Agamemnon wrote:

zn wrote:

Quinn averages just under $11 million under a year under the new deal, which isn’t exorbitant for a star defensive end these days.

11 M is actually less than Long.

But I guess what Quinn really wants is the guaranteed money–that that balances out the avg.

This deal just plain makes the future cap an open field of dreams.

I always assumed it would be far more than that, in terms of a cap hit.

I wonder if people realize that even with this deal the Rams now have probably around 68 or so M in 2016 cap space free right now.

I think they probably used up a bit more of the cap in 2016. 2014 and 2015 are close. The 68 million of space in 2016 is probably less than that, cause they have to take some money out somewhere. imo

Well what I did was subtact 11 M more from the current 2016 cap.

I doubt they backloaded it so I was just using the avg. annual amount to get a rough guess-timate.

The deal is worth $65.5 million w/$41.2 million guaranteed. That’s over a 6-year period because 2014 year and 2015 year were torn up

I don;t think that’s the final say on that contract. 65 M for 6 years is way too low–that’s less than what Long has in terms of the annual average. So we need to see the breakdown.

InvaderRam wrote:

the psychology and motivations behind staying in an abusive relationship are far more complex than what the general public thinks.

The idea being, many people think “mostly they stay because they’re financially dependent and have few options.”

But then I suppose WV is thinking of many of his poor clients and whether they could sit through that vid. Those people would already know that the stereotypes about why poor women would stay in abusive relationships aren’t true. So the question becomes, from his perspective, who is being talked to?

Quinn is believed to be targeting a deal that would pay him in the $15 million per season range on a four- to six-year extension.

That would be a good bargain. But I looked at it and it’s not that far off from other star D-linemen. Mario Wms’s deal is about 16 M a year.

Still, people talk about Watt’s 100 M (16.7 M a year) but if you look at it, it’s backloaded, so that makes it kind of phoney money.

I think one advantage the Rams have, besides guys wanting to play for Fisher (and in RQ’s case, Waufle too), is that they frontload–guys REALLY ARE getting that money, upfront.

Details On Adrian Peterson Indictment Charges

Nick Wright

September 12, 2014

http://houston.cbslocal.com/2014/09/12/exclusive-details-on-adrian-peterson-indictment-charges/

According to reports, Peterson has been indicted in Montgomery County, Texas for injury to a child.

The “whooping” – as Peterson put it when interviewed by police – occurred in Spring, Texas, in May. Peterson’s son had pushed another one of Peterson’s children off of a motorbike video game. As punishment, Peterson grabbed a tree branch – which he consistently referred to as a “switch” – removed the leaves and struck the child repeatedly.

The beating allegedly resulted in numerous injuries to the child, including cuts and bruises to the child’s back, buttocks, ankles, legs and scrotum, along with defensive wounds to the child’s hands. Peterson then texted the boy’s mother, saying that one wound in particular would make her “mad at me about his leg. I got kinda good wit the tail end of the switch.”

Peterson also allegedly said via text message to the child’s mother that he “felt bad after the fact when I notice the switch was wrapping around hitting I (sic) thigh” and also acknowledged the injury to the child’s scrotum in a text message, saying, “Got him in nuts once I noticed. But I felt so bad, n I’m all tearing that butt up when needed! I start putting them in timeout. N save the whooping for needed memories!”

In further text messages, Peterson allegedly said, “Never do I go overboard! But all my kids will know, hey daddy has the biggie heart but don’t play no games when it comes to acting right.”

According to police reports, the child, however, had a slightly different story, telling authorities that “Daddy Peterson hit me on my face.” The child also expressed worry that Peterson would punch him in the face if the child reported the incident to authorities. He also said that he had been hit by a belt and that “there are a lot of belts in Daddy’s closet.” He added that Peterson put leaves in his mouth when he was being hit with the switch while his pants were down. The child told his mother that Peterson “likes belts and switches” and “has a whooping room.”

Peterson, when contacted by police, admitted that he had “whooped” his son on the backside with a switch as a form of punishment, and then, in fact, produced a switch similar to the one with which he hit the child. Peterson also admitted that he administered two different “whoopings” to his son during the visit to Texas, the other being a punishment for the 4-year-old scratching the face of a 5-year-old.

