Vikings place Peterson on exempt list

[NoSaint]

I have to wonder if the public is reacting to the fact that smoking Mj a few times is a year long suspension and knocking someone out is a 2 game suspension is having an impact here. With more and more states making Mary Jane legal for medical and recreation use, more and more fans are asking why it's still such a harsh fine from the nfl compared to other offenses. Dwi, domestic abuse, child abuse, assault are all slaps on the wrist in the last few years

 

i dont doubt thats a portion of whats starting the ball rolling.

 

of course it ignores that its a 3rd strike catching a guy that year long suspension.... but.....

[Offside Number 76]

I put AP in an entirely different category than Ray Rice. Peterson grew up thinking this was an appropriate way to discipline a child. It's what he knows; this is what was taught to him as a child. He needs therapy (to deal with the abuse he received), counseling (to become a better parent), and compassion. Not this nonsense.

 

I doubt Ray Rice grew up thinking it was appropriate to knock a woman out.

[Kellyto83TD]

If AP did what he was accused of, why can't NFL wait til legal case is adjudicated and then go from there? You know, like they did with the Beast's DWI thing. In the newly reported case, no charges were even filed. Doesn't mean he didn't do it, but at least it would be a somewhat fair repeatable process.

 

Or once charges are filed, he's suspended until the case is adjudicated?

 

NFL has to be careful, or they could have a lot guys out on suspension.

 

Bottom line is he and Ray Rice need to sue the NFL and the teams. Just because there is peer pressure neither has been convicted of a crime.

[eball]

Bottom line is he and Ray Rice need to sue the NFL and the teams. Just because there is peer pressure neither has been convicted of a crime.

 

What a naive statement. The NFL has a personal conduct policy that has nothing to do with the criminal justice system.

[BuffaloBud]

Check with your HR department concerning a situation like this. I did yesterday. If I did something and the news broadcast that was associated with Acme Co., Acme Co. can let me go. No questions asked. No due process.

[KD in CA]

If AP did what he was accused of, why can't NFL wait til legal case is adjudicated and then go from there?

 

Because the legal system moves very slowly and the public outcry is happening right now. The NFL is running a business and can't simply ignore cases as egregious as Peterson and Rice and tell the press, fans, advertisers, etc. 'let's wait till AP's case goes to trial sometime next year'. There are about ten different threads on this board right now concerning all these off-field issues. I don't see anyone here waiting until the cases are settled in court, do you?

 

Obviously the NFL failed to anticipate the public outcry from the Rice case and did not give him an adequate suspension. That combined with the release of the video dumped the blood in the water and now everyone is putting NFL player conduct under much more scrutiny and demanding action on AP and the other wife/child beaters. It's yet another example of how fast things move in the modern communication age and the NFL simply wasn't ready for this and as a result they are back on their heels. I think the owners' best move is to agree to decisively act at the team level and not expose Goodell to the role of sentencing each of these cases because at this point, no one will be happy no matter what he does.

[HamSandwhich]

Check with your HR department concerning a situation like this. I did yesterday. If I did something and the news broadcast that was associated with Acme Co., Acme Co. can let me go. No questions asked. No due process.

 

So let me ask you this, do you think this kind of case would be plastered all over the news just like AP? Do you you'd be plastered on all major sports media outlets? Or any news outlets for that matter? No, you'd be on the last page of the news paper with one line, if at all. This is apples and oranges. Its likely your company would allow you to go through the process and still work. If found guilty then they make a decision. That's the way it should be.

 

Because the legal system moves very slowly and the public outcry is happening right now. The NFL is running a business and can't simply ignore cases as egregious as Peterson and Rice and tell the press, fans, advertisers, etc. 'let's wait till AP's case goes to trial sometime next year'. There are about ten different threads on this board right now concerning all these off-field issues. I don't see anyone here waiting until the cases are settled in court, do you?

