Why Goodell should ban Michael Vick from the NFL
by KC Viking on May 24, 2009 5:32 PM CDT
Email
PrintDogfighting is terrible and wrong on so many levels. Enough has been said about that. The NFL's image has suffered in recent years from heavy police blotters, but not everybody cares about that. Michael Vick's sentence was less than what somoeone else would have received for the same crime, but at least he has served that. I do not understand why the #1 reason to permanently ban Michael Vick from the NFL is so rarely discussed since everybody cares about that.
Michael Vick, meet Pete Rose. (But don't shake hands, guys, or else it will look like a wager of some sort.)
Remember Pete Rose? Baseball's hit king bet on baseball while managing his former team--long after his playing career had been over--and received a lifetime ban from baseball. He has spent some time in jail, and he is not likely to ever become enshrined in Cooperstown.
Michael Vick bet on dog fights during most or all of his playing career when he certainly had the potential opportunity to throw games as a starting QB. His INT% nearly doubled from 1.9% in 2002 (7th best) to 3.7% (9th worst) in 2004 (his next full season due to injury in 2003). He also led the league with 16 fumbles in 2004. His INT% plateaued at 3.4% during his last 2 seasons in which the Falcons were 8-8 and 7-9. He received a suspension after changing his story and admitting to some of his alleged wrongdoing before serving almost 2 years in prison (plus some community service time in the coming months).
Of course, the trends in Vick's numbers may or may not have been influenced by gambling debts or payoffs. Kurt Warner's INT% also doubled in his second year, although he went on to have the best in the league a few years later (and 2 other seasons with lower INT%s than he had had in 1999). However, given the uniquely important and influential position of an NFL QB (certainly more so than a major league manager), why would Vick deserve any more leeway or benefit of the doubt than Pete Rose?
This FanPost was created by a registered user of The Daily Norseman, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the staff of the site. However, since this is a community, that view is no less important.
83 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Kinda ridiculous
Yes, the guy bet on dogfighting and ran an organization so to speak. But to accuse him of throwing games is a little farfetched. All of the numbers which you presented show change in his statistics, I don’t think their is anywhere near enough evidence to say he did this. Yes, he had 16 fumbles. (Keep in my mind he was a running qb and if you ever watched him play then you would know almost everytime he took off running he wouldn’t cover up the ball. It used to drive me crazy watching Falcons games.)
Comparing his situation to Pete Rose’s situation has no relevancy. First off, Rose was accused of betting on games, and as far as I know or have heard you are the only one who has accused Vick of throwing games. Second, Pete Rose admitted to throwing games.
To answer your question he would deserve more benefit of the doubt because he was never accused of throwing games (by anybody legit). I guess if in sometime it is brought to Goodell’s attention (by somebody legit) that he has thrown games, he doesn’t deserve anymore leeway. Your comparing apples to oranges, their situations are completely different. No disrespect intended but this post is kind of irrelevant.
Not ridiculous
It’s not a matter of whether there is evidence that he threw games. Only the motivation to throw games to pay off gambing debts after violating the NFL’s golden rule about gambling and a demonstrable lack of integrity (including but not limited to lying to the commissioner’s office at least once while the scandal unfolded) are necessary to ban him from the game.
The line of thinking with Rose was that his entire career was implicated after evidence surfaced that he may have bet on baseball while managing the Reds. Unlike Rose, Vick was paid mightily for his playing career, so there was absolutely no reason for Vick to have participated in dogfighting.
It’s relevant to the Vikings because others continue to suggest that the Vikes should sign him.
Also, Pete Rose chose to be banned for life..
According to http://baseball1.com/bb-data/rose/agreement.html , a print of the Rose/Giamatti Agreement, Rose agreed to be banned for life with the chance to apply for reinstatement. This deal was made in order to not further sully MLB by dragging the whole scenario through the Federal Court system for years. However, when Rose applied for reinstatement, Giammati was dead and the new Commisioner, Bud Selig, saw no reason to reinstate him, and just let his forms sit.
On a personal level, I believe he should remain banned from baseball, with the exception of being allowed eligibility for the Hall of Fame. What Charlie Hustle did as a player was huge for MLB. His actions after retirement should not reflect the non-steroid numbers that he put up during his playing days. He broke many records and rewrote the way baseball could be played. Noone could steal home like that guy. Even today, noone plays at full speed, 100% of the time, the way that guy did.
If one is to believe Rose, the agreement he signed with Giamatti had a verbal agreement attached that he would admit to being banned with the provision that his playing career could still be celebrated in Cooperstown. If one is to REALLY believe Rose, then the Dowd report is a conspiracy…and just like Vick, neither is left with any amount of integrity.
Even his Charlie Hustle effort will be questioned forever. Was he playing at 100% because he had bets to win? …to draw attention away from his below-average fielding (which also could have been a way of fixing games despite his offensive production)? When did the compulsive gambling begin? It is so difficult to tell with an individual who has repeatedly lied, tried to cover things up, and lied some more before finally admitting to a compulsive (by definition, uncontrollable and repeating) behavior(s).
He did not need to have bet on baseball during his playing career, either. Even bets on horses or dogs or airline arrivals and departures would potentially put him in a position of being influenced by those he bet with.
I used to be in favor of allowing PR’s playing career to be celebrated in the Hall, but now I think a plaque and video display by the exit would be sufficient.
"What if, what if, what if..."
We can’t go off speculation. The investigation with Rose revolves around his post-retirement days. They didn’t bring up any charges about his playing days, so there is no reason to add that to the mix.
The bottom line with this situation is that there was an agreement that Rose would take a ban so that MLB could save face (very common for the time period), while still allowing Rose to get back in to baseball. Unfortunately, with Giamatti’s death, a new commissioner came in with a different idea.
I could care less if Rose stays banned from baseball, but the Hall of Fame is for what a player did on the field during his career and I believe that Rose belongs in there as a player. Anything that he did after should be dealt with separately.
It's not about speculation
It’s about INTEGRITY, and Vick has none. We can’t speculate that he will be so much happier with a significantly lesser version of the former mega-bankroll life he threw away to gamble on dogfighting with a bunch of thugs. He does not deserve that benefit of the doubt ever again.