In an interview with Houston police, Peterson was very matter-of-fact and calm about the incident, appearing to believe he had done nothing wrong and reiterating how much he cared about his son and only used “whoopings” or “spankings” as a last resort. He offered up information that the police didn’t have and was incredulous when asked if some of the numerous wounds and marks on the child were from an extension cord, saying, “Oh, no, I’d never hit my child with an extension cord. I remember how it feels to get whooped with an extension cord. I’d never do that.”

Peterson also said, “Anytime I spank my kids, I talk to them before, let them know what they did, and of course after.” Peterson also expressed regret that his son did not cry – because then, Peterson said, he would have known that the switch was doing more damage than intended. He didn’t realize the “tip of the switch and the ridges of the switch were wrapping around [the child’s] legs.” Peterson also acknowledged that this was administered directly to the child’s skin and with the child’s pants pulled down.

Peterson later told police that the marks on his son’s buttocks were similar to the marks any of his other children get when he “spanks them with a switch,” but that the mark on the child’s leg from when the switch “wrapped around his thigh” was more severe than anything he had ever done in the past.

Peterson said he knew that his son had a doctor’s appointment scheduled for when he returned home and that the doctor would discover the injuries. Peterson added that if he felt like he was “really wrong for what I did, or had any ill intent, there’s no way I would have let him get on that plane.” He went on to say, “I have nothing to hide, but I also understand when a child has marks like that on his leg, they have to report that.”

When Peterson was asked how he felt about the incident, he said, “To be honest with you, I feel very confident with my actions because I know my intent.” He also described the incident as a “normal whooping” in regards to the “welps” on the child’s buttocks, but that he felt bad immediately when he saw the injuries on the child’s legs. Peterson estimated he “swatted” his son “10 to 15” times, but he’s not sure because he doesn’t “ever count how many pops I give my kids.”

Peterson went on to reiterate again how much he loves all his kids, and only “whoops” them because he wants them to do right. Toward the end of the interview, Peterson said he would reconsider using switches in the future, but said he would never “eliminate whooping my kids . . . because I know how being spanked has helped me in my life.”

After the child returned home to Minnesota in late May, the mother took the son to his previously scheduled doctor appointment and the doctor that examined the child said the injuries were consistent with child abuse and that it appeared the child had injuries from one incident involving a “switch” and another incident possibly involving a cord.

Authorities in Minnesota referred the case to the Houston Police Department to investigate. During the investigation, authorities determined that the incident did not take place on Woodway Drive in Houston, as originally believed, but instead in Spring, Texas, which is in the Montgomery County jurisdiction.

According to a law-enforcement source, Peterson was indicted Friday in Montgomery County, Texas, but has not yet been arrested.

The NFL recently unveiled a domestic-violence policy, which stipulates a six-game suspension for a first offense but allows for steeper penalties if children are involved.

As of publication, Peterson is not under arrest and is expected to play for the Vikings this weekend when they host the Patriots.

The Vikings have deactivated Peterson for Sunday’s game against the Patriots.

The Montgomery County Sheriff Office released the following statement:

On Thursday, September 11, 2014, a Montgomery County Grand Jury, “true billed”, Adrian Lewis Peterson on a charge of injury to a child. On today’s date at 2:47 PM, a warrant was issued and entered for the arrest of Adrian Peterson for that charge.

Since the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office has referred the case to the Montgomery County District Attorney’s Office, and the investigation has led to a, “true bill”, on a criminal offense, the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office will not discuss details in reference to the case or investigation.

At the time of this release, Adrian Peterson is not in custody at the Montgomery County Jail and the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office does not have any details in the arrest of Adrian Peterson.

Ian Rapoport@RapSheet
Arrest of Adrian Peterson stems from the disciplining of a son with a switch, source says. He’s been indicted

Ian Rapoport@RapSheet
The investigation has been going on for some time with Adrian Peterson, source says. He testified for a grand jury weeks ago.

—

Vikings RB Adrian Peterson Indicted For Child Abuse

http://www.chatsports.com/nfl/a/BREAKING-Vikings-RB-Adrian-Peterson-Indicted-For-Child-Abuse-10-206-2304

Vikings RB Adrian Peterson has been charged with reckless or negligent injury to a child.

