Michael Vick Indicted - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

QuasiMondo · 07-17-2007, 06:01 PM

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2940065

Let's see how Goddell handles this now that there's a marketable big-name player running afoul of the law.

Cross-Over · 07-18-2007, 04:55 AM

The allegations are quite disturbing and reveal that he is suspected to be directly and indirectly involved in the killing of dogs as well as fighting (which is also wrong). I was born in Georgia and have always been a Falcon fan. If this turns out to be true though, he will rightfully be suspended. It is cowardly and pathetic. Some people brush it off as dogs not being human beings, but in children, cruelty to animals has a direct correlation to future violent behavior. Obviously, Vick is not a child, but that is merely an example of the seriousness of the charges. It is also fair to reiterate that these are just allegations at this time.

QuasiMondo · 07-18-2007, 05:06 AM

Why wait? Pacman Jones got suspended for a full year even though none of the incidents he was involved in resulted in him being arrested. The DUI that got Tank Johnson suspended by the league and cut from the Bears turned out not to be a DUI after the test results showed him under the limit. If the league doesn't suspend Vick, then it justifies the accusations that the league is working under two disciplinary guidelines when it comes to marquee players and everybody else.

Walking Shadow · 07-18-2007, 09:28 AM

Re: Suspending Vick.

Fuck that, if I were Goddell, I'd ban him outright.

But unfortunately Vick falls under the leagues own suspension policy which is quite specific about such things. This is Vicks first run in with the law and until there is a finding of guilt against him or he admits guilt the league can do nothing.

Which is a fucking shame.

Vick is filth, pure and simple.

Brewmaniac · 07-18-2007, 09:45 AM

Fuck suspension if found guilty he should do some time!
Martha did, hell Paris did, he deserves to do much more than either!

We'll see how they spin this! Scum bag!

Ridge · 07-18-2007, 11:09 AM

That guy is a fucking jerk. Drowning, electrocuting and strangling dogs that won't fight? And he knew about it. I hope he gets prison time, and if not, ban his piece of shit ass from the NFL. If he does play I hope that scumbag gets booed everywhere he goes, even at home.

Ilow · 07-19-2007, 09:10 PM

And i love how he meets with Blank to apologize for being a distraction to the team. "Sorry for being a distraction...and, uh for that whole despicable human being thing...yeah, sorry about that too."
For some reason I can't wait for this verdict, so everyone can stop saying "alleged" and so we all don't come off sort of prematurely bashing him. With that being said, i don't feel like this is a Duke lacrosse case, as there seems to be overwhelming evidence against him. He has already lied about his involvement, so it should just get better.
Oh and Nike shelved his new shoe debut. Hopefully they shelved their payments to him as well. Although he is exciting, they should have cut ties with him years ago because he isn't that good a quarterback anyway.
The worst part about it is that with 130 million you could do some really great things and i never hear of him doing shit. Fuck, buy a yacht, buy a couple houses and a Ferrari, and you still have plenty of dough for philanthropy. If you take the money he paid out in gambling losses on the dogs, you could fund a non-profit for a year! Admittedly I do not live close to Atlanta,but you never even see him do public service messages or Make a Wish appearances.

kutulu · 07-20-2007, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walking Shadow

But unfortunately Vick falls under the leagues own suspension policy which is quite specific about such things. This is Vicks first run in with the law and until there is a finding of guilt against him or he admits guilt the league can do nothing.

I've heard that as well. The charges are heinous but he deserves due process like everyone else.

Jadey · 07-20-2007, 03:28 PM

I realize not all the facts are known at this point, but regardless of the result anyone that treats dogs that way is a piece of shit.

Mister Coaster · 07-20-2007, 05:09 PM

If he's guilty, he NEEDS to GO DOWN!! I mean jail time, and lots of it. Cancel his 130 mil contract, and perhaps renig what he has already earned. If the NFL lets him skate, it would be the biggest black eye in sports history.

This, of course, is only if he is proven guilty. He can obviously afford a good defence, so... way to go US legal system.

Strange Famous · 07-21-2007, 04:32 AM

I mean, I absolutely have no support for dog fighting and think it is certainly cruel and dispicable... but what has it got to do with football?

Why, and on what basis, should the NFL punish him or suspend him if he is cruel to animals, what has it got to do with anything?

If he has broken laws, then he should answer for them in court and be punished by the law as anyone else.

I cannot see what right the NFL have to suspend him unless he violates rules of FOOTBALL.

