Skip to content

Chris Cook remains on Vikings’ roster, but won’t practice or play

Minnesota Vikings v Chicago Bears Getty Images

Vikings cornerback Chris Cook, who was in jail for one game and suspended for another after being charged with choking his girlfriend, has been brought back to the Vikings — but he won’t be playing.

The Vikings announced today that Cook’s suspension is over, and he’s back on the 53-man roster and will be getting paid.

However, Cook will not participate in football activities. He won’t practice or play. He’s not suspended, but he’s not with the team, either.

By rule, the Vikings could have suspended Cook for up to four weeks. It’s not clear why they decided to go this route, rather than continuing the suspension. But the Vikings say that’s their decision, and they say Cook and his agent have agreed to it. So Cook likely won’t be on the field for the Vikings any time soon.

Permalink 36 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Minnesota Vikings, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
36 Responses to “Chris Cook remains on Vikings’ roster, but won’t practice or play”
  1. vikingssoxfrustration says: Nov 7, 2011 4:34 PM

    Maybe he choked Speilman until he reinstated him?

  2. The Phantom Stranger says: Nov 7, 2011 4:50 PM

    I wonder what they gain by paying him instead of suspending him another couple weeks? There must be a reason for this.

  3. jbythebay says: Nov 7, 2011 4:54 PM

    That’s too bad. If he was able to play the Vikings may have gone 4-12 instead of 3-13

  4. ammarradhi says: Nov 7, 2011 4:55 PM

    this makes no sense, so your bringing him back to pay him to watch practice and games, after getting arrested, talk about job security!

  5. fwippel says: Nov 7, 2011 4:58 PM

    Not sure what the purpose is of having a guy take up a roster spot when he can’t help the team. Maybe they’re hoping he’ll be found less guilty than he looks now.

    I can’t help but wonder if this team were in better shape in the secondary whether Cook would have been released.

  6. gb4mn0 says: Nov 7, 2011 5:01 PM

    Either Zygi hates money or he has so much he can waste it paying this purple piece of human debris. And if he has that much to waste then why doesn’t he build his own stadium?

  7. pacific123ocean says: Nov 7, 2011 5:04 PM

    If the Vikings release him…there are probably 20-25 other teams that would pick him up.

  8. 7ransponder says: Nov 7, 2011 5:08 PM

    MN is a very worker friendly state. If the Vikings were to release Cook now, (which I think is what will happen, eventually), AND he were found to be innocent of the serious charges against him, it could lead to him filing a lawsuit for wrongful termination, or whatever else his lawyers and agent could dream up/bring forth against the Vikings. They’re probably just making sure that won’t happen, so that when they do release him, there won’t be any continuing action/drama they’ll have to deal with. Since he won’t be playing/contributing to the team and, whatever the legal outcome, he’ll still be facing NFL action against him, I’d say he’s gone sometime after his day in court.

  9. gb4mn0 says: Nov 7, 2011 5:18 PM

    7ransponder say? MN is very friendly worker state. So what you trying to say is that the Central Committee won’t allow the exiling of a worker member of the proletariat until after the 3rd International has decided Cooks fate.

  10. expatpatfan says: Nov 7, 2011 5:21 PM

    First, Minnesota is an “at-will” state, meaning you can be fired for no reason.

    Second, it’s the NFL! It has its own set of labor laws that supersede local jurisdiction. People get cut in the NFL for no reason other than the person who’s cutting them decided to overpay them 12 months ago. If Minnesota wanted to cut this guy, they would.

  11. prior0knowledge says: Nov 7, 2011 5:39 PM

    Maybe they are waiting for some positive action by Cook. For example, a written apology to the woman, completion of anger management classes, resolution of the charges, installation of a soul… something like that

  12. duluthvikesfan says: Nov 7, 2011 5:59 PM

    My guess is they want him on the 53 man roster because they are so weak at the position. If they are getting by without him then they are just out the money. If they think they need him, then they can come out and say “he’s been punished enough” and let him play again.

