Allow me to momentarily interrupt the ever-present and ongoing Teddy vs. Sam debate (Mobility! Winner! Accuracy! Smile!) with another edition of Links of the Week. Perhaps the only Vikings-related topic discussed as much as the quarterback dilemma (which, until both are healthy, is not a dilemma at all) the last few weeks is the potential landing place for Adrian Peterson. Peterson is still under contract with the Vikings for one more year, but with an $18 million cap hit, there’s a high likelihood the team will cut bait. The Vikings could of course bring him back at a lower dollar amount, but as our first bullet points out, the Adrian Peterson speculation knows no bounds:
- In fact, the Star Tribune‘s Michael Rand writes Peterson has been linked to basically every NFL team. This post is a good collection of all the speculation, from intriguing to ridiculous. Some of the more reasonable teams named are the Giants, Buccaneers and…the Packers.
- Adrian himself weighed in on Twitter Wednesday night, in his usual ham-fisted way of trying to be ominous or something:
From where I’m sitting, it looks to me like the majority of Vikings fans are either apathetic about Peterson returning or would like him gone altogether. This may or may not be representative of the total fanbase, but I imagine a healthy chunk of Vikings nation had the same reaction as me to Peterson’s tweet: whaaaaaaaaatever, dude.
- The only reason I didn’t lead with this is because everyone has already seen it, but if you haven’t, please stop reading and go watch all of Randy Moss’s 40+ yard touchdowns. Moss turned 40 this week, and NFL.com put together this nice (long) cut in his honor. The early Vikings stuff is especially good—I forgot how great Moss was at fighting off defensive backs and winning 50/50 balls.
- Vikings.com‘s Craig Peters asked five high-profile NFL reporters how a full offseason together could help the Sam Bradford/Pat Shurmur combination. It’s always refreshing to hear from national guys and get Vikings opinions from outside the bubble.
- The venerable Sid Hartman thinks the Vikings should mimic the 1973 team next season. Sid’s become an easy punching bag for local media, but his knowledge of Minnesota sports history is unmatched, and the parallel he makes between Fran Tarkenton and Sam Bradford—both in their second seasons after being acquired by the Vikings—might sound ridiculous, but it’s at least interesting to ponder.
- Potential targets for the franchise tag—remember that?—from The Viking Age. Could Cordarrelle Patterson get slapped with the tag? (Probably not, no. But you never know.)
- Finally, have some fun with Vikings valentines from Daily Norseman‘s Eric Thompson.
View Comments
"I imagine a healthy chunk of Vikings nation had the same reaction as me to Peterson’s tweet: whaaaaaaaaatever, dude."
And after all of the apathy and outright hostility from the fan base over the last few months, you expected him to express his undying wish to stay with the team? Was the e-mail you quoted in any way actually hostile or inappropriate? Jeez, double standard, much?
Hey cka2nd. First of all, I'm not sure what email you're referencing. Second, did I expect him to express his undying wish to stay in MN? Not especially, nor do I think it's necessary. But I find it a bit silly the way he goes about cryptically dropping hints here and there. Minnesota - and its fans - have been pretty good to Adrian over the years, all things considered.
Sorry, I meant Peterson's tweet about the Giants that you had quoted above. Through 2012 and maybe 2013, Vikings' fans were good to Peterson, but fans can turn on a dime, and over the last few months - heck, starting with the child abuse charges but speeding up during this past season - many fans seem to have reversed themselves almost 180 degrees. Where before, they might have been uncritical, now they are hyper-critical. And while anything they say about him, no matter how unfair or factually incorrect, is fair game, any expression of disappointment on his part, hell, anything but abject contrition, is a sign of his ego, attitude, sense of entitlement, etc., etc.
What this exchange with you also confirms for me is that Twitter is a plague that must be avoided at all costs.
I do agree with that. I think once his productivity started dropping, many fans began to view him as expendable, which kind of started this whole "OMG you HAVE to cut Adrian!!!!" thing. And I personally have never thought him to be entitled or have an overinflated ego (at least no more than any other star athlete), so those ideas baffle me, as well. I do think the child abuse charges forever changed the way a lot of fans look at him, and, as you said, kind of started this whole anti-Adrian movement. Which I think is understandable; I try to be more willing to accept that people make mistakes--no matter how heinous--and once they've paid their penance, move on. But not everyone's that way, especially with child abuse, and I get that.
My comment over at Mr. Hartman's column is apparently awaiting moderation, but while his Tarkenton/Bradford analogy is not without merit, he forgets that it was a defensive collapse that drove the Vikings down in 1972, and it was first and foremost a revival on defense, along with improvements in both the passing and running games, that put the Vikings back in the Super Bowl after the '73 season. Getting our current defense back in consistent tip-top shape and reviving a truly wretched running attack - along with greatly improved offensive tackle play - will probably do more to get Bradford and the team to the next level than any improvement in Bradford's play in isolation.