said:
Authorities had made NO move on Hernandez until the day they arrested him. The Patriots cut him within minutes, never to look back, voiding his contract and absorbing cap hits for the next 2 years.

Authorities indicted and arrested Peterson on Thursday. The Vikings deactivated him on Friday. The Vikings activated him on Monday. The Vikings deactivated him on Tuesday. They have not voided his contract and are still paying him.

YOU see this as the Patriots not acting as decisively as the Vikings.

Unbelievable, but thank you for the comedy.

.

I find the action by MINN to be more reasonable than that of patriots. But that is simply my personal opinion.

ensoul · Sep 17, 2014

I am sure this has already been mentioned but Vikings are doing this not because it is the right thing to do but because sponsors are either pulling or threatening to pull.

SB39 · Sep 17, 2014

AndyJohnson said:
Of course they are the employer.
How is the NFL funded by public monies?

People are using the league as an employer interchangeably with using the team as an employer. I suggest we just look at context to figure out what someone means. For example if someone says Peterson works for the NFL, they probably know that that's not technically accurate and we all probably know what they mean.

Having said that, a great many teams have received large amounts of money from public financing. That simply cannot be denied.

BradyFTW! · Sep 17, 2014

mgteich said:
QUESTION 1

Peterson is guilty of child abuse in most jurisdictions in the US. What punishment SHOULD be (or should have been) enacted by the NFL? and by the Vikings?

QUESTION 2

Rice is clearly guilty of spousal abuse. What punishment SHOULD be (or should have been) enacted by the NFL? by BALT?

Clearly you all think that the NFL and its member teams should punish these behaviors, independent of any action by society through its legislature, police and courts. I understand that.

So, let's go beyond all the criticism of the NFL and the teams. What SHOULD be done?

What you think is clear to all of us isn't clear at all, IMO. It has little to do with what the NFL should do and everything to do with the position that it put itself in by voluntarily assuming (or, more aptly, demanding) these responsibilities.

Goodell rode into town and made it very clear that he was going to be the judge, jury, and executioner when it came to player conduct. Now he's paying the price for being inconsistent and generally ****ty at the job that he demanded.

SB39 · Sep 17, 2014

shmessy said:
SB39 thinks the Patriots did not act as quickly and decisively with Hernandez...........

While I said I am letting this matter drop, I just want to quickly add a request that you stop blatantly lying about things I have said.

Nowhere did I ever state the above so stop lying.

mgteich · Sep 17, 2014

BradyFTW! said:
What you think is clear to all of us isn't clear at all, IMO. It has little to do with what the NFL should do and everything to do with the position that it put itself in by voluntarily assuming (or, more aptly, demanding) these responsibilities.

Goodell rode into town and made it very clear that he was going to be the judge, jury, and executioner when it came to player conduct. Now he's paying the price for being inconsistent and generally ****ty at the job that he demanded.

So, you have NO OPINION on what should be done in either case, or what should have been done. What you seem to want to tell us is that Goodell is wrong.

Vikings RB Adrian Peterson indicted for child abuse; deactivated for Pats game at Minnesota

Goodell sucks

Phoenix, AZ/Retired

2nd Team Getting Their First Start

PatsFans.com Veteran

Pro Bowl Player

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Supporter

Phoenix, AZ/Retired

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Veteran

PatsFans.com Supporter

Phoenix, AZ/Retired

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Veteran

PatsFans.com Veteran

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

Goodell sucks

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Veteran

Similar threads