In 2004, the Falcons were a pretty good team, but they lost to the Lions. Watch this and tell me that the INT between 45 seconds and 1:10 isn’t directly to LB Alex Smith (especially with the vantage point from behind Vick…it was a soft toss which could not have sailed over the defender to a receiver). To seal the game, Vick almost seems to pass to Hall while a Lion cub bites on his ankles a little bit.
Agree to Disagree
I saw the intended receiver running behind the guy who intercepted him (Smith). I have seen (and thrown) that similar type of interception plenty of times. I don’t dwell much on conspiracy theories. The ball being knocked out of Vick’s hands is too reminiscent of our own TJax, when trying to get out of a crumbling pocket.
So, seeing as how this is becoming personal for you, rather than staying objective, I will separate myself from any more banter regarding Vick with you. See you on the next issue :)
Ha
You know how many different clips you could find of a qb that looks like he threw a int directly too a defender? Probably hundreds, maybe thousands, it happens all the time.
Not to start any arguments but I have watched T Jackson throw picks right to people. Just one other example. Should we accuse him of throwing games also?
Your argument just really isn’t that logical. To say that because he is a convicted felon and is in debt, he is going to throw games in future just seems ridiculous too me, and I have to think that their are others on here who feel the same. And you don’t know how much debt he is in either. He has a $20 million signing bonus which he is arguing should be paid too him. I believe he and his lawyers are taking it to court, and if he gets that $20 mill he might be able to pay off all his debt.
It seems rather obvious that this a pretty personal issue to you. Maybe your a dog lover, and because of what he did hold a personal grudge against him, or maybe you just don’t like the guy. Either way, I think you need more evidence to support your ludicrous claim.
by packallday555 on May 26, 2009 2:27 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm not making a claim
My point is this: after a player has lost integrity, he no longer gets the benefit of the doubt-not after, any grace previously allowed to him should be reexamined, and the burden of proof shifts back to proving that the player was not corrupt before. It is absolutely fair to assume that he had none before. It is equally true for being caught using steroids and disqualifying previous accomplishments from record books (which MLB does, and the NFL should) and so many other things in life.
You can’t say that throw had any intention other than to the receiver.
If you look at the camera angle from behind Vick, you can see that that Smith was not even seen by Vick as he was behind two linemen as Vick threw the ball. If smith wasn’t there, the ball was going right to the intended receiver.
Seeing the receiver is not always the case. If you’ve every played organized football and the QB position, you know that a lot of plays are based on timing; the QB knows that x-number of seconds into the play, his receiver should be at point y, and that’s where he throws the ball. The trend towards taller QBs gives the QB a better chance of being able to see where he’s putting ball, but it’s still not always the case that he can see that. Especially with 6’6"+ linemen and LBs all around him, all of whom are throwing arms and hands into the air to deliberately block his line-of-sight. This has a lot to do with why QBs and receivers need to get their practice time in, to learn each other’s speed and instincts and timing.
I dont understand what the big deal is with dogfighting. When this story came out a few years ago thats all we heard about for months. Dante Stallworth just killed a guy drunk driving, and they talked about it for 10 minutes. A human is a hell of a lot more important than the dogs that Michael Vick had fight. Each dog was given an opportunity to survive. Some took advantage of the opportunity, and some didn’t. The guy that Dante Stallworth hit didn’t have any opportunities. Dante Stallworth is 10 times worse than Michael Vick and hopefully more people will start to realize stuff like this.
Ah…Leonard Little. Now there is a fricken idiot. The guy kills someone because he was drunk (and they weren’t at fault by jaywalking, or the like), and instead of learning from it and being scared straight by it, he goes and gets in trouble for drunk driving again. They should have thrown the book at him, but instead, he got off easy again.
The guy that Dante Stallworth hit was the victim of an accident. He walked out in front of a car and didn’t look. Dante just happened to be a bit inebriated when this took place.
During dog fights, the dogs are just trying to please their masters. They are asked to “defend” vs another dog who is a threat to their wolfpack (in their eyes). The losing dog isn’t killed by the other dog, it is killed by the dog handlers. Sometimes they hook up battery cables to the skin folds at the top of their legs and run juice through them until they are dead. The thought is, once the dog is beaten, it has lost the ability to ever win again. Dog-fighting is a nasty business that is enjoyed by the ignorant or by those with a sadist need that must be fulfilled. Some, are involved just because they think it will make them look cooler (sort of like the clowns who walk around with their pants down past their butts…they think they look cool, but are laughed at by most of the population).
Im not a dog fighter and never will be, but do you really believe Dante Stallworths story…if he had not been drunk maybe he would have seen him or been able to slow down and not kill him. I just thing its unfair to Vick to get this much publicity when guys like Leonard Little, Dante Stallworth, and Ray Lewis are never talked about.
Yes, I definitely agree with that adammoney. I think Little should have been blasted. His case was cut and clear, and he was a fool for not waking up after his first grievous error. As for Lewis, unfortunately, we don’t know what really happened, since the stories of the witnesses changed back and forth, so it is hard for me to tear at someone whose circumstances are surrounded by conjecture.
Again, I agree with you that different people are held to different standards. The harshness of how a situation is dealt with is based on circumstances and who is pushing the buttons behind the scene.
Re: Leonard Little, Donte Stallworth...et al
The difference between those losers and Vick/Rose is that drunken driving (while criminally worse in terms of human life) does not make those who are too cheap to call a cab or hire a driver likely to throw games. Gambling does open up a huge can of worms which can affect the integrity of the game. To be banned by breaking the gambling rules, one only needs to violate them by participating in any sort of gambling (and I suppose with idiot bonus points for illegal forms of gambling). The NFL (and MLB) must enforce these sorts of incidents 100% in order to provide maximum assurance that the product on the field is not corrupted by inside or outside gambling by their players.
I disagree
I think a person can gamble and not be an instant game-thrower. Players often go to Vegas or Atlantic City to gamble. It’s one of the pleasures offered in our society. You see celebrities playing in televised Poker tournaments all the time. Basketball Hall of Famers Charles Barkley and Michael Jordan are famous for their love for gambling.
You tell me which is worse in your mind (not criminally worse):
Vick supported dog-fighting, which led to the losing dogs being killed by various inhumane methods afterwards.
Rose retired from baseball and, while coaching, gambled on baseball.