I dont especially like Vick, or even think he is a valuable player for his team... but I dont understand calls to suspend him at all.

Mister Coaster · 07-21-2007, 07:56 AM

If I were an employer, I wouldn't want a criminal working for me.

The NFL knows that Vick is a role model for kids, to keep him as a player sends a message that being a criminal is A-OK with us, as long as you din't break a football rule. Besides, rules of life should override rules of the field.

NASCAR drivers have been banned from driving for life for smaller/less despicable crimes.

Strange Famous · 07-21-2007, 01:21 PM

"criminal" is normally someone who is found guilty in a court of law, not someone who is simply charged.

And the NFL is not Vicks employer, Atlanta Falcons are.

If the Falcons want to sack him, by all means.

I repeat, what is it to do with the NFL?

Ilow · 07-21-2007, 09:26 PM

Strange Famous, i feel like you are just trying to get a rise out of people, or are playing devil's advocate or something. For most people, it seems rather straightforward what a corporate entity (and make no mistake the NFL is a corporate entity) would wish to distance itself from someone who is not considered a solid citizen. Also, Vick has not been found guilty (except in the court of public opinion) but there is apparently a fairly significant amount of evidence against him, and it appears more clear cut than some sort of domestic violence or other case.

Strange Famous · 07-21-2007, 11:52 PM

I am not trying to get a rise out of people.

Michael Vick is a football player, not a role model. If he is a horrible person, it hasnt got much to do with his ability to play football - unless he is so wretched that his team mates wont play with him.

I genuinely belive the NFL has no right to ban anyone for any grounds other than football grounds. If Michael Vick abuses animals it is nothing to do with the NFL.

If I committed a crime my employer would of course have the right to sack me for it, but I wouldnt expect the Office of Fair Trading to enforce my sacking... its the same with Vick. The Falcons should have the right to sack someone if they commit a crime, but again it has nothing to do with the NFL.

pan6467 · 07-22-2007, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Famous

I am not trying to get a rise out of people.

Michael Vick is a football player, not a role model. If he is a horrible person, it hasnt got much to do with his ability to play football - unless he is so wretched that his team mates wont play with him.

I genuinely belive the NFL has no right to ban anyone for any grounds other than football grounds. If Michael Vick abuses animals it is nothing to do with the NFL.

If I committed a crime my employer would of course have the right to sack me for it, but I wouldnt expect the Office of Fair Trading to enforce my sacking... its the same with Vick. The Falcons should have the right to sack someone if they commit a crime, but again it has nothing to do with the NFL.

Has a lot to do with the NFL. Teams are basically subsidiaries to the League. The teams while independantly owned also rely on the Commissioner's office for fairness, carrying out punishments, keeping the name clean, advertising the league as a whole, etc etc. The NFL has every right to punish and needs to punish.

The problem is if Atl. decides to cut Vick, a team that only cares about winning may pick him up and still damage the league's reputation.

If the NFL does nothing, then I know a lot of people who will boycott games. These people are Cleveland and Cincy fans.... The perception is if the NFL doesn't do anything they are in fact endorsing it.

Same as how the League and Commissioner suspend guys who pop on their piss tests, get caught at parties shooting, driving drunk, etc.

Now I do have this question............ If Vick were a white QB (say Roethlisburger, Manning, Favre even..... would they have already done something, would the team have cut him and the NFL suspended him already?

I just ask, because I have been hearing the race card played and whispered about and am curious what others think.

Ilow · 07-22-2007, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pan6467

Has a lot to do with the NFL. Teams are basically subsidiaries to the League. The teams while independantly owned also rely on the Commissioner's office for fairness, carrying out punishments, keeping the name clean, advertising the league as a whole, etc etc. The NFL has every right to punish and needs to punish.

The problem is if Atl. decides to cut Vick, a team that only cares about winning may pick him up and still damage the league's reputation.

If the NFL does nothing, then I know a lot of people who will boycott games. These people are Cleveland and Cincy fans.... The perception is if the NFL doesn't do anything they are in fact endorsing it.

Same as how the League and Commissioner suspend guys who pop on their piss tests, get caught at parties shooting, driving drunk, etc.

Now I do have this question............ If Vick were a white QB (say Roethlisburger, Manning, Favre even..... would they have already done something, would the team have cut him and the NFL suspended him already?

I just ask, because I have been hearing the race card played and whispered about and am curious what others think.

