Today, the league has provided a special exemption for the Minnesota Viking franchise, possibly succumbing to the political pressure by the governor and other political members, as well as other outside influences that were directed upon the both the Viking franchise and the NFL. This exemption releases Adrian Peterson from his contractual obligations to play football and still get paid by the Vikings franchise. The money to Adrian Peterson comes from season tickets, ticket sales, The NFL Ticket as well as other sources. It could be argued that the NFL exemption for Adrian Peterson is tantamount to a bait and switch by the NFL. The NFL promises entertainment and Adrian Peterson was no small slice of that pie. The public accesses the perceived level of entertainment and then that individual decides whether he wants to purchase that entertainment. At $11 million dollars per year, Adrian Peterson is the prime factor in making the decision to purchase that product.
Was Adrian Peterson injured and placed on injured reserve? The answer is no.
Was Adrian Peterson disciplined by his team? Yes, but the organization rescinded the judgment to deactivate him.
Did Adrian Peterson lie, unlike others, about that fact that he disciplined his child? No. In fact he was forthright and did so based upon a long standing code passed down to him from his father.
Did Adrian Peterson violate a NFL league rule? It appears that the answer is Yes, however no one can specifically tell us exactly how many games for which he should be suspended and this is the crux of the problem as any new standard cannot be applied after the fact.
If for example the NFL determines that Adrian Peterson must forfeit an entire season for his action then that might be construed as too harsh a punishment that would apply to this particular franchise, and not another franchise, as it is apparent that some franchises count, and others don't. What is particularly heinous is the leagues refusal to impart a suspension as due process has not occurred proving his guilt or innocence. This is America ... love it or leave it ... but it is a process that must be allowed to follow it's course. What Adrian Peterson admits is not to be construed as either a conviction or as a sentence as punishment as disciplining your child, as you were once disciplined under the moors that you were instructed, may not even be a crime. In other words, the cart is clearly in front of the horse. League tampering ... based upon the court of public opinion and conjecture, on the other hand ... well that is another matter. In the old days they referred to these types of actions as a Witch Hunt ... call it Bully Gate 3 or Tom Brady cheetin' 15.
In America, during the grand jury, Adrian Peterson did not plead the 5th, which was his right to do. In short, he could have said absolutely nothing leaving the burden of proof upon the state however he waived that right and he admitted his actions. Why? Because whether you like it or not ... whether you agree with it or not ... he saw his right to discipline his child as his right as a parent. To be direct, and in comparison, my father used a strap on me and my sisters and there wasn't a day in his life that my father didn't know that I loved him. To be direct, there was a time when a spanking by hand just didn't do it however that strap spoke to me in a way that could hold no other meaning. It was his way of getting me to understand his way of thinking about things as I was clearly going down the wrong path. To put this into perspective, my father attended just about every parent teacher conferences and relished the opportunity but not for the reason that you might think. He stood right next to me as we approached each and every one of my teachers and the first words were my fathers. He stated quite clearly to each and every one of them that if I was ever to get out of line that he gave them his permission to let me have it, and to send a note home, so that he could give it to me when I got home for good measure. In my neighborhood, my father wasn't the exception ... he was apart of the rule. Again, up to the day of his death, my father knew that every day of my life that I loved him with all my heart. Did I ever use a belt on my children ... No ... but they were introduced to the sound of the crack of the belt. Every night my wife said it's time to go to bed. Did those kids move upon her command? No. Then I'd clap my hands together and rub them hard against each other and I clearly state," It's time to heat em up". Let me tell you they moved and then found a way to get to bed without question. They understood that I had a job to do ... a job that I was willing to do for them. Did I ever hit them? No, I didn't have to. To be direct, it was only last month when my son told me how much I abused them with all those spankings, when I asked him directly, "Son ... when exactly did I ever lay a hand on you". He thought about it and then laughed when he realized ... "You never did". But it was right there each and every night for them as it was my responsibility to guide them through life without either faltering or wavering. Let me ask you, do you think that my children might love me as much as I loved my father?
Last Friday, on the very day that the Vikings deactivated Adrian Peterson, with
my wife we watched an old movie, "The Fighting Sullivan's. It was about five brothers
that collectively joined the United States Navy and secured a special exemption
so that they could serve together on the same ship. After the Civil War, where entire towns
of men were wiped out in one single day (Antietam Creek- Sharpsburg, Maryland),
the United States Government implemented rules to prevent brothers from serving
together. As a result, all five Sullivan's sons lost their lives at the same moment when
their ships magazine exploded sending their ship to the depths of Iron Bottom
Sound in the Solomon's. What was poignant in that movie was a pivotal scene
or plot as one of the young sons was preparing to run away from home.
When confronted by the mother, the young son said that he'd never come home
again because his father hit him. The mother replied, "It is your
fathers right to hit you". One of the ten commandments states quite
clearly to honor your mother and father. The way that I interpret my
religious duty is that if that honor is broken, it is my duty as my sons father
to remedy that honor where I asked my son at the tender age of 20 in front of my
mother and intended future wife, "Son, can you ever imagine me grabbing you
by your neck up and slamming you up against that wall over there?"
That statement came out of no where ... but the timing of it was apparent and
necessary ... and the determination in my eye for an answer to my quarry was
apparent. My mother thought
nothing of that question as she clearly understood the depth and meaning of it. His intended was shocked by the question and my
son, reeling from that statement, had no immediate answer for that question ... so I helped him out with the answer.