< Viking game blackout | Main | Ahhhh! It's the new ballpark! Everyone run! >

September 10, 2007

A good beginning

aptd.jpg
I think we all know what happened next

I was at the Vikings game yesterday and witnessed Adrian Peterson's first NFL touchdown. I also witnessed the beginnings of what looks like a dominating Viking defense. Even Udeze got a sack so you know something must be going right for the Purple. Here are a couple of other things I noticed:

In fact, yesterday's "Playbook" had a good column called "5 Decades with Freddy" in which Fred Zamberletti is given some space to reminisce about the glory days of the franchise. One story Fred tells is particularly humorous and may give the secret of getting the Vikings team fired up for game day:

"The most eventful Atlanta memory was when we were playing a game in Atlanta. It was probably three-quarters of the way through the season and it was a dismal day. The team was down; you could tell at the pregame mean that it was a bit of a downer. The guys weren't moving with any energy. Bud Grant was always very strict about the pregame meal. It was always the same: steak, eggs, green beans, and a baked potato. That day, Carl Eller asked the waiter to bring him some pancakes. So, the waiter said 'sure' and went to the kitchen to bring him some pancakes. Grant, who never misses a thing, looked at our operations guy and he didn't even say anything, he just moved his eyes. And the operations guy jumped to his feet, ran over to the waiter and had the guy take the pancakes back to the kitchen. Well, Eller saw that and he sprung from his chair. He charged the waiter's tray of dishes on the table; it had dishes of food and glasses. He hauled off and kicked that thing straight in the air. Dishes, food, glasses, everything went flying. The team went into an uproar. Bud sat there and didn't show any emotion, and he didn't have to give a pregame speech that day! They were all fired up."

Great story. In fact, I think it holds the key for the success of this year's team. Their motto should be, "No pancakes." Skol Vikings!

Posted by snackeru at September 10, 2007 6:29 AM

Comments

If AP continues to perform the way he did yesterday, he may solve the blackout issue in short order. Zygi may have had to make his last bulk ticket purchase this year. And, I totally agree on the Immigrant Song. Where HAS that been?

Posted by: Derek at September 10, 2007 1:49 PM

If only the Vikes could play Joey Harrington every week, they would go 16-0...How does this bum continue to be on an NFL roster???

Posted by: kevin in az at September 10, 2007 2:13 PM

The Vikings finally play Immigrant song and I only hear about it 24 hours later??!! Shane, in the past news like that would have been on Greet Machine seconds after the game ended. Also we need you to expand your list of wishes. Just think:

1. Outdoor Twins ballpark - Check.
2. Vikings play Immigrant song - Check.
3. Gophers fire Munson - Check.
4. Led Zeppelin reuniting and touring - Check.

Expand your vision Shane, take on world peace, a cure for cancer, or the Packers going 1-15.

Regarding concourses...You've obviously never been to an older baseball park. Wrigley, old Comiskey, Yankee Stadium all have/had much much narrower concourses than HHH metrodome.

Posted by: freealonzo at September 10, 2007 2:56 PM

Yankee Stadium doesn't have concourses, it has tunnels.

Posted by: SBG at September 10, 2007 3:50 PM

Since it looks like Vikings fans are about to get really excited about Adrian Peterson, I wanted to note one thing... His initials are "AP", but his nickname is "AD" for "All Day" Adrian Peterson, as in "he could run all day." I just figured that if you are going to have a star running back, you should at least know his nickname. I've seen him play in the Big XII the last few years, and when he's healthy he's a beast. I hope he has a great career.

Posted by: The Rational Actor at September 10, 2007 5:44 PM

It's funny that he got the nickname "All Day" considering how often he was injured at Oklahoma.

Posted by: Lafferty at September 10, 2007 5:55 PM

how often he was injured at Oklahoma

Care to chronicle how much time he missed at Oklahoma?......I didn't think so.