  13. formyministy says: Nov 7, 2011 6:00 PM

    expatpatfan: why do you think the whole starcaps case hinged on minnesota? the players union brought their case in minnesota (they could have picked any other state) because they knew that was their best bet…some of the lockout crap was their as well, but i’ll let someone else try to remember details for that…

  14. glac1 says: Nov 7, 2011 6:18 PM

    He should be put on a public speaking tour for their new stadium. It would be great PR.

  15. jimmysee says: Nov 7, 2011 6:32 PM

    Vikes could use Chris Cook in Green Bay next Monday night.

    If his bail bond or probation officer lets him leave the twin cities.

  16. jallen69 says: Nov 7, 2011 6:33 PM

    “First, Minnesota is an “at-will” state, meaning you can be fired for no reason.”

    Not when you have a contract.

  17. axespray says: Nov 7, 2011 6:47 PM

    should cut him and just go get darren sharper….

    been wanting to see Greg Jennings score on da’ hardest hittin’ safety in the league since I saw that youtube video.

  18. canadianvikingfaniii says: Nov 7, 2011 6:56 PM

    Only thing I see in this is that they want to wait for the trial before they do anything indefinite. Minnesota has those laws about first offences with drug use for their workers so I can’t imagine this being a much different situation (punishing someone before the verdict in the trial is reached.) If he turns out to be guilty then I hope they drop him in a second, if they find he is not I hope they drop him because he is still guilty from what the reports say.

  19. johnsticle says: Nov 7, 2011 7:14 PM

    My guess here is they’ve spoken to the defense and the case FOR Cook is strong enough that he may not be convicted… therefore Les will keep him after the court date on the 22nd. Just a guess here of course… but I don’t see Les keeping him around if the loser is convicted for his crimes.

    Either way, I don’t like Chris. He’s been nothing but either a failure or a problem for this team since signing.

  20. dumplingsrbrown says: Nov 7, 2011 7:19 PM

    They’re keeping him on the payroll to go on a special assignment. He’s going to the state legislature to choke out a new stadium deal.

  21. janvanflac says: Nov 7, 2011 7:26 PM

    Not when you have a contract.
    ———————————————————-
    NFL contracts allow the team to terminate the contract at any time. This is why they have signing bonuses. If they wanted to cut him, they could, and without repercussions.

  22. bobnelsonjr says: Nov 7, 2011 7:54 PM

    A move like this comes only after the lawyers have briefed team ownership over the last 2 weeks.

    Wilf made the decision. It tells you that he has given up any chance of sucking up government wilfare money from Minnesota.

    Keeping Cook cannot help any stadium effort.

    This is a clear sign the vikngs are relocating.

  23. adirtyplayernamedsue says: Nov 7, 2011 7:59 PM

    Sounds like a great football decision by Minnesota. Maybe next they go get moss again.

  24. theytukrjobs says: Nov 7, 2011 8:13 PM

    I understand hanging onto the guy to salvage some of his value. Perhaps he could be traded somewhere. Or perhaps he’ll turn out to be innocent.

    But why not make him serve out his suspension, without pay, first? That I don’t get. I doubt Cook would be that mad at the Vikings for it considering the situation.

    I mean definately don’t play the guy but don’t pay him either. Just, weird actually. It is actually quite nice of the Vikings pay him.

  25. brewdogg says: Nov 7, 2011 8:14 PM

    Now, correct me if I’m wrong on this but….

    If a player is suspended, then they are not allowed to be in contact with the team. Right? So by ending his suspension, he has to show up at practice and at the games if he wants to get paid. In doing so, he has to face the teammates he let down with his poor decisions. (or however you want to phrase it…I’m trying to be diplomatic) At the same time, his presence is a visual reminder to the rest of the team about what the consequences of these type of indiscretions are.

    Or maybe there’s some kind of deal we don’t know about yet…..

  26. dd393 says: Nov 7, 2011 8:21 PM

    Maybe he could be a spokesman for the new stadium deal. “I’m Chris Cook and I beat up women. And I’m with the Vikings and we want a new stadium from the taxpayers.”