 

Obviously the NFL failed to anticipate the public outcry from the Rice case and did not give him an adequate suspension. That combined with the release of the video dumped the blood in the water and now everyone is putting NFL player conduct under much more scrutiny and demanding action on AP and the other wife/child beaters. It's yet another example of how fast things move in the modern communication age and the NFL simply wasn't ready for this and as a result they are back on their heels. I think the owners' best move is to agree to decisively act at the team level and not expose Goodell to the role of sentencing each of these cases because at this point, no one will be happy no matter what he does.

 

This is exactly right, and exactly the problem. Everyone has to have everything RIGHT NOW! No time to allow for the legal system to do its job. It's sad sad sad. Again, let me reiterate that I'm not trying to condone anything any of these people did. IF they are proven guilty, then they deserve everything they get. We don't know all the facts, AP's looks cut and dry, Ray Rice's does too, but we need to allow for the process to take place.

[Offside Number 76]

So let me ask you this, do you think this kind of case would be plastered all over the news just like AP? Do you you'd be plastered on all major sports media outlets? Or any news outlets for that matter? No, you'd be on the last page of the news paper with one line, if at all. This is apples and oranges. Its likely your company would allow you to go through the process and still work. If found guilty then they make a decision. That's the way it should be.

 

 

What about the guy who slid down the railing?

[HamSandwhich]

What about the guy who slid down the railing?

 

You do realize that kids are beaten everyday, and women have violence against them every day also. You don't see them on the front page of the news do you?

[BuffaloBud]

So let me ask you this, do you think this kind of case would be plastered all over the news just like AP? Do you you'd be plastered on all major sports media outlets? Or any news outlets for that matter? No, you'd be on the last page of the news paper with one line, if at all. This is apples and oranges. Its likely your company would allow you to go through the process and still work. If found guilty then they make a decision. That's the way it should be.

 

Looking at my local current newspaper and news stories, yes, it would. And, it would not take much for it to go "viral" over other news connections. In my opinion, it is not apples and oranges. That's also why I tell my nieces and nephews that anything that they post on the web is public domain and that they should think twice before posting something.

Edited September 17, 2014 by BuffaloBud

[KD in CA]

So let me ask you this, do you think this kind of case would be plastered all over the news just like AP? Do you you'd be plastered on all major sports media outlets? Or any news outlets for that matter? No, you'd be on the last page of the news paper with one line, if at all. This is apples and oranges. Its likely your company would allow you to go through the process and still work. If found guilty then they make a decision. That's the way it should be.

I don't know what fantasy world you are living in, but that's not the way it goes.

 

Obviously the higher profile the person and the more distasteful the crime, the more likely an employer is to take harsher and more immediate action. Yes, if a major company CEO was arrested for whipping his 4 year old or there was video of him knocking his wife out, you better believe it would be plastered all over the media and he would be out on his ass. Committing felonies aside, people are fired all the time even for things they post on social media. Why? Because it makes their employer look disreputable.

 

You do realize that kids are beaten everyday, and women have violence against them every day also. You don't see them on the front page of the news do you?

And here we get to your real agenda --- excusing the behavior.

Edited September 17, 2014 by KD in CT

[TH3]

So you've seen the contract say that he's guilty until proven innocent in these types of cases? It's that black and white. Can you take a snapshot and post it for us to have a look for ourselves what the language of the contract says?

 

No, I can't.

 

The contract says nothing about guilt or innocence...it is also not in dispute that every NFL contract has boiler plate language regarding code of conduct, representing the league etc. The NFL and the team are hardly on thin ice putting AP on PAID leave after a review of the details of the case and as well the cost of reputation lost.

 

This is a case of the court of public opinion not a court of law and the Vikings have acted accordingly. If they were not in accordance with the contract the NFLPA would be suing.

 

Do you have AP in your FF team?

[Jauronimo]

I don't know what fantasy world you are living in, but that's not the way it goes.