Posted by: STM at September 11, 2007 11:23 AM

For a person who rarely backs up what they say because you claim you don't want to do other people's research for them, it's a bit ironic that you ask Lafferty to "chronicle" how much time AD missed at Oklahoma. However, there is so much information on this subject, that I had to post it. I also find it very amusing that you arrogantly ignore AD's past durability issues due to your purple-colored glasses.

Here's a couple links for you (although, based on your past comments, I would have believed that the omniscient STM would not need any assistance with his Internet research):

2006
"Adrian Peterson broke his collarbone on Oct. 14 against Iowa State and missed the rest of Oklahoma's regular season, returning for the first time in the bowl game against Boise State"

http://www.adrianpetersononline.com/news-20070426.php

That would make it 7 games missed out of 14 total games in 2006, when you look at Oklahoma's 2006 schedule:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/teamsched?teamId=201&year=2006

2005
"Adrian Peterson was one of the Consensus All-Big 12 in 2005. Adrian Peterson missed all or more than half of four games with ankle injury"

http://www.adrianpetersononline.com/

That would make it 4 games (or more than half a game) missed out of 12 total games in 2005, when you look at Oklahoma's 2005 schedule:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/teamsched?teamId=201&year=2005

2004
"Lone exceptions were game 10 when Adrian Peterson played sparingly in a win over Nebraska (15-58) due to injury"

http://www.adrianpetersononline.com/

That would make it 1 game he played sparingly in out of 13 total games in 2004, when you look at Oklahoma's 2004 schedule:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/teamsched?teamId=201&year=2004

Notice a trend? AD has been missing more games in each of the past 3 years.

Also, the following is informative on the subject:

"It's widely assumed that Adrian Peterson will declare for the NFL draft. So why would a player with a history of health issues (separated shoulder, sprained ankle and broken collarbone) who could become a top-10 pick put that in jeopardy?"

http://www.adrianpetersononline.com/news-20061222.php

Also, this article also details past injury issues:

http://www.adrianpetersononline.com/news-20070124.php

Care to do your own research??......I didn't think so.

Posted by: The Rational Actor at September 11, 2007 11:53 AM

As Greet Machine's college football guy (who doesn't follow nfl) i would say this about Peterson:

Watch the tape of his collarbone injury, if you can somehow prove to me that ANY PERSON wouldn't have been severely injured by that, i'll buy you a soda.

the guy is actually pretty durable... remember, in college the coaches tend to be very protective of their athletes (moreso than in the pros)... when AP was out, it was because Bob Stoops said so.

Remember the Fiesta Bowl last year (who could forget it, honestly?)... Peterson kept the Sooners in it by the force of his will. There is only one back in college today I'd rather have on a team, and that's Mike Hart of Michigan... he's a gamer.

Posted by: CJ at September 11, 2007 12:36 PM

I think Peterson is an outstanding back, however, to say he kept Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl by the force of his will is truly false. He wasn't even the leading rusher in the game and prior to his 25 yd TD in OT, he only had 52 yds rushing for the game. He was hardly dominant.

Turnovers and big plays will be what that game will be remembered for, not Peterson.

As far as the best college back, to me it's Darren McFadden at Arkansas.

Posted by: Cheesehead Craig at September 11, 2007 1:14 PM

Can't a local boy get some love on the Greet Machine?!? C'mon!!

Posted by: Amir Pinnix at September 11, 2007 1:38 PM

This came up on TalkVikes.com... I am absolutely positive they've played "Immigrant Song" before! I haven't been to a Vikes game in a few years, but remember hearing it at least 2 or 3 times around 2001-2002.

Posted by: Kurtis at September 11, 2007 3:06 PM

cheesy - i'll take the two td's he had... his rushing wasn't dominant, but he kept them in the game. i would argue without him, boise would have rolled them.

I like McFadden, but I can't give a lot of love to the SEC... I think it's overrated. (not as much as the Big 11... but close) Of course, i've been told college backs dont always translate to the nfl... i dont know how to look for the difference... since i dont watch the nfl.