Dante Stallworth hit and killed a man who crossed the road in the middle of a causeway. This man didn’t look to make sure no cars were coming down the road. (Stallworth was also drunk at the time, although it is unsure whether this played a factor in being able to stop in time)
Leonard Little crashed into and killed a woman in her vehicle while he was drunk. After 90 days in jail, four years probation and 1000 hours of community service, he went on (six years later) to again get caught speeding while drunk. Because of the previous charge of manslaughter while driving drunk, Little was classified as a persistent offender (felony). The charge of driving while intoxicated was dropped (he was acquitted of it, actually) and was only charged with misdemeanor speeding.
Ray Lewis’ entourage got into a post-superbowl fight with rapper Chino Nino’s entourage. Two died from stab wounds. Witnesses early on said that Lewis was involved, but with differing accounts of whether he hit, kicked, or stabbed someone. When it came time to testify, no witnesses put a knife in his hand. Instead, Lewis testified against two members of his entourage. Lewis himself was charged with Obstruction of Justice.
Which of these cases do you think is worse?
Of all these, Vick took the worst punishment. He was sent to prison for 2 years (23 months) and declared bankruptcy.
It is not about punishment/criminality/morality but about integrity
It’s not about whether gambling = instant gamethrower, but rather that he has made himself instantly vulnerable to be influenced sometime afterward. Going to Atlantic City or Vegas is different because in legal games and venues, there is no chance of a thug gaining influence over the players/umps/refs to throw a game to spare body parts or family members. Comparing celebrity poker/golf (for charity in all such events that I’ve seen or heard about) is preposterous.
Of course I think that there are many criminally worse cases, but this is not really about punishment. Goodell isn’t acting as a supplementary justice system because that isn’t his job. His prime directive is to do what’s right for the game and no harm to the integrity of the game in the worst case scenario by intervening as early as possible whenever necessary (unlike the NBA scandal), and that should mean banning Michael Vick.
Integrity is a binary deal, and one either has it or doesn’t. Breaking the rules regarding gambling at all as an NFL/MLB/NBA player or ref or ump = an immediate and permanent loss of integrity. Would you like to have the likes of Donaghy officiating Vikings games and point shavers in the Vikings’ lineup (committing more penalties than Ryan Cook or giving up a cushion bigger than Cedric Griffin’s), or even in the opponents’ lineups (possibly beating the worst team ever only because their QB stepped out of bounds to pay off a gambling debt) just to give a few poor millionaire gambling junkies a second or third chance?
It’s sort of like air traffic control drug testing. If they want drug-free ATCs as much as I do, then any ATC should be summarily fired on a first offense of being under the influence of drugs while on the job with no exceptions. If not, then there would always be a question about how many substance abusers were inebriated while on duty whenever a crash occurred.
The fact that Vick is bankrupt now and could potentially earn more $ from thugs than as a minimum wage to $1M NFL gimmick/backup QB only piles onto the many reasons to ban him. The fact that he was a flashy player and now has a new story already sounds like the sorts of rehearsed storyline-based non-competition which has allegedly been taking place in the NBA (if one cares to believe a word Donaghy says).
Comparing Vick to Donaghy is apples and oranges.
Vick’s actions were outside football. He didn’t bet on football or throw any games or point shave. So we should focus on the issue at hand. Should Goodell uphold the suspension on Vick, make it tougher and ban him for life, or mark it up to time served and lesson learned?
Based upon Pacman’s 300 chances, I would say he is going to let Vick have another shot. I support this, since I think he has paid his dues and wasn’t a constant source of trouble previous to that. Sort of goes along the same lines as Prison not being prisons anymore, rather, they are correctional facilities. If people don’t deserve a second chance after paying their dues anymore, then we might as well set up the electric chair in every state and death be an automatic sentence (instead of just for the worst of the worst of our society).
Vick broke the rules about gambling, and it's as simple as that.
The NFL has those rules in place for a very good reason, and if Roger Goodell doesn’t consider that important (his predecessors would have), then why have any rules or even pretend to have any integrity? The 400 pound OL is just around the corner, and most fans won’t question whether that is natural and legit when it happens either.
Actually, there have been many other issues regarding Michael Vick…intentionally giving herpes to women, the infamous water bottle at the airport deal (he claimed it was for jewelry), friends of his picking up an expensive watch belonging to another airport official named Alvin Spencer (and putting it in one of their faux water bottles?) and returning it 6 days later after the investigation was allegedly “fixed”, owning a truck others used for drug trafficking…LYING to police and to the NFL about his dogfighting…if one’s name is NOT Michael Vick, then one would have been in prison and/or bankrupt from these issues a long time ago anyway. STILL, the issue is not criminality or punishment, but a matter of integrity.
Corrections
Actually, I’m against the death penalty and all for rehabilitation of many crimes (esp. drug crimes). However, there are times when a rule is there as an absolute point of no return. Mary Kay Latourneau (sp) should not have been allowed to teach again after having sex with a (late elementary/early middle school) student. A local financial institution once had an attempted robbery by employees in the tens of millions of dollars (from retirement accounts), and thankfully the 2 people involved were caught before they could get away and were summarily fired (and prosecuted, hopefully, but I didn’t follow the story that closely). I guess you would want those folks getting 2nd chances with your kids or retirement funds?
I think the league learned something from Pacman’s incidents. The Cowboys were not a better team because of him and his bodyguards and whatever other high maint requirements were involved, and the league’s image suffered a bit from that Crybabyboys team, too.
Great post
I wanted to post something like this but was too lazy to get some of the details on cases that I wasn’t sure of haha. I think of all these aside from Rose are worse then Vick’s. I’m hesitant too say this, but I thought it was kind of ridiculous how big a deal people made of dogfighting. Like I have already said I have two dogs and like dogs very much, but I think killing somebody is a lot worse. Too those of you who disagree let me ask you this. Would you rather see your dog killed in a dog fight, or your mom killed by a drunk driver? I think the answer is pretty obvious.
by packallday555 on May 26, 2009 2:33 AM CDT up reply actions
He should be banned for at least a year.....
But Goodell is going to tell himself, “Well, I think he was punished enough by serving jail time.”
I can outrun a mule deer.
Why just 1 year?