 

Obviously the higher profile the person and the more distasteful the crime, the more likely an employer is to take harsher and more immediate action. Yes, if a major company CEO was arrested for whipping his 4 year old or there was video of him knocking his wife out, you better believe it would be plastered all over the media and he would be out on his ass. Committing felonies aside, people are fired all the time even for things they post on social media. Why? Because it makes their employer look disreputable.

 

 

And here we get to your real agenda --- excusing the behavior. Scumbag.

Usually employers have some type of coherent and consistent process to guide them while dishing out the highest levels of disciplinary action available to them. They don't make it up as they go along desperately trying to appease the angry mob.

[A Dog Named Kelso]

@ProFootballTalk: Peterson's agent: This is the best possible outcome given the circumstances http://t.co/rsoL2frQ4z

From the article:

NFLPA asked Peterson if he wanted to challenge the team’s decision

The NFLPA has to stop with the unwavering support of poor behavior by its members. There should be something written into to union guidelines that states if accused of a crime we will not fight a suspension. I understand why the NFLPA does this but in my opinion there should be standards for your members to utilize the unions services.

[HamSandwhich]

I don't know what fantasy world you are living in, but that's not the way it goes.

 

Obviously the higher profile the person and the more distasteful the crime, the more likely an employer is to take harsher and more immediate action. Yes, if a major company CEO was arrested for whipping his 4 year old or there was video of him knocking his wife out, you better believe it would be plastered all over the media and he would be out on his ass. Committing felonies aside, people are fired all the time even for things they post on social media. Why? Because it makes their employer look disreputable.

 

 

And here we get to your real agenda --- excusing the behavior. Scumbag.

 

Wow you took that in a different direction. I believe calling me a name like that is against the COC?

 

That's not the point I was making at all, you're assuming the poster that I was responding to was a CEO? I'm assuming he was just another run of the mill employee, an assumption yes, but that how I took it. Now, a normal employee, underling, etc is not going to get front page news. They are going to get their due process. Again, I don't condone anything any of these people have done, I simply think everyone should have their due process just like it was meant to be. Innocent until proven guilty.

 

The comment of there being many people who are under these despicable conditions of child abuse and domestic abuse was merely to point out that they are not on the front page. By no means do I say its right, I'm trying to make the point that they are NOT on the front page and so they would likely not get judged in the court of public opinion and would get their day in court.

 

Usually employers have some type of coherent and consistent process to guide them while dishing out the highest levels of disciplinary action available to them. They don't make it up as they go along desperately trying to appease the angry mob.

 

Exactly

 

No, I can't.

 

The contract says nothing about guilt or innocence...it is also not in dispute that every NFL contract has boiler plate language regarding code of conduct, representing the league etc. The NFL and the team are hardly on thin ice putting AP on PAID leave after a review of the details of the case and as well the cost of reputation lost.

 

This is a case of the court of public opinion not a court of law and the Vikings have acted accordingly. If they were not in accordance with the contract the NFLPA would be suing.

 

Do you have AP in your FF team?

 

This is precisely the problem, "The court of public opinion" which is backwards and messed up. We're in a NOW NOW NOW generation, and its causing the right of due process to disappear. You're instantly judged w/o facts, that's a sad state of affairs.

[Jauronimo]

Exactly

Before you agree with me you should know that I'm one of those people that doesn't think that AP's overzealous punishment was the greatest crime of the 21st century which means that I tacitly condone child abuse and worse. Having any contact with me makes you just as guilty.

[BRH]

I don't know what fantasy world you are living in, but that's not the way it goes.

 

Obviously the higher profile the person and the more distasteful the crime, the more likely an employer is to take harsher and more immediate action. Yes, if a major company CEO was arrested for whipping his 4 year old or there was video of him knocking his wife out, you better believe it would be plastered all over the media and he would be out on his ass. Committing felonies aside, people are fired all the time even for things they post on social media. Why? Because it makes their employer look disreputable.