  27. contra74 says: Nov 7, 2011 9:18 PM

    bobnelsonjr says:
    Nov 7, 2011 7:54 PM
    A move like this comes only after the lawyers have briefed team ownership over the last 2 weeks.

    Wilf made the decision. It tells you that he has given up any chance of sucking up government wilfare money from Minnesota.

    Keeping Cook cannot help any stadium effort.

    This is a clear sign the vikngs are relocating.
    ———-
    What are next weeks powerball numbers? I can guess just as well too!1!

  28. 6kings says: Nov 7, 2011 10:40 PM

    It’s so obvious. Cook was framed by the Viking mascot. I can’t believe you all can’t see that.

  29. vikesfan4life says: Nov 7, 2011 10:53 PM

    “Not sure what the purpose is of having a guy take up a roster spot when he can’t help the team.”

    Correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t the Colts doing the EXACT same thing with Peyton Manning? He seems to be on the 53 man roster yet not contributing to the team in the least bit.

  30. claymath52 says: Nov 7, 2011 10:57 PM

    The Phantom Stranger says:
    Nov 7, 2011 4:50 PM
    I wonder what they gain by paying him instead of suspending him another couple weeks? There must be a reason for this.

    __________________________________

    Yup. The team is so desperate that they have to keep him and hope this blows over. Not suprising given the teams track record. But hey, at least they lead the league in something right? Most arrests in the league since 2000….(worse than the Bengals)

  31. purplehayseuss says: Nov 7, 2011 11:40 PM

    bobnelsonjr ;

    Clearly, that’s what it means. It’s over, Vikings fans! Bobby just declared this whole thing OVER.

    Thanks, Bobby, for taking this all off our minds. Now we can relax about it and get on with our lives without the Minnesota Vikings. The Los Angeles Vikings will be arriving in LA with much fanfare and, ah, what, Bobby? Please let us in on the schedule of events for that big transition. Will there be a new coach? New cheerleader suits? New Uniforms? Will we ever see Donovan McNabb again? What will the Packers’ record be in 2015? How much will it cost in fines to pretend to moon the Faithful at Holy Lambeau next year, when Jerry Rice emerges from retirement, playing for the soaring San Fransisco 49ers? Only Rice would have the stones to attempt what Moss did. You agree, of course, that the Niners will be challenging the Almighty Packers for their third consecutive Super Bowl. Surely, you must, Lord Nelson.

    Give us your word, Robert Jr! We wither and gnash here in the lowly soil without your potency and vigor! [genuflect]

  32. oldcracker says: Nov 8, 2011 12:13 AM

    Sounds like a future Bengal.

  33. snarkzilla says: Nov 8, 2011 2:00 AM

    >Sounds like a future Bengal.

    Sounds like a current Viking.

  34. sevensixtwonato says: Nov 8, 2011 9:05 AM

    Yup. The team is so desperate that they have to keep him and hope this blows over. Not suprising given the teams track record. But hey, at least they lead the league in something right? Most arrests in the league since 2000….(worse than the Bengals)

    ————————————————–

    Or could it be they are trying to get all their ducks in a row before they let him go so the organization does not get faced with any kind of wrongful termination issues?

  35. The Phantom Stranger says: Nov 8, 2011 12:12 PM

    brewdogg says:
    Nov 7, 2011 8:14 PM
    Now, correct me if I’m wrong on this but….

    If a player is suspended, then they are not allowed to be in contact with the team. Right? So by ending his suspension, he has to show up at practice and at the games if he wants to get paid. In doing so, he has to face the teammates he let down with his poor decisions. (or however you want to phrase it…I’m trying to be diplomatic) At the same time, his presence is a visual reminder to the rest of the team about what the consequences of these type of indiscretions are.

    Or maybe there’s some kind of deal we don’t know about yet…..
    _______

    That would make sense, but they said that Cook wouldn’t practice or be at games. I wonder if they can’t have contact with him at all if he’s suspended? They might want to keep an eye on him and having him on the roster makes that easier.

  36. pack13queens0 says: Nov 8, 2011 6:14 PM

    Is he going to be activated when the team moves to LA?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!