It’s NOT about punishing him. It’s about the integrity of NFL games, and there is no such thing as a little integrity or mostly having integrity. Vick was obviously motivated by his former peers and fellow dogfighters more than the truckloads of money the NFL/Falcons paid him, so why would he be any more honest or pure now or a year from now?
Because that's how it works
You do a crime, you pay the price. If that entails jail time, you do your jail time, and when it’s done… IT’S DONE.
It’s not a license to presume that you can continue to punish a man for the rest of his life because you don’t think his motives are pure enough, especially when you can’t know his motivations or the depth of his regret and repentance. Obviously he convinced the court system that he’s ready to re-enter society and continue with rehabilitation. Losing a multi-million dollar career and life is a hefty penalty to pay for something as minor as dog fighting, and I’ve never heard of anyone who got nailed that hard for the same offense.
This is how our system works, however, and Vick has paid the price for his lapses in judgment, character, and integrity. It’s time to give him a fresh start, wherever he lands.
It should also be brought up that his peers and dogfighters rolled over on him in court. They’re the main reason he was sentenced. I get the feeling he’s going to be staying away from those influences now, since he’s learned they really don’t have his back. I’m not sure if I believe his regret myself, it’s kind of hard to knowing he lied to the Commish AND the Falcons owner about this directly, but he did serve his sentence which is good enough for me. People can and do change.
Hell, look at Jared Allen. I put drunk driving on the same level as dogfighting in terms of dispicbility, because you can easily kill another person driving drunk, as we’ve seen multiple times occur in the NFL. He didn’t go to jail for an extended period of time, but he did change his lifestyle. I’m willing to give Vick the same opportunity. Maybe just not in Minnesota though.
Why ban him?
IMO, the man has done his time. He has served in a federal prison for 21 months. We have all made mistakes in our lives, but do you hold yourself to that everyday and not allow yourself to do what you love?
How come when a human life is taken people aren’t throwing fits about getting players suspended (accident or not). However, when animals (i love dogs) gets killed then its a huge deal. If James Harrison puts his dog down, should that get him put on a 4 game suspension? Pitbulls are known to attack, why would you have a child near it? No one has talked about that incident but Mike Vick does what any kid from the streets does, and boom kick him out of the league, get rid of him, lock him up. I don’t think it should work like that.
Let him play, he did his time and is ready to move past it.
Not about punishment
See other responses in this thread—Harrison, Little, Stallworth…did not threaten the integrity of the game by getting involved in gambling thugs who could potentially influence them to, say, commit 3 turnovers to lose to the Lions in 2004 or throw 2 picks and several convenient incompletes (have you ever seen so many 4th down incompletes in a game, ever?) against the 2004 Chiefs defense (one of the worst defensive units I’ve ever seen, especially vs. the pass).
Lifetime Ban?
I think not. Its very very hard to point shave in football, its way easier to do it in baseball or basketball. I think Vick served his penance, He’s lost out on future earnings potential, and will continue to pay for his crimes. To ban him from the NFL is ridiculous. What about the players that get caught setting up drug deals, hits, murder sheets, DUI’s…etc. The punishment has fit the crime.
Yes
Point-shaving is tough for some positions in football, but not for a QB, and especially not for one who runs and passes.
I don’t think the NFL’s decision has anything to do with punishment. Vick got and served the sentence through our justice system, and that is no longer the issue here. It’s a matter of integrity for the NFL, and there are rules in place specifically about gambling to insure that the integrity of NFL competition is never compromised.
Bad as it is, a DUI doesn’t provide an incentive to throw a game. Doesn’t it look like he thew it directly to LB Alex Smith? The game-sealing fumble also went directly to a Lion, and it may have been incidental, but why not hold onto the football with 2 hands when a Lion is biting your ankles? I’ll bet the Falcons had been favored over the Lions by a considerable margin that week (no pun intended).
Speculation
“Innocent until proven guilty”. It’s a bedrock concept in US law.
Unless you have some figures to prove that Vick was in debt for millions of dollars due to dog-fighting bet losses, and that he was betting money on his own games, you don’t have the foggiest shred of evidence to support your accusation.
Guilty and loss of integrity override that
He’s 100% guilty of associating with gamblers, bankrolling a rather extensive illegal gambling scheme, and generating a ton of negative press before and after which hurt the NFL’s image. According to the NFL’s rules on these matters those are at least 3 reasons to ban him for life when only 1 is needed.
Once someone demonstrates a lack of integrity, the burden of proof shifts the other way. Remember the OJ Simpson case? Once the LAPD was found to have planted evidence, they lost the ability to convict Simpson. Every other detail was considered corrupt. When a business is found to be out of compliance with laws or tax codes, you’d better believe that all prior records are suspect and scrutinized with a fine-toothed comb. Also, when a district attorney is found guilty of breaking the law to convict just one criminal, all others convicted by that DA are set free.
I disagree
Guilty and loss of integrity doesn’t override innocent until proven guilty in this case. It would override it if he is accused of another dogfighting charge because he has once already been accused of one, but I don’t think it overrides it in your theory/claim about him throwing NFL games. I don’t think betting on dogfights, and throwing NFL games are enough related too each other to say that his integrity on the subject of point-shaving is not respected.
by packallday555 on May 26, 2009 5:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Good point..
..about knowing how much debt he really is in. If it turns out that he will have no debt, and gets that $20 million signing bonus, then your entire “theory/claim” is completely irrelevant. Your assuming that he is going to be in debt, but you don’t know that for sure (at least you haven’t provided any proof that he is going to be).
by packallday555 on May 26, 2009 5:45 PM CDT up reply actions
This seems quite a bit farfetched. I highly doubt that Vick’s thrown NFL games before. You could argue that any QB who has some terrible games is throwing them then. Sure, Vick was involved in gambling on dogfights, but that doesn’t mean he’s doing the same thing with his career. That’s a bit of a stretch.
I don't know
When a player is caught using steroids, it’s only natural to question whether his previous accomplishments were legit or from juicing. Just looking at OL recently (LTs typically 330-350+ pounds, average OL over 300) vs. 10 (biggest guys were around 320, average under 300) or 20 years ago (300 was enormous then) and the fact that QBs didn’t need to be 6-2+ to see over them, it’s difficult to believe that all of that growth occurred naturally.