 

This, a thousand times this. Employers can and do place employees on paid suspension until a case is resolved. This has nothing to do with presumption of guilt and everything to do with the employer's prerogative to protect its image. He's getting paid, so there's no adverse employment action about which he can complain. Can Adrian Peterson be held to a higher standard by his employer because he is an NFL player and not Joe Schmo and therefore his conduct is likely to make worldwide news? Of course he can. More specifically, can he be held to a higher standard by the Minnesota Vikings because he is the face of the franchise and not practice squad fodder? Of course he can.

[HamSandwhich]

Before you agree with me you should know that I'm one of those people that doesn't think that AP's overzealous punishment was the greatest crime of the 21st century which means that I tacitly condone child abuse and worse. Having any contact with me makes you just as guilty.

 

Lol, I believe that people are a slave to their upbringing but that does not exhonorate them from all punishment. At the very least, if found guilty, he should be suspended for some length of time, and told to take some classes on the subject. I'm a proponent of corporal punishment, but it has to be reasonable. Can't do what AP did.

 

This, a thousand times this. Employers can and do place employees on paid suspension until a case is resolved. This has nothing to do with presumption of guilt and everything to do with the employer's prerogative to protect its image. He's getting paid, so there's no adverse employment action about which he can complain. Can Adrian Peterson be held to a higher standard by his employer because he is an NFL player and not Joe Schmo and therefore his conduct is likely to make worldwide news? Of course he can. More specifically, can he be held to a higher standard by the Minnesota Vikings because he is the face of the franchise and not practice squad fodder? Of course he can.

 

I think we're arguing about two different things. I'm saying theres an intrinsic problem with the court of public opinion swaying things so much. Often times, people react on feelings and don't have the facts in hand. Their views are skewed, and they want to roast and skewer the person who is "wrong" in their opinion without any intelligent thought to it. This is a problem.

 

If I've gone off on a tangent otherwise, I apologize, but that's the underlying problem here.

Edited September 17, 2014 by HamSandwhich

[Jauronimo]

This, a thousand times this. Employers can and do place employees on paid suspension until a case is resolved. This has nothing to do with presumption of guilt and everything to do with the employer's prerogative to protect its image. He's getting paid, so there's no adverse employment action about which he can complain. Can Adrian Peterson be held to a higher standard by his employer because he is an NFL player and not Joe Schmo and therefore his conduct is likely to make worldwide news? Of course he can. More specifically, can he be held to a higher standard by the Minnesota Vikings because he is the face of the franchise and not practice squad fodder? Of course he can.

It is the employers right to act as they see fit. Its their right to act carefully. Its their right to act hastily and awkwardly. Its the right of the Minnesota Vikings to sway in the wind and gauge media reactions, and probe around trying to find a solution that makes this all go away. I don't think they should have exercised the right to embarrass themselves but I support their right to do so.

[KD in CA]

Usually employers have some type of coherent and consistent process to guide them while dishing out the highest levels of disciplinary action available to them. They don't make it up as they go along desperately trying to appease the angry mob.

As I acknowledged in my prior post, the NFL wasn't ready for this firestorm and that's their fault. But now it's here and they need to figure out some way to deal with it. Doing a poor job up until now doesn't mean they should stop disciplining those who deserve it.

 

 

Wow you took that in a different direction. I believe calling me a name like that is against the COC?

I was wrong to type that. I apologize.

 

That's not the point I was making at all, you're assuming the poster that I was responding to was a CEO? I'm assuming he was just another run of the mill employee, an assumption yes, but that how I took it. Now, a normal employee, underling, etc is not going to get front page news. They are going to get their due process. Again, I don't condone anything any of these people have done, I simply think everyone should have their due process just like it was meant to be. Innocent until proven guilty.

It doesn't matter if it gets front page news or not. If your employer knows you committed a felony, you're going to be fired. And if you hold a high paying/high profile job than yes, you ARE held to a higher standard and you ARE going to be judged more quickly and more harshly because of the negative attention you bring to your organization.

 

AP is going to get his due process in a court of law. What his employer does is a completely different matter. And if you want to equate the two, than consider that felons are often put in prison before being convicted.