This is pretty much the essence of why the NFL is so deeply involved. Although the individual teams sign the checks, the players ultimately serve at the discretion of the NFL. If this were not the case, the NFL would not be involved in enforcing in other areas, (performance enhancing drugs, etc).
If you would like another comparison, it is like when someone finds a finger in some chili at Wendy's. The Wendy's corporate is quite aware that this incident that happened in one place affects people's perception of ALL Wendy's, and hurts the Wendy's BRAND. The NFL is extremely concerned about the NFL Brand, and is taking dramatic steps to protect it's image.
As far as your question about race, Pan, I think race is relevant in this matter, but perhaps not in the way that you reference. I don't have the feeling at this point that a white player would have taken a bigger hit from the NFL or the legal system. There is the issue, that in this case, dogfighting is apparently mainly a culturally black enterprise (I seriously doubt that you can find any kind of accurate stats to support this so it is all anecdotal evidence). The people who have spoken out on the topic so far, from the NFL have all been black as far as I've heard, and some have even given tacit approval of the practice (although the often retract). Of further concern for the NFL is the fact that nearly everyone who has been disciplined by the NFL has also been black. Now obviously since the majority of players in the NFL are black this would be a statistical probability, but the non-blacks are significantly less represented. Off the top of my head, I can only think of one white player who has had issues (Perf. enhancing drugs, josh miller, I think). There may be others, but they pale in comparison to the Pac-Mans, Tank Johnsons, and a good portion of the Bengals. Anyway, if I go any further, I feel like it may be a thread hijack (if it isn't already) so I'll stop here.

Walking Shadow · 07-23-2007, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Famous

I am not trying to get a rise out of people.

Michael Vick is a football player, not a role model. If he is a horrible person, it hasnt got much to do with his ability to play football - unless he is so wretched that his team mates wont play with him.

I genuinely belive the NFL has no right to ban anyone for any grounds other than football grounds. If Michael Vick abuses animals it is nothing to do with the NFL.

If I committed a crime my employer would of course have the right to sack me for it, but I wouldnt expect the Office of Fair Trading to enforce my sacking... its the same with Vick. The Falcons should have the right to sack someone if they commit a crime, but again it has nothing to do with the NFL.

The NFL has a code of conduct which all players agree to when they sign their contracts. It basically boils down to the player agreeing not to make a complete Assclown oiut of himself and thereby throw a bad light on himself, his team and the league as whole. How hard is that to understand?

pan6467 · 07-23-2007, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ilow

This is pretty much the essence of why the NFL is so deeply involved. Although the individual teams sign the checks, the players ultimately serve at the discretion of the NFL. If this were not the case, the NFL would not be involved in enforcing in other areas, (performance enhancing drugs, etc).
If you would like another comparison, it is like when someone finds a finger in some chili at Wendy's. The Wendy's corporate is quite aware that this incident that happened in one place affects people's perception of ALL Wendy's, and hurts the Wendy's BRAND. The NFL is extremely concerned about the NFL Brand, and is taking dramatic steps to protect it's image.
As far as your question about race, Pan, I think race is relevant in this matter, but perhaps not in the way that you reference. I don't have the feeling at this point that a white player would have taken a bigger hit from the NFL or the legal system. There is the issue, that in this case, dogfighting is apparently mainly a culturally black enterprise (I seriously doubt that you can find any kind of accurate stats to support this so it is all anecdotal evidence). The people who have spoken out on the topic so far, from the NFL have all been black as far as I've heard, and some have even given tacit approval of the practice (although the often retract). Of further concern for the NFL is the fact that nearly everyone who has been disciplined by the NFL has also been black. Now obviously since the majority of players in the NFL are black this would be a statistical probability, but the non-blacks are significantly less represented. Off the top of my head, I can only think of one white player who has had issues (Perf. enhancing drugs, josh miller, I think). There may be others, but they pale in comparison to the Pac-Mans, Tank Johnsons, and a good portion of the Bengals. Anyway, if I go any further, I feel like it may be a thread hijack (if it isn't already) so I'll stop here.

Thanks man. I don't think it was a threadjack, I think it's part of the subject...... except that whole Bengals dig there

Mister Coaster · 07-24-2007, 12:08 PM

Vick ordered NOT to show up at Falcon's Training Camp:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/10266380

I do believe in innocent until proven guilty, and I did mention (my very first words in this topic, post #10) that IF HE'S GUILTY the NFL should step in and ban his ass. It looks like there is enough uproar to cause the league to do something.

