vikings/nfl

I'm not sure this is the "right" decision and it probably isn't what I would have done--not that anyone cares!--but I can understand it. What Cook is accused of doing is reprehensible, my inclination based on what we know is that he probably is guilty of some pretty severe abuse, and if that's the case I would not want him on my team no matter how talented he is. But waiting for the legal case to run it's course isn't crazy, and of course it's possible that the initial, quite terrible reports were inaccurate in crucial ways. I doubt that, but I can see why the Vikings made this decision even though it's quite wishy-washy, and even though I'd prefer to see him go based on the available info and despite his abilities on the field.

Disgusting and pathetic that just because he is good, err, the other Vikings CB's are that BAD; they keep a gf-beater with a history of violence. Just gross.

Cook's fate is up to the legal system and the NFL. The Vikes should just hold on to the talented player and hope he pulls through. If not, cut ties and fill his spot.

Interesting what a 2-6 record does to decisions made by the front office and coaching staff; to set an example, release a player before the regular season because he is over weight but during the season, keep a player who choked a woman to the point she bled from the eyes. What is wrong with this picture? I don't think Bud Grant would have been as lenient with Mr Cook and I don't think Mr Grant would have been foolish enough to release Bryant McKinnie.

In reality most of us can only wish that contracts included "strong behavior clauses!" If the player and their agent completely understood the importance of "responsibility and accountability" these acts would be greatly reduced. Today we have "athletes" that somehow believe that they can do anything they wish! Unfortunately the fan continues to buy the ticket! How many young people are wearing Cook jersey's today? The Bible speaks clearly about the heart of man and Mr. Cooks behaviour is a perfect example of that truth.

Yes, that was supposed to be "behavior!"

In the situation regarding Chris Cook, you have to weigh the situation carefully. His problems are emotional in nature.Don't abandon him, help him to become a better man. The bible teaches us about helping others and the art of forgiveness. He needs a lot of counseling for years to come. He should be made to volunteer at womens shelters and help promote an end to violence period. What would have made you shake your head was a true criminal, Michael Vick, and all of the little children wearing his attire while he was in prison for inhumane acts. Now that is something to ponder on the state of mankind. Not Chris Cook.

since he's getting paid while not playing he should give at least half his check to a "victims of domestic violence" charity AND be forced to do community service at one of their facilities

The guy has anger/emotional problems that need to be addressed. Getting him help should be the primary goal, playing football is a distant second. Without help this will happen again at some point down the road, maybe the next time he seriously injures or kills someone. I think the team did the prudent thing. I hope they also encourage him to seek professional help.

One of the tough parts of these situations is if the Vikings cut Cook either before or after he may be found guilty, another team can pick him up and have everything work out just fine for them. Then people will blame the Vikings for cutting him too soon. The NFL should have a hold clause for these situations that a team can retain rights until the legal issues are settled, or that for certain cases a player is banned for an amount of time but can then come back to his original team, or be traded by them. We don't know through facts what really happened yet, and we should trust our legal system - I hope the verdict on Cook is fair and accurate. But teams should not be penalized for dealing correctly with these things when another team can grab bad people and ultimately win with them.