The Vikings and RB Adrian Peterson "officially have renewed their vows" after an "uncertain offseason packed with tension, hard feelings and distrust," according to Matt Vensel of the Minneapolis STAR TRIBUNE. The Vikings yesterday announced that Peterson and the team "'mutually agreed' to restructure the final three years" of his contract. Exact terms "were not disclosed, but the new deal reportedly includes" $20M in guaranteed money for Peterson in '15 and '16 combined, something his old contract "lacked." Yesterday's announcement "confirmed that the Vikings and Peterson indeed have patched up their marriage after several rocky months, with both sides coming away happy" (Minneapolis STAR TRIBUNE, 7/22). YAHOO SPORTS' Charles Robinson cited sources as saying that Vikings GM Rick Spielman "never wavered inside the franchise -- he wanted Peterson on the roster," and "barring a massive trade offer, Peterson wasn't going anywhere." Spielman's stance "set the stage." It put Peterson into a place where either he was going to "show up and play football, or he was going to sit out and lose chunks of a massive" $13M payday. But as "lost as Peterson was at times -- and as strained as it seemed" between the Vikings and Peterson's agent, Ben Dogra -- it was "never as bad as some of what was reported" (SPORTS.YAHOO.com, 7/21).
IS THIS REAL LIFE? In Minneapolis, Jim Souhan writes a "humane Vikings fan" has "little choice but to compartmentalize today." The team rewarded Peterson with a contract "restructured to his preferences." This is the "latest proof that the barrier between the real world" and the NFL "makes the Rocky Mountains look like spilled salt." Souhan: "If you’re humane, you wonder why a player who beat a child, missed 15 games because of his actions, aged a year and complained about the franchise’s remarkably deferential treatment of him is deserving of a restructured contract. ... You don’t restructure the contract of a 30-year-old running back who caused you headaches and scared off sponsors unless you think you can win big with him" (Minneapolis STAR TRIBUNE, 7/22). ESPN.com's Kevin Seifert wrote the decision "made sense within the context of league finances." Peterson had "complained publicly about his contract and, after all, is the best player on a team that is selling ticket licenses for a new stadium" opening in '16. Moments like these, however, "compel us to step outside the bubble of professional sports and accept just how warped it can be." From a broader sense, it is "undeniably ridiculous that the Vikings were compelled to reward a player who was at the center of one of the league's worst years in history." The civic optics "are terrible." Inside the bubble, this is a team "taking care of a relatively standard offseason hiccup." From the outside, where the "glare has been increasingly critical and unforgiving, it further buries the NFL as an awkward social participant" (ESPN.com, 7/21).