Press conference with Falcon's owner today.

Personal opinion, not based on any facts... it looks to me like there is now way he's going to slip out of this one. This is one major fuck up on his part, and this will not go away quietly.

QuasiMondo · 07-24-2007, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ilow

This is pretty much the essence of why the NFL is so deeply involved. Although the individual teams sign the checks, the players ultimately serve at the discretion of the NFL. If this were not the case, the NFL would not be involved in enforcing in other areas, (performance enhancing drugs, etc).
If you would like another comparison, it is like when someone finds a finger in some chili at Wendy's. The Wendy's corporate is quite aware that this incident that happened in one place affects people's perception of ALL Wendy's, and hurts the Wendy's BRAND. The NFL is extremely concerned about the NFL Brand, and is taking dramatic steps to protect it's image.
As far as your question about race, Pan, I think race is relevant in this matter, but perhaps not in the way that you reference. I don't have the feeling at this point that a white player would have taken a bigger hit from the NFL or the legal system. There is the issue, that in this case, dogfighting is apparently mainly a culturally black enterprise (I seriously doubt that you can find any kind of accurate stats to support this so it is all anecdotal evidence). The people who have spoken out on the topic so far, from the NFL have all been black as far as I've heard, and some have even given tacit approval of the practice (although the often retract). Of further concern for the NFL is the fact that nearly everyone who has been disciplined by the NFL has also been black. Now obviously since the majority of players in the NFL are black this would be a statistical probability, but the non-blacks are significantly less represented. Off the top of my head, I can only think of one white player who has had issues (Perf. enhancing drugs, josh miller, I think). There may be others, but they pale in comparison to the Pac-Mans, Tank Johnsons, and a good portion of the Bengals. Anyway, if I go any further, I feel like it may be a thread hijack (if it isn't already) so I'll stop here.

To be honest, to say race plays an issue is to toss out a red herring. This case is generating attention because it's a first real test of Goddell's league conduct policy, and because people have a soft spot in their heart for dogs. I firmly believe that had Vick been accused of any other crime, this wouldn't get so much attention.

How much media attention did Rae Carruth get?

jorgelito · 07-24-2007, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pan6467

Has a lot to do with the NFL. Teams are basically subsidiaries to the League. The teams while independantly owned also rely on the Commissioner's office for fairness, carrying out punishments, keeping the name clean, advertising the league as a whole, etc etc. The NFL has every right to punish and needs to punish.

The problem is if Atl. decides to cut Vick, a team that only cares about winning may pick him up and still damage the league's reputation.

If the NFL does nothing, then I know a lot of people who will boycott games. These people are Cleveland and Cincy fans.... The perception is if the NFL doesn't do anything they are in fact endorsing it.

Same as how the League and Commissioner suspend guys who pop on their piss tests, get caught at parties shooting, driving drunk, etc.

Now I do have this question............ If Vick were a white QB (say Roethlisburger, Manning, Favre even..... would they have already done something, would the team have cut him and the NFL suspended him already?

I just ask, because I have been hearing the race card played and whispered about and am curious what others think.

If Vick were white, he would get off scott free.

Yeah the race ca

Ilow · 07-25-2007, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuasiMondo

To be honest, to say race plays an issue is to toss out a red herring. This case is generating attention because it's a first real test of Goddell's league conduct policy, and because people have a soft spot in their heart for dogs. I firmly believe that had Vick been accused of any other crime, this wouldn't get so much attention.

How much media attention did Rae Carruth get?

It is true, I believe that to say that race is a red herring with regard to Vick's individual treatment by the NFL. However, I think that this is more interesting from the standpoint that dogfighting is apparently more culturally sanctioned by blacks than whites and is possibly more reviled by whites than blacks (didn't see many black PETA members demostrating), thereby creating a situation like the drug sentences where possession of cocaine a "rich white person drug," had more lenient sentences than crack, a "poor, black person drug." It is true that Rae Carruth's acts did not gain as much notoriety as they should have, but I think that Pac-man and Tank's cases as well as Chris Henry's (sorry Pan) have already demonstrated a pretty stringent policy on the part of Goodell, the difference is really that all of the aforementioned were found criminally responsible, but Vick is thus far only guilty in the court of public opinion.
By the way jorgelito, I am not sure what you were trying to say, but it looked like it was well on the way to being complete bosh.

jorgelito · 07-25-2007, 11:44 AM

What? What do you mean? Pan asked if he thought race was a factor and I replied that yes, I do think so but in the other direction. How is that "complete bosh"?