Fox 26 in Houston is reporting that the All-Pro was indicted in Montgomery County. Peterson missed practice on Thursday, with no explanation given for his absence.

As reported by Ian Rapoport of NFL Network, the charges arose after Peterson allegedly use a stick to discipline his young son.

Using a switch against a child is considered to be a form of corporal punishment, with the severity of the punishment usually determining whether legal action is taken on a case-by-case basis. 38 countries have full-on bans instituted when it comes to using physical means to punish the child. The United States is not one of those countries.

As tweeted by Jay Glazer of FOX Sports, Peterson will now be forced to turn himself in to Texas authorities, which understandably puts his status for Sunday’s Minnesota Vikings/New England Patriots game in question.

GreatRamNTheSky wrote:

WV, the same reason as any broadcasting company would suspend him currently because they do not want to deal with the backlash of those who would demand his job and those who would protest the company and they do not want to seem insensitive to the victims rights.

My point WV, is it seems we’ve become a society where if somebody utters something insensitive or stupid as human beings do every once in a while that we immediately call for them to be punished. Can we not simply disagree with him rather to extract a pound of flesh? People say stupid things. Even broadcasters as we have seen over the years.

When you work for someone in the capacity he did, and speak up at work, you are not expressing an opinion–you are representing your workplace. They have a right to determine whether or not you have represented them appropriately. He does not have the right to that job, and that job comes with expectations of certain kinds of behavior. For example he cannot start swearing on the air. Or to say vote for this candidate not that one. Etc. Or explain his favorite sexual practices and how he would employ them with whoever the camera happens to be showing in the stands at the moment.

Meanwhile he can say what he wants. He never lost that right. He just cannot do it as a representative of the organization, at work.

Reports: Rice told Goodell truth; Goodell feared backlash for victim

By Eric Edholm

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/reports–rice-told-goodell-truth–goodell-feared-backlash-for-victim-233406125.html

Two reports have taken the Ray Rice saga in another direction on Thursday.

ESPN’s Outside the Lines, citing four sources, is reporting that Ray Rice told NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell on June 16 that he punched his then-fiancée Janay Palmer in a casino elevator. In an interview with CBS News, Goodell conversely indicated this week that Rice’s account was “ambiguous” compared to what the full video inside the elevator showed.

“Ray didn’t lie to the commissioner,” one source told OTL. “[Rice] told the full truth to Goodell — he made it clear he had hit her, and he told Goodell he was sorry and that it wouldn’t happen again.”

A second source told ESPN something similar:

“He told the truth,” the second source said. “This is a public lynching of Ray.”

Wall Street Journal earlier on Thursday reported that Goodell did not serve Rice with a stiffer penalty out of respect for Palmer (now Rice), according to one NFL franchise owner.

That owner said that Goodell revealed to other owners privately that during his investigation — specifically, in that meeting with the Rices in June — Janay Rice said she had hit Ray Rice and believed she was partly to blame for the incident escalating. According to those private conversations with the owners, Goodell left the meeting with the Rices believing that Janay Rice had become unconscious after falling during the scuffle.

The ESPN and WSJ reports appear to conflict on that latter point.

After Goodell suspended Rice for two games in July, per the WSJ report, Goodell told several NFL owners that he felt it might have been insensitive to doubt Janay Rice’s story and come off as an indictment of her character. It appeared that Goodell felt uncomfortable with challenging her story.

But the ESPN report says there was no ambiguity in what Ray Rice told Goodell about what happened. Although it’s possible that both reports contain truths, it appears that a few anonymous sources view what happened in that June meeting with the Rices a bit differently.

If the NFL indeed is going to have an independent investigation, these facts should be vetted out over time, and Goodell reportedly has told the investigators that he’s ready to comply with the process effective immediately.

Mackeyser wrote:

Ya know… the other option is that the Vikes defense is really, really that much better and we all just don’t know it, yet.

Actually that’s what I think. Zimmer turns defenses around. He’s good. In fact let’s see how the Bengals do without him. So far they’re 27th (admittedly early)…last year with Zimmer they were 3rd. This year the Vikes are 11th (admittedly early)…last year before Zimmer they were 31st.

Sigh.

Read about half of it.

Others might like it. There are different views of things.