Explaining Adrian Peterson's suspension and what it means for his future, Adrian Peterson was denied reinstatement from the exempt/commissioner's permission list Tuesday, and instead will be suspended for "at least" the rest of the 2014 season. The fallout from Peterson's decision to beat his four-year-old son with a switch may be too broad to properly categorize. In the immediate aftermath of the NFL's announcement, we can at least try to explain what is forthcoming for the running back, the Minnesota Vikings and the NFL.
Why was Peterson suspended?
When Peterson was placed on the commissioner's permission list in September, the understanding between the Vikings and the NFL was that Peterson would remain on the list until his legal situation had been resolved. That resolution came when Peterson pleaded no contest to misdemeanor charges of reckless assault, resulting in probation, a $4,000 fine and 80 hours of community service. Goodell instead made a statement.
Technically, Goodell could have held Peterson on the exempt list for as long he wanted. As long as Peterson remained on the list, he would be paid his regular salary, per protocol. Now, Peterson will not only continue to sit, but he won't get paid for as long as his suspension lasts -- at least six more games.
Goodell explained his decision to suspend Peterson in a lengthy statement. The key points of his reasoning were:
1) Peterson abused a four-year-old child. The release cited the "significant" difference in strength between the two, and the fact that the child was defenseless, whether "to flee, to fight back, or to seek help from law enforcement" as an adult might.
2) Peterson used a switch -- a long, thin tree branch -- as "the functional equivalent of a weapon," particularly in Peterson's hands.
3) Peterson's apparent lack of remorse. The running back has acknowledged what he did, but following his indictment he indicated that he though he was right, that he was "very confident with my actions because I know my intent," and that he may continue to use violence to discipline his children.
The Vikings have exactly six games remaining this season. That number is significant. The NFL's new domestic violence policy dictates a six game suspension for first-time offenders, but also gives the league leeway to extend that suspension depending on circumstances. Peterson's case qualifies, based on the reasons Goodell gave above and what the commissioner wrote when he announced the policy in August.
Mitigating circumstances will be considered, and more severe discipline will be imposed if there are aggravating circumstances such as the presence or use of a weapon, choking, repeated striking, or when the act is committed against a pregnant woman or in the presence of a child.
Will Peterson appeal the decision?
Yes. Peterson has a three-day window to file an appeal, but has reportedly already moved ahead with the process. Filing the appeal will keep him on the exempt list, allowing him to continue to collect his paycheck while the appeal proceeds. A hearing will likely occur quickly.
What will Peterson argue?
The NFL Players Association released a statement that lays out Peterson's potential case. The statement suggests that Peterson and the NFL had an agreement that he would be reinstated once his legal obligations had been fulfilled, and that one NFL executive had told Peterson that "his time on the Commissioner's list would be considered as time served." The NFLPA claims that the league has ignored obligations and inconsistently meted out punishment.
If the Peterson and the NFLPA can get in front of a neutral arbitrator and prove any of this, it will be a messy situation for Goodell, who has already come under fire from the NFLPA for his indefinite suspension of Ray Rice. If all the union can stand are tacit agreements, however, Peterson may have a difficult time obtaining a favorable ruling. The NFL can also say it kept its word by simply stating that Peterson's paid leave was considered when it defined the terms of the suspension.
Will Peterson play for the Vikings again?
The Vikings have yet to release a statement concerning Peterson's suspension, but the team has for, the most part, supported its running back. The NFL dragged its a feet a bit in reinstating Peterson perhaps in part because it knew that it would put the team in an awkward situation. Vikings executives were reportedly torn over how the handle Peterson's return. But never was the conversation a matter of "if" rather than "when."
The overwhelming reason why Peterson may play for the Vikings again is that he is still Adrian Peterson, one of the NFL's all-time great running backs and the 2012 league MVP. There may not be a tougher physical specimen in the NFL today. Minnesota could actually field one of the league's most fearsome running attacks with Peterson working in tandem with Jerick McKinnon, which would be an immense benefit to young quarterback Teddy Bridgewater.
The reason why the Vikings wouldn't bring back Peterson is PR. The team doesn't owe Peterson any more guaranteed money on his contract. Minnesota is free to release Peterson in the offseason at no financial cost if it feels it would rather avoid a potential headache.
How the Vikings handled Peterson's status at the beginning of the season shined an ugly light on the reality of big businesses. The team activated Peterson for Week 3 to play against the New Orleans Saints, but changed its mind by sending out a late-night press release announcing that Peterson would be moved to the exempt list.
In the release, owners Mark and Zygi Wilf said they wanted to "get this right," an adage they would repeat several times during a live press conference. The new public stance came just days after the Vikings excused Peterson as "disciplining a child."
What happened in between the Vikings' decision to activate Peterson and their press release putting him on the exempt list is open for interpretation. At face value, the Vikings' front office had a change of heart. Cynics may point out that the team received overwhelmingly negative feedback from fans, sponsors and even the governor, and reacted only because it saw that playing Peterson could hurt its revenue.
If that's the case, the team may not hesitate to let go of Peterson. There may be feelings of remorse, given what Peterson has meant to the success of the team, but the Vikings' front office is also concerned about its business. The benefit of keeping Peterson may be less than the cost.
Can Peterson's image be salvaged?
Before September, Peterson reputation was relatively clean. He was the public face of the Vikings, to no one's surprise. He was the hard-working, all-everything back who had conquered career threatening injury in spectacular fashion. Off the field, Peterson was well known for his charitable exploits. He was the brightest spot for a team that had won more than six games just once in its last five seasons.
The child abuse case changed his image rather quickly. Sponsors, including Nike, began dropping the running back, then took their wrath out on the team when it tried to activate Peterson ahead of Week 3.
Then the Minneapolis Star-Tribune released a report detailing allegations that Peterson was running a sham charity and had been accused of rape in the past. Though Peterson refuted that his foundation had misused funding, the Star-Tribune's report added another layer of tarnish to his reputation.
What anyone thinks of Peterson will be up to him or her. In the grand scheme, however, people, media and corporations tend to have short memories. At some point, we'll be writing about Peterson again in terms of what he is doing on the football field, just as we do now for the most part with Ben Roethlisberger and Michael Vick.
But we won't be talking about Peterson as an exemplar of virtue again, in all likelihood.
What is the lasting impact of Peterson's arrest on the NFL?
It was a bad offseason for the NFL. Peterson's case compounded the domestic violence issues of Ray Rice, Greg Hardy and Ray McDonald. The Rice case in particular showed the league as ill-prepared and perhaps vindictive in its approach to domestic violence, and inhuman in the way that big corporations often are. Outrage over the offseason problems of its players moved the league to drastically beef up its domestic violence policy on the fly and promise a revamped personal conduct policy.
The NFL should be more vigilant in how it handles cases of off-field violence in the future. That's good. That said, the league needed a confluence of scandals to big name players, several PR gaffes and outrage both public and in the media to realize it needed to evolve. The NFL may still have a problem at its core, which means that it may not be far from its next major damage control project.