Ilow · 07-25-2007, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jorgelito

What? What do you mean? Pan asked if he thought race was a factor and I replied that yes, I do think so but in the other direction. How is that "complete bosh"?

Well, I said that it was "well on the way" because "Yeah the race ca" is far from being a complete or coherent follow up to a pretty significant statement. In my opinion I don't think that anybody is going to get out of a mess this big regardless of their ethnicity or color. Vick was never in major trouble with the law that i am aware of, he was a spokesperson for many products, and is a multi, multi millionaire, I would say that if anyone was going to get off it would be that sort of person. There may be a lot of racist acts perpetrated against people in this country, by law enforcement, and otherwise, but i do not think that Michael Vick's indictment is one of them.

Walking Shadow · 07-26-2007, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ilow

It is true that Rae Carruth's acts did not gain as much notoriety as they should have,

Excuse me??? Carruth was all over the fucking news channels and ESPN and Court TV after he murdered his girlfriend and kid. ESPN spent days showing nothing but live coverage of the trial.

And as for the claims that "...if Vick was white, this wouldn't even be news, please. You and I both know that's a bunch of shit.

The reason that it seems that a larger proportion of black then white athletes get into this sort of horseshit is because quite frankly, of the gangsta/thug/keepin' it real attitude that many black athletes carry on their shoulders like a fuckin chip.

You never hear or see Bears linebacker Brian Urlacher bleating and shrieking about "I'm keepin' it real for ma homies, and my tru niggas" or going into strip clubs and throwing $80,000 in cash into the air.

jorgelito · 07-26-2007, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ilow

Well, I said that it was "well on the way" because "Yeah the race ca" is far from being a complete or coherent follow up to a pretty significant statement. In my opinion I don't think that anybody is going to get out of a mess this big regardless of their ethnicity or color. Vick was never in major trouble with the law that i am aware of, he was a spokesperson for many products, and is a multi, multi millionaire, I would say that if anyone was going to get off it would be that sort of person. There may be a lot of racist acts perpetrated against people in this country, by law enforcement, and otherwise, but i do not think that Michael Vick's indictment is one of them.

Ah, I see it now . I didn't realize the rest of my post got cut off.

I don't know if Michael Vick's indictment was entirely race-based but feel that race often does play a role in these things as well as in other areas of life. That's pretty much what I was trying to say in response to Pan's question he posed to us. So, for example, if it had been Peyton Manning? I don't think the reaction would be as strong. Maybe no suspensions and more of a wait and see attitude.

Mister Coaster · 07-26-2007, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jorgelito

So, for example, if it had been Peyton Manning? I don't think the reaction would be as strong.

Wow, I couldn't disagree more. For the sole reason that Manning is viewed as such a squeaky-clean mamma's boy. If he was fingered in something like this, I think so many people would be in shock that it would be the biggest sports-related arrest ever.

essendoubleop · 08-15-2007, 04:40 PM

I was going to post a long diatribe about how much more attention people give to dogs than OTHER PEOPLE, but I decided Jim Rome can say it much better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERNI0...elated&search=

Glory's Sun · 08-15-2007, 05:42 PM

Jim Rome is an idiot. While I didn't watch the video I'm sure he says that dogs are lower than people. While I agree to a certain extent, there are a massive amount of people who feel their pets are family members. I don't think it's the fact that the dog's were harmed, it's <b>HOW</b> the dogs were harmed and killed. Vick is in a position to better himself and the image of his "race" (since people want to play the race card) yet he goes out and apparantly funds a dog fighting ring. Is it any less than rape or murder? That's up to the courts and the public as a whole to decide. While I'd put this a few notches down from those crimes, the fact is that Carruth and Kobe were found innocent and have rebuilt their images and their sponsorships. With Vick copping a plea deal.. his image is ruined forever.

The fact that he wants to barter a plea shows he has no balls. With his amount of money and how much he could "lawyer up", he's basically saying that he's guilty. People can claim that he's out of options considering the other people in his group are agreeing to testify against him, but he has the money to really do some damage with great lawyers in court.

Now what should the NFL do?? There will be a massive PR problem if the league lets him back in after he serves his time. Will a team be willing to take on that kind of bad PR?? I guess we'll just have to wait and see. You can bet he won't get shit for sponsors any more however.

hunnychile · 08-17-2007, 02:20 PM

Let's just hang him by the neck for a while and then when he's almost dead, push his head under water till he dies.