Posted by: CJ at September 11, 2007 3:33 PM

I think it's too soon to give AD Offensive ROTY honors, but Don Banks is ready to do it... Click my name for the story.

Me, I'm just glad to have something to look forward to on Sunday again. AD's bobble-and-catch-and-run was more exciting than ANY offensive play from last season.

Posted by: Kurtis at September 11, 2007 3:53 PM

CJ - For more fun discussion :)

Peterson's 25 yd TD run in OT was outstanding, no doubt. The rest of the game though, he was borderline invisible. His backup, Allen Patrick had a better night than he did right up to the OT. Had Peterson not been in the game, I highly doubt that Boise State would have rolled over Oklahoma as Patrick proved before and during that game he was more than capable of picking up the slack.

Peterson had an outstanding college career and is a great talent. I'm not arguing against that. Simply that he was not nearly as dominant or as big of a difference maker in the Fiesta Bowl as you are making him out to be.

Posted by: Cheesehead Craig at September 11, 2007 6:52 PM

Hmmmm...Adrian Peterson or Justin Harrell????

Hmmmm...This is a tough one indeed.

Posted by: kevin in az at September 11, 2007 7:01 PM

Hell, I'm not going to argue that one Kevin. I'd rather have Peterson hands down. But then, we didn't have the luxury of picking at #7 like the Vikes did.

Posted by: Cheesehead Craig at September 11, 2007 10:00 PM

I'm sure you wouldn't argue that the Vikings 7th pick of AP was a better selection of talent..It's impossible. However, Green Bay used a first round pick (16th overall) on what was arguably a middle 2nd round pick at best.

I just think since you're having fun with AP's past injury issues, I can have fun with Justin Harrell reporting to camp 30 lbs overweight, unable to finish practices through the first week because he was getting too tired. Then just before the the season started, Robert Nunn admitted that Harrell was maybe the 6th best lineman at camp.

All this with Brady Quinn on the board, not really knowing Aaron Rodgers is the real deal.

That being said, I think the Vikings "gamble" with the raw talent of Peterson at #7 is a bit safer than Green Bay's "reach" of Harrell at #16.

Posted by: kevin in az at September 11, 2007 10:33 PM

Whoa Whoa Whoa there Kevin...

I never once mentioned anything about AP's past injuries. I was simply discussing his role in the Fiesta Bowl. I have said numerous times that I think he's an outstanding back, he just simply wasn't as big of a factor in the Bowl game as CJ was stating he was.

As for Harrell, yeah, I wasn't too pleased with the pick as I definately thought it was a reach. But as always, we judge draft picks after 3 years. Maybe he'll be a stud, maybe not but we'll just have to wait and see.

As for Quinn, didn't want him. Think he's overrated. No reason to take 2 QB's in the first round in a 3 year period.

Posted by: Cheesehead Craig at September 12, 2007 7:36 AM

Back to the matter at hand;

"Oputz the liar" needs to be more careful about what he says. Throughout this process of maligning the land owners and even his attempts to "set the record straight" on Greet Machine only prove his self serving lies!

Remember this little tidbit in July?

http://blog.lib.umn.edu/snackeru/greet/2007/07/11/setting_the_record_straight.html#comments

-- Why not start with this one: "The only party that really benefits during condemnation are the lawyers." To be honest, I sometimes feel this way myself. I went to the opening arguments at the condemnation hearing and saw a courtroom packed with lawyers. It is too bad. I can only justify this kind of expense by saying two things: Good legal advice is expensive. And I would rather have the public represented by the best legal team available than go with a subpar legal team and see a lousy performance in court. Let me also say that I have never heard anyone suggest, as the recent Star Tribune article does, that our legal expenses will approach $8 million. That is a huge figure and it has no basis in fact. The County's current contract with Leonard, Street & Deinard is for $950,000. I understand that we may have to increase that amount as the case proceeds, but it should give you a sense of scale. That contract, by the way, was unanimously approved by the County Board. Even my colleagues who opposed the ballpark project voted to protect the public interest in court.