If the NFL doesn’t care about players gambling and opening themselves up to being influenced into throwing games, then I will absolutely wonder about other games and players and probably stop caring about or supporting the NFL, too.
Hahaha
“..then I will absolutely wonder about other games and players and probably stop caring or supporting the NFL, too.”
Ha go for it my friend. I don’t think any of us will suffer, nor will the NFL. Once Vick plays, and commits questionable turnovers, or throw questionable incomplete passes then accuse him, but not when there is no evidence against him.
by packallday555 on May 26, 2009 2:43 AM CDT up reply actions
I used to buy NFL merchandise every year, and it’s not just about me. Many others share my feelings on Vick, other thugs in the league, and whether we’re seeing a tainted product on the field (mostly by PEDs).
The recession will probably make more people reprioritize which millionaires they want to fund with their earnings more than anything else, but for some who would otherwise be on the fence, a slap on Vick’s wrist will be a tiebreaker.
I got news for you
Anyone who doesn’t like Vick, and has decided to stop buying NFL murchandise because of him has already done so, about 2 years ago. I would be willing to bet my life that the recession will not be enough to significantly hurt the NFL.
by packallday555 on May 26, 2009 5:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Don't bet your life on something you haven't at least Googled.
The NFL has definitely been hurt by the recession already. Roger Goodell even said that the NFL is not recession proof.
Haha
I’ll decide what I’m willing to bet my life on. Like I said earlier I’m sure it will be hurt by the recession. I don’t really care what Goodell said. I think both you and I know the chances of the NFL recessing so much to the point that the league is no more is not a good one.
by packallday555 on May 31, 2009 11:26 PM CDT up reply actions
NFL Gear
Honestly, NFL gear is way too expensive even if there’s no recession at all. Prices like that, I could understand if the volume was real low, or they were depending on it for their income to survive, but the NFL makes huge money elsewhere. I think they could get rid of the cheezy undercutters AND sell much higher volumes if they priced things more reasonably.
Agreed!
The price to get an authentic team jersey is absolutely ridiculous.
by packallday555 on Jun 1, 2009 10:21 PM CDT up reply actions
Gambling on dog fights is not the same as gambling on football games. I just find it extremely hard to believe that he willingly shot his own stats and took the verbal lashings from the analysts for a couple bucks. You’re citing bad throws as evidence, which is completely ludicrous, because every QB throws terrible picks at times.
So if Longwell goes to Vegas during the offseason, and then misses a FG during the season that ends up costing us the game, will you also accuse him of throwing games?
No on Longwell, of course
To the NFL, Vick has broken the gambling rules at least 3x over, and only 1 violation is necessary to consider a lifetime ban.
It’s simple: People deserve the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. Vick has proven himself an untrustworthy cheating liar and generated tons of negative press vs. the NFL. Knowing that he is guilty of lying, cheating, gambling, associating with gamblers, criminal offenses and other incidents which generated tons of bad press and negative drama for the NFL; therefore, he no longer deserves any amount of trust or benefit of the doubt, and the burden of proof shifts back to him. You probably trust the financial advisors, daycare providers, bus drivers, and pilots/air-traffic controllers who come into your life, and you should UNLESS they have proven themselves to be lying, scheming crooks, pediphiles, previous records of texting while driving the bus (on the road, not at a stoplight), or unmedicated narcoleptics who have been caught drinking during previous flights. If you would send your child to a daycare facility which employed 1 or more known pediphiles on a bus driven by a serial texter and flew them to a relative’s place on a plane piloted by a known unmedicated narcoleptic drunkard all for the sake of feeling sorry for those offenders, you would soon find yourself under investigation by Child Protective Services!
I’m confident that that doesn’t really apply to you, though.
This is freakin stupid
Vick paid his price. 2 years in a FEDERAL PENITENTIARY! Not county jail. His name is forever disgraced. He lost millions apon millions of dollars. Yes… he did what he did, and deserved the punishment. But he has served his punishment, and he should be allowed to earn back some of the respect he has lost.
To say he threw games to pay off gambling debts is just stupid. This might be the most ignorant post I have ever read
by PurplePeopleEaters09 on May 25, 2009 2:24 PM CDT reply actions 3 recs
Logic
…according to me:
If a player is caught using steroids, then his previous accomplishments must be called into question or considered invalid unless there is absolute proof to the contrary.
…according to you:
If a player is caught using steroids, then his previous accomplishments are seen in exactly the same light and he still deserves the benefit of the doubt every time.
- * *
Both MLB and the NFL should ban steroid using players for life, in my opinion, just as they once did regardling gambling.
How is this about steroids all of a sudden?
Vick did not use steroids. He has not been accused of taking any sort of drugs what so ever. And I said nothing about steroids in my post. Don’t put words in my mouth.
If Vick had used steroids, this would be a whole different issue. What Vick was accused of and punished for was an illegal act that he did in his personal life outside of football. His name has been disgraced, as it should be, because of the choice he made. But none of this changes the type of player he was on the field.
by PurplePeopleEaters09 on May 25, 2009 6:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Just as steroid use called into question whether Merriman’s Defensive POY award was really deserved or whether A-Rod or Jose Canseco deserve to be celebrated in Cooperstown (in most people’s minds, but probably not in yours), a gambling liar who bet as much as $40k on a single dog fight and happens to be one of the highest paid pro athletes ever invites the same sort of scrutiny.
In a perfect world, all such players would be banned for life after their first positive test or the first time they broke the gambling rules (and especially if they lied about it).
There are 2 links to the 2004 Falcons-Lions game highlights. I’m curious to read the pathetic excuses that you and other Vick apologists write about that INT thrown directly to Alex Smith.
Given the laxed steroid/PED joke of a policy and the soft slap on the wrist to the Patriots, the NFL barely has as little integrity as MLB and marginally more than the NBA, which also made the mistake of not caring about gambling (and even covering it up) until it completely ruined the sport.
You have no proof that Vick bet on his own games. It is just some wild speculation that you have come up with. Just like how back in the day people were accused of being witches. The people who pointed the fingers didn’t need any logic to back up their findings. They just pointed their finger and accused. There is no logic or proof behind your theory, just you pointing your finger at Vick. I watched that video of Vick’s INT. Yes, it was a poorly thrown ball. Yet it’s funny that you don’t mention the fact that it was Vick who made the TD saving tackle. (I don’t know about you, but if I were intentionally trying to lose a game, I wouldn’t have made that tackle.)