Good ridence. What a piece of shit. The NFL can survive without the likes of that dog killing non-human.

powerclown · 08-17-2007, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by essendoubleop

I was going to post a long diatribe about how much more attention people give to dogs than OTHER PEOPLE, but I decided Jim Rome can say it much better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERNI0...elated&search=

Cmon now that was a funny video, and I like dogs.

I agree with jorgelito. While I don't think race entirely decided this, it exacerbated it. If Peyton Manning or Steve Nash did this, they'd get a slap on the wrist at worst. There would be Karl Rovian levels of PR and spin control, you would stop hearing about it in the news and on tv, Manning and Nash would be sat down in front of the worlds media to give public apologies, and each would become co-chairs and Lifetime VIP "contributing members" at PETA and other animal welfare organizations. That Vick is facing jailtime is beyond ludicrous.

The heads of major sport in America are cracking down more and more on the thuglife/ganglife mentality. As old white guys, the fact that the biggest, strongest and fastest athletes in the world are black must drive them bonkers from a business perspective.

The_Jazz · 08-20-2007, 11:01 AM

Looks like he's pleading guilty but no word on what deal he's cut. He may still go to jail.

Vick accepts plea deal

I'd guess that his NFL career is over for at least the next few years. I doubt the Canadians will take him with a felony conviction, assuming he stays out of jail, so the CFL is out. NFLEurope got shut down after the last season, so that leaves the Arena Football League. I'm not sure how well he'd do there since there seems to be a higher premium on accuracy than speed at the QB position. If he does land there, I can see a return to the NFL if he becomes the anti-dog fighting champion, gives money, makes public appeals, etc.

Then again, I've never given ol' Ron Mexico much credit in the smarts department, although he seems to have some smart folks working for him. Maybe they'll try to weather the storm with him.

Only time will tell.

Mister Coaster · 08-20-2007, 11:10 AM

The Jazz beat me to it.

People don't cop a guilty plea when they are innocent. If he is ever allowed to play again, it will be a black eye for the sport/organization that allows it.

The_Jazz · 08-20-2007, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister Coaster

People don't cop a guilty plea when they are innocent. If he is ever allowed to play again, it will be a black eye for the sport/organization that allows it.

Umm, duh?

Yeah, he's guilty. As soon as his codefendants started turning on him, I made up my mind.

I agree with the black eye, but I think that the potential reward might be worth the risk for some teams. The NFL will most likely suspend him for the season (maybe longer) and the Falcons will try to break his contract and get as much of the upfront money back as possible. I sincerely doubt that even the Raiders would touch him when he's eligible again. He needs time and distance from this moment to repair his image. Like I said, if he becomes the poster boy for the anti-cruelty forces, then its possible he'll get back in the game at the NFL level at some point. That's not going to happen this year or even next year, though.

For those of you in keeper leagues, this is your chance to drop Mr. Mexico.

Glory's Sun · 08-20-2007, 11:24 AM

I'll just choose to disagree on the "people don't cop plea's unless they're guilty" bit.. people will do what they have to in certain situations.. but that's a totally different thread.

In this case, however, I do believe Vick had some part in the killing of the dogs. It really doesn't matter because the judge has already told the co-defendants he was going to go above and beyond the recommendations of the plea.. which spells bad news for Vick.

The agreement is probably for a year in jail with some community service and probation tacked on at the end of term. I expect the judge to throw at minimum 2 years prison Vick's way. This judge is known as being a tough sentencer.

spectre · 08-20-2007, 12:08 PM

I don't think we'll ever see Vick back in the NFL. If he does come back, he'll have to fight his way onto a roster since most teams won't want to take a chance. Plus, he's a mediocre quarterback at best. The only thing he only really has going for him is his ability to run. Not to mention the fact that Goodell still has to decide whether or not to even let him back in the NFL, which, with all of his fire and brimstone talk about player conduct in the NFL, I don't see it happening.

The_Jazz · 08-20-2007, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spectre

I don't think we'll ever see Vick back in the NFL. If he does come back, he'll have to fight his way onto a roster since most teams won't want to take a chance. Plus, he's a mediocre quarterback at best. The only thing he only really has going for him is his ability to run. Not to mention the fact that Goodell still has to decide whether or not to even let him back in the NFL, which, with all of his fire and brimstone talk about player conduct in the NFL, I don't see it happening.