[I asked for further clarification on this point and received this information: "The attorneys fees come out of the infrastructure or ballpark fund (not general county revenue funded by property taxes). PLEASE keep in mind that the $8 million figure cited by the Strib is completely groundless. I've never seen an estimate that high. Ever. It came from the landowners, but it's based on nothing.

To give you an idea of where we are right now: our contract with Leonard Street & Deinard for legal fees, which started last August, is capped at $950,000. That contract includes not only condemnation work but also legal work drafting and vetting the development agreement with the Twins, the grant agreement with the Ballpark Authority, and any number of other legal documents." -- Back to Opat's email.]

And now in todays Strib;

http://www.startribune.com/462/story/1417141.html

Last week, the owners offered to settle for about $33 million, plus legal fees, which the county is obligated to pay under the state's condemnation statute. The county said the fees would make the total about $40 million.

Oputz, what a schmuck! doesn't he have any integrity? Let's see what twist and bend on reality he comes up with to explain this, if he even bothers.

Posted by: STM at September 12, 2007 8:12 AM

I noticed that too. One thing STM is forgetting is that the $40 million needs to include LPII's lawyer fees. Pogin says LPII's lawyer fees are $2.5 million. That brings the total to $35.5 million. Where is the County coming up with that extra $4.5 to get to $40 million? Is it their lawyer fees or is it a rounding up p.r. statement?

Posted by: Freealonzo at September 12, 2007 8:40 AM

You shouldn't be able to explain away blatantly false statements as "P.R." There has to be a line somewhere and gross, negligent exaggerations fall across it.

Posted by: STM at September 12, 2007 8:50 AM

Gotta agree with STM here. Sounds like legal fees are a lot more than the $950K Opat suggested. I am so sick of this land issue. I know it happens in every ballpark deal, but I have yet to see one at this level of severity. This mess will continue on for many months.

I wonder if Zygi is secretly wishing he had hung in there with Anoka County. He has to be wondering what possibilities there are with Minneapolis as this continues to develop.

Posted by: Derek at September 12, 2007 9:17 AM

I think "no pancakes" was Steve Hutchinson's motto last season.

Posted by: chapman at September 12, 2007 9:53 AM

Fine STM, but what do you call LPII's figure of $65 million when now they are willing to settle for half that amount? If $65M isn't a gross, negligent exageration I don't know what is. However instead of dragging everyone's name through the mud, maybe a little acknowledgement of that's the way the real estate game is played.

Posted by: Freealonzo at September 12, 2007 10:07 AM

Apples and oranges, Free. Arguing a subjective value (one that WAS substantiated by the zoning) and representing a number that turns out to be off by 500% (a mere 2 months later) as FACT, are two different things.

When it was in Oputz's best interest to represent low legal fees (to support his decision to proceed with condemnation), he did. And now that its in his best interest to acknowledge them for what they truly are, he does. He is simply being dishonest vs. the sellers (in your example) believing their land to be worth more. I think we're finding out what I've said all along; Oputz will say and do anything to serve his interests. The problem with doing it in this instance is everything he says is being written down and subsequently his character is being exposed.

Posted by: STM at September 12, 2007 10:29 AM

STM - obviously you aren't a fan of Opatz, but I'd hold off on making the leap that the county's legal fees are over the $950,000 by a few million. It could be the case where they are assuming (apparently inaccurately) that LPII's legal fees would be that high.

Who knows. This needs to end.

Posted by: IowaWigman at September 12, 2007 11:01 AM

I agree. This is a non-story. Who knows and who cares. Moving on ...

Posted by: Shane at September 12, 2007 11:04 AM

Fine. Rationalize all you want. When Oputz wrote that letter in July everybody knew full well that the County was also responsible for the sellers legal fees and in that context Oputz knowingly lied about what this process would cost. He claimed the the Strib pulled the 8 million dollar estimation out of their ass, funny that that's the number the "County" is now using.

I agree with Shane; "Oputz caught in another lie" should really be a tired headline by now. You go ahead and crown him.