Stop trying to convince yourself and other people on this site that Vick tried to bet on his own games and intentionally lost them. If you don’t like Vick, that is fine. There are plenty of people right there with you. If you don’t think he should play another down in the NFL, that is your opinion, and that is fine as well. But base that opinion on the facts surrounding what happened. If you were to say “I don’t think Vick should play because what he did was horrible,” that would be your opinion, and you are entitled to it. But you are just making stuff up and it is losing a lot of the credibility of your posts on this site IMO.
by PurplePeopleEaters09 on May 25, 2009 11:18 PM CDT up reply actions
No proof required
…just as no proof is required to consider ALL of Shawne Merriman’s stats and accomplishments as tainted, even though he didn’t necessarily test for ’roids every week.
I’m probably wasting my time trying to reason with you, but haven’t you at least heard of guilt by association? That is sufficient grounds to ban Vick for life as per the NFL gambling policy (bold added for emphasis):
NFL personnel can face “serious penalties” for the following: accepting a bribe or agreeing to throw or fix a game or illegally influence its outcome; failing to promptly report any bribe offer or any attempt to throw or fix a game or to illegally influence its outcome; betting on any NFL game; associating with gamblers or with gambling activities in a manner tending to bring discredit to the NFL.
The NFL also does not allow promotional appearances by players, coaches or other personnel involving casinos, sports books and gambling cruises and any “advertising or promotional activities that can reasonably be perceived as constituting affiliation with or endorsement of gambling or gambling-related activities.”
I’m not making up anything. I couldn’t make up an softly-tossed INT directly to Alex Smith in 2004 (from about 0:45 – 1:15, and maybe even the fumble at the end).
I was a Michael Vick fan at one time, but after “Ron Mexico” gave at least 1 woman herpes on purpose and kept getting into trouble (and buying reduced sentences each time), I grew to despise him, especially since his productivity got worse rather than better (probably due to the time spent dogfighting and whatever else). Then he lied about everything…really, what’s to like? Sure, he did a discounted amount of time compared to what anyone else would have received, and he served it, but why the clamber to give him some sort of medal?
I’m not looking at Vick differently than society views most people who are given great opportunities, only to disregard something that is good and prudent:
- Anyone who is this reckless against nearly sacred rules of a financial institution (regarding integrity, not stealing or skimming or inside trading, etc.) will never work in that sector again.
- Air traffic controllers who compromise their ability to direct traffic and break their nearly sacred rules (regarding sobriety/alertness) will be summarily fired and never work in that field again…and so on.
- Nobody owes Vick a chance to make a gazillion dollars and/or wear an NFL uniform again just because he was stupid about it through several smaller incidents which were not flattering to the NFL before. Sure, he has a right to earn a living, but that could mean arena football or construction or bike messenger or whomever else cares to hire him.
Tell me
how him betting on dogfighting was tending to bring discredit to the NFL. It should be fairly obvious who is right about this matter….Pretty much everyone on the thread that has DISAGREED with you, or you….Take a look at people’s responses and decide for yourself.
by packallday555 on May 26, 2009 2:48 AM CDT up reply actions
You couldn't answer your own question?
The Vick dogfighting story was a major news item and 100% negative (that seems lost on you…exactly how was it good publicity for anyone?):
- Violence toward animals is a classic early symptom of psychopathic behavior. Most serial killers mutilated or killed animals first. This guy also intentionally gave at least 1 woman herpes on purpose.
- Another fine example of an NFL player who feels entitled to everything (including fans’ $) and seems to believe that he is above the law. He even has you and several others here playing their tiny violins and feeling sorry for him.
- Although he had one of the richest contracts ever, Vick felt the need to gamble for even more. That cannot resonate well with the average blue-collar fan earning $8-16/hr. who used to save up for several months to attend 1-2 games per year. If the typical blue-collar fan screwed up that badly at a $16/hr. job, s/he would be extremely lucky to work for more than $10/hr. at an otherwise worse job, probably as a temp without any vacation or health insurance, too.
- In these tougher economic times, more and more fans are reevaluating whether the want to save up to line [insert name of millionaire thug who makes kids think that being a criminal is cool]‘s pockets for exemplifying everything they do not want their kids to learn or emulate…without much assurance that those guilty of breaking the gambling rules aren’t influencing the outcome of the games somehow.
- The NFL has been trying to lure more female fans all the time, and women were especially sensitive to all of these issues.
- Of the many positive things sports are supposed to teach and exemplify, how many applied to Vick? NONE! He was selfish on and off the field. The time spent dogfighting could have been split between friends and charity work, which the NFL gladly would have co-sponsored and given him tons of good publicity. He thought he was above everyone else rather than a member of a team or a society, not just with the dogfighting, but also with other incidents. He was disrespectful and a sore loser when he flipped off fans, and just when did he exemplify any amount of discipline or good judgment? NEVER!
Haha
You talk like you know him personally or something? Have you ever talked to him? It sure would explain why this issue seems to be SO personal and important too you. As you are finding out the majority of us do not care enough to stop supporting the NFL. I would say based of this thread and the amount of people who have expressed their opinions on the situation, that only 1 of 10 (And its probably more like 1 of 50, I just say that because only about 10 people have expressed opinions on the situation) people care enough to stop supporting the NFL. That is not enough to significantly hurt the league. Yes, there will be more people do to the recession but again I don’t think it will be enough to hurt the league.
by packallday555 on May 26, 2009 6:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Check your Brain at the Door
1) So every kid who’s ever hit an animal or thrown a rock at one, or shot squirrels with a BB gun, or fried ants with magnifying glass, is a psycho serial killer waiting to happen? No. I’m not buying into your liberal psycho-babble.
2) No one’s feeling sorry for Vick, he did something stupid and he paid the price. What people are arguing for is the principle that if you commit the crime and you pay the price, you get a fresh start in life. Your irrational way of thinking suggests that if someone gets a speeding ticket, the cops are entitled to break into his house and search it for cocaine, because the individual is obviously a law breaker, and for the rest of his life, even if he pays the ticket, he should never again be allowed to drive a car or be trusted not to molest small animals.