Spec, are you thinking lifetime ban? I can't see Goodell going that far on something that happened off the field and didn't involve the game itself. If he does a year in jail, I can see Goodell giving him another year or two off before letting him be eligible, but if that's the scenario that plays out then he's got to prove that he's physically able to perform first, which, I think, makes my AFL scenario all the more plausible, assuming someone in that league has the guts to give it a try.

There are a whole lot of maybe's in all of this, though.

spectre · 08-20-2007, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

Spec, are you thinking lifetime ban? I can't see Goodell going that far on something that happened off the field and didn't involve the game itself. If he does a year in jail, I can see Goodell giving him another year or two off before letting him be eligible, but if that's the scenario that plays out then he's got to prove that he's physically able to perform first, which, I think, makes my AFL scenario all the more plausible, assuming someone in that league has the guts to give it a try.

There are a whole lot of maybe's in all of this, though.

It's possible. Remember, there are the gambling charges along with everything else, which can cause him to be more harsh, but I can see Goodell giving him a couple to a few years off, at which time, a quarterback who relies on his legs more than his arm won't be quite as useful. Which, in effect, would make him, at best a back up or a number 3 when he gets back, if anyone would want to take him.

Glory's Sun · 08-20-2007, 01:18 PM

Goodell will be looking at the gambling charges harder than anything.. with the recent bombshell that hit the NBA, Goodell isn't going to take a chance looking as stupid as the NBA Comish.

The only team I can see taking Vick is the Raiders.. they don't really give a fuck what you did ..

That being said, I'll be surprised if we see Vick on an NFL field again.

07-17-2007, 06:01 PM	#1 (permalink)
QuasiMondo Wise-ass Latino Location: Pretoria (Tshwane), RSA	Michael Vick Indicted http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2940065 Let's see how Goddell handles this now that there's a marketable big-name player running afoul of the law. __________________ Cameron originally envisioned the Terminator as a small, unremarkable man, giving it the ability to blend in more easily. As a result, his first choice for the part was Lance Henriksen. O. J. Simpson was on the shortlist but Cameron did not think that such a nice guy could be a ruthless killer. -From the Collector's Edition DVD of The Terminator

07-18-2007, 05:06 AM	#3 (permalink)
QuasiMondo Wise-ass Latino Location: Pretoria (Tshwane), RSA	Why wait? Pacman Jones got suspended for a full year even though none of the incidents he was involved in resulted in him being arrested. The DUI that got Tank Johnson suspended by the league and cut from the Bears turned out not to be a DUI after the test results showed him under the limit. If the league doesn't suspend Vick, then it justifies the accusations that the league is working under two disciplinary guidelines when it comes to marquee players and everybody else. __________________ Cameron originally envisioned the Terminator as a small, unremarkable man, giving it the ability to blend in more easily. As a result, his first choice for the part was Lance Henriksen. O. J. Simpson was on the shortlist but Cameron did not think that such a nice guy could be a ruthless killer. -From the Collector's Edition DVD of The Terminator

07-18-2007, 09:45 AM	#5 (permalink)
Brewmaniac Searching for the perfect brew!	Fuck suspension if found guilty he should do some time! Martha did, hell Paris did, he deserves to do much more than either! We'll see how they spin this! Scum bag! __________________ "That's a joke... I say, that's a joke, son"

07-19-2007, 09:10 PM	#7 (permalink)
Ilow Junkie Location: Pats country	And i love how he meets with Blank to apologize for being a distraction to the team. "Sorry for being a distraction...and, uh for that whole despicable human being thing...yeah, sorry about that too." For some reason I can't wait for this verdict, so everyone can stop saying "alleged" and so we all don't come off sort of prematurely bashing him. With that being said, i don't feel like this is a Duke lacrosse case, as there seems to be overwhelming evidence against him. He has already lied about his involvement, so it should just get better. Oh and Nike shelved his new shoe debut. Hopefully they shelved their payments to him as well. Although he is exciting, they should have cut ties with him years ago because he isn't that good a quarterback anyway. The worst part about it is that with 130 million you could do some really great things and i never hear of him doing shit. Fuck, buy a yacht, buy a couple houses and a Ferrari, and you still have plenty of dough for philanthropy. If you take the money he paid out in gambling losses on the dogs, you could fund a non-profit for a year! Admittedly I do not live close to Atlanta,but you never even see him do public service messages or Make a Wish appearances. __________________ "Religion is the one area of our discourse in which it is considered noble to pretend to be certain about things no human being could possibly be certain about" --Sam Harris Last edited by Ilow; 07-19-2007 at 09:50 PM..