Posted by: STM at September 12, 2007 11:21 AM

Blah, blah, blah. STM doesn't like Mike Opat. In other news, the Earth revolves around the Sun.

Posted by: Shane at September 12, 2007 12:09 PM

Methinks Oputz has a co-conspirator in his effort to demonize LPII and to help lift himself to "sainthood" in the process.

Hey GM'ers - the Emperor has no clothes!

Gee Shane, and the devil is just a neccessary offset to Jesus Christ and Christianity?

See, its not hard to downplay significant facts if its your goal only to obscure the truth.

Posted by: STM at September 12, 2007 12:49 PM

Goal? My goal was to write about the Vikings game and relay a humorous anecdote about Bud Grant to the readers of this site. If you want to continue to cry about spilled milk then that is up to you. I just don't find your incessant whining about this compelling or interesting.

Now a Led Zeppelin reunion show ... that is interesting.

Posted by: Shane at September 12, 2007 12:59 PM

So this Zeppelin gig is apparently only a one-time deal. I know that they are richer than God but I'd like to see them do just one more tour here in the states. The most I've paid for a concert ticket was around $130 to see U2. I'd easily double that for a Zeppelin ticket.

Posted by: IowaWigman at September 12, 2007 1:12 PM

IowaWigman, I was also upset about the fact that it is only for one show. Let's hope they have so much fun they decide to do a full-blown tour.

I did see Page/Plant at the Target Center about 10 years ago and it was a very good show. I would also pay a substantial amount of money to see Led Zeppelin though. Having John Paul Jones in the lineup would definitely make it more "real."

Posted by: Shane at September 12, 2007 1:23 PM

I'm well aware of Shane's love of Led Zeppelin and I won't try to argue against it but I don't think I would pay more than $30 to see Led Zeppelin in concert in 2007/08. To me they are just too past their prime to matter anymore and to one day on your death bed say, I saw Led Zeppelin in concert is meaningless because it was 2007 and not 1977.

Now I am looking at ways to swing going to see Dylan/Elvis Costello and also Neil Young in concert later this fall, all of whom have 30, 40, and nearly 50 years of recording history so I realize I'm not being consistent. I guess the difference is (1)they are individual performers and not a band that has been broken up for over 25 years; and,(2) they've continued to record and perform. By seeing Dylan in 2007 I'm not trying to re-capture what it was like to see Dylan going electric at the Freeport Jazz Fest or Elvis Costello playing Radio Radio on SNL, but to see time-tested performers who are still vital today. Led Zeppelin touring seems just like a nostaglia act cashing in before they and their fans die.

That and STM is a dope.

Posted by: freealonzo at September 12, 2007 1:56 PM

Hard to argue the relevance of pop culture against things like crooked politicians.

Hey, maybe you can sit in the Oputz box at "Dewey, Cheatem & Howe" stadium and watch your youth slip away before your eyes outdoors?

Posted by: STM at September 12, 2007 2:41 PM

I think they should play "Purple Haze" during home games, especially when an opposing Quarterback gets sacked.

Posted by: I Want Answer at September 12, 2007 5:51 PM

I just hope and pray that I can view other games like NFL over my laptop without any internet connection, just like having a pop up T.V. lifted or uprgaded inside a laptop. I don't know if this technology exist now.

Posted by: Gabriel at February 11, 2010 7:30 AM

A good beginning, Viking, and Led Zeppelin? wow, this is really good, almost all of the best things are there. Nice write up.

Posted by: Gabriel at February 18, 2010 6:02 AM

I can't remember what happened next? Can someone refresh my mind? Anyway, it's another year and it's going to be another opportunity for the Vikings and take a shot again at the gold! Go go Vikings!

Posted by: cake decorating business at April 11, 2010 10:31 PM

I can't wait for a full blast of the games this year and I'm really hoping that Vikings will shine once again.

Posted by: find medical practice lawyer at June 1, 2010 11:00 PM

eXTReMe Tracker
View My Stats