Rounding out our three-part series weighing the impact of retaining Adrian Peterson, today we take a look at the future of the organization. How much would keeping Adrian in purple help the Minnesota Vikings down the road and how much could it hurt them?

Earlier this week we factored in the THE MONETARY impact that would come and the PUBLIC RELATIONS effect that could follow the reinstatement and retention of Adrian Peterson for the 2015 season. If you haven't, I would encourage you to check those out as well.

How does Adrian Peterson effect the future of the Minnesota Vikings? One could argue, much like the Herschel Walker trade did back in the early 90s, the entity of Adrian Peterson could be the single determining factor that decided where the Vikings go into the future. At this point, it would be foolish to think that the Vikings could get a king's ransom in return for Peterson as the Cowboys did with Walker, but five, ten years down the road, this could be one of those fork in the road decisions that could determine the success of the organization for years to come.

On one hand, you have a stellar player. For the seven seasons that he's played, Adrian Peterson has hands down been the best running back in the league. Averaging 1,445 yards per season to go along with 12.28 touchdowns per season, Adrian was nothing less than a force to be reckoned with. Demanding the attention of 8, 9, sometimes even 10 defenders in the box, it's safe to say that for most of Adrian's career, he WAS the Vikings offense.

But that was then.

Fast forward to 2015 and you now have a 30 year old running back who took a year off from the game of football. Between his college years at Oklahoma and his time with the Vikings, Adrian has carried the ball 2,802 times and has caught 232 more passes. That's a lot of miles on his legs and with the year off, a lot of question marks surrounding how he will return.

The physical status for Peterson is only one side of this conversation. Team's take risks on players returning from injury each and every year. Some work out and some don't. If I were to gamble on any player ultimately working out, I'd put my money on Peterson. His track record has shown his ability to bounce back. But there's more to this.

Would the Vikings be jeopardizing their future by keeping Adrian as the focal point of the offense? Would keeping Adrian around for a few more years aid Teddy Bridgewater's progress or hurt it?

It is my opinion that year one for Teddy greatly benefitted from the absence of Adrian in the backfield. Coming into the season, Adrian was the focal point of the Vikings offense and I don't think anybody was arguing that. If Peterson would have been on the field when Matt Cassel got hurt, it would have been very easy for Norv to increase the load for Peterson to take some of the pressure off the rookie quarterback. Peterson would have found a decent level of success because that's just what he does, and the rest of the season would have followed this blueprint.

With Peterson out of the picture, when Teddy took the helm, he was the focal point of the offense. It started and stopped with how well Teddy was playing. In turn, the Vikings ran 515 pass plays and 298 run plays the rest of the way. That's more than a 60/40 split for play selection from a team that in year's past was basically the opposite at 40/60 pass to run. This allowed Teddy to learn on the job as a quarterback, not as a ball hander-offer. I'm partially kidding there as the rush game is an important facet of the offense as well, but you get the point.

There's two sides to this stance though. There is a danger in bringing Peterson back for Teddy's progression, but there is also a potential benefit. Nobody really knows what this team could look like with a fledgling quarterback and a dominant running back? Peterson doesn't exactly fit the mold of how Norv Turner has used running backs in the past, but that doesn't mean that Norv didn't have something planned. There is the side that says having Peterson on the field with Teddy will allow the young QB to fully spread his wings.

At the root of all these speculative scenarios is one thing. This decision will likely highlight the desired identity for Norv Turner's and Mike Zimmer's Vikings offense. Retaining Peterson, even for only one more year, shows that the running game is going to be a big part of the offensive game plan. Afterall, that's a $15 million investment there. Parting ways from the embattled running back would stake a flag in the other side. By moving on from Peterson and even replacing him with a middle level free agent running back (see Mark Ingram, C.J. Spiller), would show your hand towards a pass first offense with a change of pace out of the backfield. This seems to be the way the league is shifting, but is it the right path?

From the Divisional Round of the 2015 NFL playoffs and on, only the Seattle Seahawks were a team that didn't feature a dominant passing attack. Probably a 50/50 team, maybe leaning more towards the run when you factor Russel Wilson's mobility in, the Seahawks made it work and have found great success behind a balanced attack and dominant defense.

Is this the path that the Vikings desire to take? Or is it time to cut ties with Peterson simply to make a more dramatic shift towards an aerial attack on offense?

-----------------------------------------------

At the end of the day, and the end of this blog series, it is hopefully clear that there is a lot that goes into this decision to retain or move on from Adrian Peterson. There were those that had these concerns immediately when Peterson signed his new contract and before the off the field situations of 2014. It's not a knee-jerk conversation based solely off of a player's behavior away from the football field. Rather, it's a business decision that could determine the direction of your franchise for years to come?

At this point, I don't know what the right answer is. I'm getting more comfortable with the idea of having Peterson back with the Vikings in 2015, but I would say that I still lean towards the other path under the premise that it would better benefit the Vikings down the road. It's probably a safe assumption that at best, Peterson has two to three more seasons of quality play. He may surprise us all because that's what he does, but I'm not sure that I want to be having this discussion again three years down the road when Teddy has three years gone by, Harrison Smith, Anthony Barr and the rest of the young core will have three years of their prime gone.

The team has an opportunity because of the off and on field situations surrounding Peterson to highlight a direction they want to go today, and follow it. Changing identities every handful of years does not work. Find your identity and run with it in 2015, don't wait until 2018 to make a reactionary move.

If you missed any part of this series and want to go back and read them, check out the links below…