3) Trying to create class-warfare over the Vick incident isn’t going to work either, that’s irrelevant.
4) See above on class-warfare. Vick was dog-fighting and put down some dogs, probably because they were seriously injured. That doesn’t make him a ‘thug’, it makes him a man was doing something stupid, for which he paid the price. Your theory that he was gambling on football games is unsubstantiated.
5) Vick now has this baggage, that’s a fact and it has to be considered. But to use him as an example of trouble in marketing to “lure” women into liking football is, at best, tasteless… at worst, sexist.
6) Again, Vick did something stupid and criminal, but he also paid for it, far more than anyone else would have had to pay, and there was no justice in that. He lost a career, respect, millions of dollars, and he had to do hard-time in a freaking Federal Penitentiary… Fort Leavenworth is a military-level prison, not a cushy country-club detention center.
But for you, that doesn’t seem to be enough, which makes me wonder what your hidden-agenda is in all this Vick-bashing.
You could have at least researched some of your questions
So every kid who’s ever hit an animal or thrown a rock at one, or shot squirrels with a BB gun, or fried ants with magnifying glass, is a psycho serial killer waiting to happen? No. I’m not buying into your liberal psycho-babble.
Whose liberal what (and why did you bring up politics on a sports blog)? Most police and FBI are conservatives, and if you would read at least the first paragraph of this, you would learn that PETA is quoting the FBI. Call your local PD on their information line and ask them about those statistics. Call your local religious leaders and ask them if maiming, torturing, and/or killing animials for fun is sick and wrong. (What is wrong with your brain and moral compass that you need to ask such questions in the first place while railing against those who say it’s sick and wrong, though?)
I have no hidden agenda. One of my grandfathers owned a cattle ranch, the other was a fisherman, and I’ve never felt bad about eating meat.
In fact, my #1 issue with Vick is none of these things which name-callers like you have gone off on at all but the possibility that the NFL is being more laxed about gambling than it should be in my opinion. I’m not the only one who has questioned this, either. Respected economist Steven Levitt publicly wondered why the NY Giants were apparently more concerned about covering the spread than winning in 2007. The final score of this Steelers-Chargers game also seemed to be determined by officials in the best interests of the betting population. NFL gambling has been a dirty little secret for quite some time, according to some, and they are at least correct in saying that the NFL doesn’t necessarily have an incentive to start clamping down on possible influences from gamblers/bookies, gang affiliations, and other sources of oranized crime.
I don’t want the Vikings to lose because Chilly tried to cover the spread instead. I don’t want a great play to be nullified for the sake of gamblers’ ease via replay ever again. And, ideally, I’d love to see human athletes play the game honestly, too. That is my agenda.
I didn’t bring up politics, I brought up a mindset that buys into the notion that just because a kid is mean to animals is a reliable indicator that the kid is likely to grow up to be a serial killer, and I don’t care what the FBI says on the issue. It’s not a political stand, it’s a cultural mindset that buys into that sort of brain drivel and it displays a degree of absolute ignorance of how real children behave and the amazingly stupid and often insensitive things they do and call ‘fun’. It’s one of the reasons we don’t treat them as adults; intellectually and emotionally, they aren’t. If the correllation translated into reality, then we’d be a society of serial killers, and, SHOCK-&-AWE, we aren’t. So clearly, somebody’s stupid psychobabble is worth about as much as toilet water.
On a hidden agenda… if it were out in the open, then it wouldn’t be hidden, now would it. I’m not sure what this has to do with eating meat, unless you have some information that the put-down (how’s that for euphemism!) dogs were also eaten?
I’m a life-long vegetarian myself, as was my father, and grandfather, and as far as I know, further generations behind them. But that’s my choice, and I don’t expect to inflict my choice on other people. That would be an infringement on their freedom. The only value, IMO, that PETA brings to the table is that some of their chicks are hot :) . Oh, and that one PETA guy who was on “Scare Tactics”, the stunt where they told him he was hired to clean up an animal experimentation lab and they brought out the little ‘monster man’; the PETA was so scared that I think he pissed his pants, squealing his head off and clawing at the door to escape! Now THAT was hilarious. Seriously funny, I never get tired of watching that :)
The problem, KC, is that you don’t have the least shred of proof that there’s been a football gambling issue. It’s something you’ve concocted out of whole cloth. If you had presented it as speculation, that would be one thing, but you didn’t. You presented it as a probable fact, and without something solid to base such an incredibly serious charge on…. all you did was buy yourself a credibility issue.
Agreed even more!!!!
“The problem, KC, is that you don’t have the least shred of proof that there’s been a football gambling issue. It’s something you’ve concocted out of whole cloth. If you had presented it as speculation, that would be one thing, but you didn’t. You presented it as a probable fact, and without something solid to base such an incredibly serious charge on…. all you did was buy yourself a credibility issue”
Wonderful last paragraph. You nailed it on the head. I couldn’t have said it any better myself!
by packallday555 on Jun 1, 2009 10:24 PM CDT up reply actions
???
Are we living in America, or some fascist nation? Wtf, the guy has paid more then ANY athlete in the history of sports. He has already shown his remorse, done his time.
He put up 1 MILLION DOLLARS to save the dogs he fought, while the same hypocrites across this nation do nothing to aid there local dog shelters. While thousands of homeless dogs are put to death daily…no one says anything.
It’s not about Dog fighting or anything else, crimes he has ALREADY PAID FOR it’s about destroying a human being, and it really makes a lot of people wonder why.
Why the city of Atlanta was so up in arms about this, yet said nothing when Dany Heatley of the Atlanta Thrashers killed his teammate Dan Snyder while drunk driving? No media outrage, he (Heatley) was the sympatric figure, yet Michael Vick is persecuted for fighting dogs.
That is insane.
It’s time to move on. destroying Michael Vick will not stop dog fighting. Banning him from Football will not stop dog fighting.
But it’s never been about dog fighting or anything else but him being famous.
+10
The animal-extremists managed to pull down a gross offender (Vick), and made him pay a huge price for his mistake in doing something he knew was illegal. Bad on Vick for being stupid that way, but the price has been paid, and then some. It’s done. The extremists got their PR and exposure, we got to see a lot more of them exposed (which can be entertaining, I admit), and now Vick is ‘rehabilitated’.
