The future Hall of Famer stated as much Monday, telling reporters that his mind set is directed toward finding a way to make that happen.
- Sessler: Where will Romo, Jimmy G end up?
- End Around: What's next for Cutler?
- Orr: Six FAs who could be overpriced
- Top 5 prospects: QB | RB | OL
- Romo Sweepstakes: Pros/cons for landing spots
- Sessler: Seven biggest collapses in NFL history
- Rosenthal: Free-agent fit for all 32 teams
- Wyche: How Doug Williams reshaped the NFL
- Roster Bubbles: Who could get cut?
Obviously, that will start with money. Peterson's 2017 salary is hefty and non-guaranteed. He is expected to count $18 million against the salary cap, which is more than quarterback Sam Bradford. Coming off a season where he played just three games due to knee surgery and rushed for just 72 total yards, the Vikings would prefer not to pay that much, regardless of how talented Peterson is.
Counting him out altogether would be foolish.
"There's the reality that there comes a point in time where, yeah, the best thing to do is take a pay cut, and it might be in the best interest of the team, as well," Peterson said.
Having Peterson on the same wavelength as the team's accountants will be huge as the Vikings start their offseason. With one of the better head coaches in football and one of the NFL's stronger defenses, they will not be starting from ground zero. Peterson might not be the focal point he used to be, but we've seen running backs extend their careers and get smarter about how they run in recent years.
Because Peterson was in the conversation to play over the final weeks (he carried the ball six times in a Week 15 loss to the Colts but did not play against the Packers or Bears), it would be reasonable to expect that he has an offseason close to what he's used to.
What team wouldn't want a close-to-normal Adrian Peterson on their roster in 2017?