Attempting to punish him further is just sickening; it’s a deliberate disregard of our laws, our judicial system, the fundamental principles our society is based on, and the sort of thing that titillates lynch mobs.
Not just animal extremists
In principle, I agree that more than enough has been done about the animal rights angle of this story, and that’s why I’ve not written a sentence about animal rights until this one. For what it’s worth, I’m not an animal rights activist (although I did adopt a dog in September). Violence vs. animals is often a sign of psychopathic behavior, and many serial killers mutilate/kill animals before moving on to humans later. The justice system has indeed punished him for that part of what his multiple wrongdoings, although I’m skeptical about rehabilitation.
I’m saying that Vick was convicted of multiple crimes other than that: lying (more than once), breaking a set of league rules multiple times which are designed to protect the integrity of the league, plus he let down his teammates and employer.
i'll feel left out if don't post here!
ok…now that i’ve read all of the above.
i see where kc viking is coming from although i disagree. it seems to me (and i may have it wrong) that kc isn’t talking about gambling, steroids, second chances, letting bygones be bygones or any such thing. i believe kc is saying that since vick gambled on dogs and is suspected (in kc’s eyes anyway) of perceived football gambling transgressions that allowing vick back into the nfl will mean that vick is going to possibly throw games because he is a perceived gambler with a large amount of debt.
it’s a valid point but i completely disagree with it.
by this argument anyone who’s bad with money and has bought a lottery ticket should be banned from professional sports because of the potential loss of integrity to the sport.
vick has done his time. i won’t presume to question his remorse or lack thereof and will leave it to the commish to know his own business.
by iseepurplepeople on May 26, 2009 11:32 AM CDT reply actions
Pretty close
Knowing that Vick willfully broke the NFL’s gambling policy numerous times and lied about it numerous times, it will be a fair question to wonder if he’s playing for his team or for himself. I happened to find one old INT which would certainly look suspicious if it happened tomorrow…and in a properly managed NFL, fans should be allowed to have absolute confidence that they are seeing games played by the most purely competitive and honestly motivated players with the greatest skills and athletic abilities which are humanly possible (which is why I’d like to see Goodell crack down on gambling violations and steroid/PED since both negatively affect the integrity of the game).
It’s fine that some disagree about whether breaches of the gambling rules are serious or not. Really, there is no reason for an NFL player to buy a lottery ticket, though. They won when they were selected in the NFL’s lottery (the draft) or beat someone else out for a job in training camp. Some of them won more than a lottery ticket could give them if they won anyway. How hard would it be to not buy another lottery ticket to have a 10-year career in the NFL instead? …or to visit every other place one cared to visit on Earth and save Vegas and Atlantic City for later (with the money to do just that)? It is perfectly reasonable to hold athletes who earn 6-8 figures per year to wait until their retirement years to gamble if they still want to lose some or all of the fortunes they worked so hard to earn then.
Young teachers in small towns are asked to avoid more than that for only $25-30k! (And before anyone says anything about summers off, that’s not really true. It’s less than 3 months to take some of that small salary and pay for more coursework.) I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the very same people who are quick to defend Vick and forget about all other transgressions besides the dogfighting because boo-hoo the millionaire is like sad and stuff would be even quicker to judge a young teacher for being seen at a bar on a school night (or even on a weekend) or hanging out with the wrong crowd…and so on. (I’m not a teacher, but some of my friends are.)
Libel? Sounds like it to me.
Hey KC Viking,
You’re lucky someone from Vick’s camp doesn’t pull this up and sue you for libel… I can’t BELIEVE you are trying to imply that he tanked/threw games, interceptions, etc. for gambling debts. We all know what he did and are disgusted by it – but for you to not only assume – but write on a blog – that his numbers “may or may not have been influenced by his gambling debts or payoffs” and that is libel in my book.
I understand that you are a Vick-hater – that’s obvious, but to try to tie him in with Pete Rose as a gambler who “may or may not” have thrown games is ridiculous. Granted – you’re a “blogger” – which makes your opinion about as worthless as those sheets of white paper next to my toilet – but this just shows your complete ignorance and disregard for the truth. Unless you can show some actual PROOF that you have first-hand knowledge that Vick was throwing games – I’d consider pulling this ridiculous entry to your “blogdom” (or should that be “blog-dumb”) as the piece of libelous crap that it is.
What Vick did is hard to forgive – but he did pay his debt to society – and should be given the rights of anyone else who has served their debt. If the Commish decides that having Vick back in the NFL disgraces the game, so be it, it’s up to him – he’s in charge of the league.
by Keepin' It Real! on May 26, 2009 6:10 PM CDT reply actions
Not libel.
My point was that nobody can tell the difference between whether a particular play which hurt or will hurt his team was simply poor judgment/execution or if he did it on purpose, and his word is not bond (and that lack of integrity does in fact open him up to a level of criticism which wouldn’t necessarily be acceptable toward another).
I’m glad you took the time and effort to react to something which you considered worthless, though.
I don’t hate Vick. I just don’t want him in the NFL again for some of the reasons mentioned here (last 3 paragraphs).
Sort of like the way I don’t want dirty cops on my local PD. If video footage surfaced of a police officer playing poker with known gangsters and mob members, that officer would (HOPEFULLY) be suspended and hopefully kicked off the force (especially if it went public), even if there was no audio, even if they were playing for chips and not for any real money, and even if the suspected criminals and gang members had not been convicted of a crime but were on a wanted/suspicious/under surveilance and investigation lists. Once a local PD allows that kind of off-duty association with criminals and/or suspects, the integrity of the department is seriously undermined. How could another officer be disciplined if this is allowed? That is why major league sports and police have these sorts of rules against associating with such people and against participation in any sort of gambling.
Haha
Gotta love your comparisons. But I’m afraid again while your comparison’s have the same concept, the seriousness of one is MUCH more then the other.
by packallday555 on May 31, 2009 11:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Alex Smith caddied for Jim Harbaugh at AT&T Pro-Am
- Boston (in) Common: Kevin Youkilis set to marry Tom Brady’s sister
- Giants to be honored with commemorative NY license plate; some would rather see a 9/11 plate
- The hidden play of Super Bowl XLVI: Justin Tuck’s third-quarter sack
- Report: Chad Ochocinco will become Chad Johnson once again
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