07-20-2007, 05:09 PM	#10 (permalink)
Mister Coaster Big & Brassy Location: The "Canyon"	If he's guilty, he NEEDS to GO DOWN!! I mean jail time, and lots of it. Cancel his 130 mil contract, and perhaps renig what he has already earned. If the NFL lets him skate, it would be the biggest black eye in sports history. This, of course, is only if he is proven guilty. He can obviously afford a good defence, so... way to go US legal system. __________________ If you have any poo... fling it NOW!

07-18-2007, 04:55 AM	#2 (permalink)
Cross-Over Psycho	The allegations are quite disturbing and reveal that he is suspected to be directly and indirectly involved in the killing of dogs as well as fighting (which is also wrong). I was born in Georgia and have always been a Falcon fan. If this turns out to be true though, he will rightfully be suspended. It is cowardly and pathetic. Some people brush it off as dogs not being human beings, but in children, cruelty to animals has a direct correlation to future violent behavior. Obviously, Vick is not a child, but that is merely an example of the seriousness of the charges. It is also fair to reiterate that these are just allegations at this time.

07-18-2007, 09:28 AM	#4 (permalink)
Walking Shadow Tilted	Re: Suspending Vick. Fuck that, if I were Goddell, I'd ban him outright. But unfortunately Vick falls under the leagues own suspension policy which is quite specific about such things. This is Vicks first run in with the law and until there is a finding of guilt against him or he admits guilt the league can do nothing. Which is a fucking shame. Vick is filth, pure and simple.

07-18-2007, 11:09 AM	#6 (permalink)
Ridge Upright	That guy is a fucking jerk. Drowning, electrocuting and strangling dogs that won't fight? And he knew about it. I hope he gets prison time, and if not, ban his piece of shit ass from the NFL. If he does play I hope that scumbag gets booed everywhere he goes, even at home.

07-20-2007, 03:28 PM	#9 (permalink)
Jadey This Space For Rent Location: Davenport, Iowa	I realize not all the facts are known at this point, but regardless of the result anyone that treats dogs that way is a piece of shit.

07-21-2007, 04:32 AM	#11 (permalink)
Strange Famous follower of the child's crusade?	I mean, I absolutely have no support for dog fighting and think it is certainly cruel and dispicable... but what has it got to do with football? Why, and on what basis, should the NFL punish him or suspend him if he is cruel to animals, what has it got to do with anything? If he has broken laws, then he should answer for them in court and be punished by the law as anyone else. I cannot see what right the NFL have to suspend him unless he violates rules of FOOTBALL. I dont especially like Vick, or even think he is a valuable player for his team... but I dont understand calls to suspend him at all. __________________ "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." The Gospel of Thomas

07-21-2007, 07:56 AM	#12 (permalink)
Mister Coaster Big & Brassy Location: The "Canyon"	If I were an employer, I wouldn't want a criminal working for me. The NFL knows that Vick is a role model for kids, to keep him as a player sends a message that being a criminal is A-OK with us, as long as you din't break a football rule. Besides, rules of life should override rules of the field. NASCAR drivers have been banned from driving for life for smaller/less despicable crimes. __________________ If you have any poo... fling it NOW!

07-21-2007, 01:21 PM	#13 (permalink)
Strange Famous follower of the child's crusade?	"criminal" is normally someone who is found guilty in a court of law, not someone who is simply charged. And the NFL is not Vicks employer, Atlanta Falcons are. If the Falcons want to sack him, by all means. I repeat, what is it to do with the NFL? __________________ "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." The Gospel of Thomas

07-21-2007, 09:26 PM	#14 (permalink)
Ilow Junkie Location: Pats country	Strange Famous, i feel like you are just trying to get a rise out of people, or are playing devil's advocate or something. For most people, it seems rather straightforward what a corporate entity (and make no mistake the NFL is a corporate entity) would wish to distance itself from someone who is not considered a solid citizen. Also, Vick has not been found guilty (except in the court of public opinion) but there is apparently a fairly significant amount of evidence against him, and it appears more clear cut than some sort of domestic violence or other case. __________________ "Religion is the one area of our discourse in which it is considered noble to pretend to be certain about things no human being could possibly be certain about" --Sam Harris

07-21-2007, 11:52 PM	#15 (permalink)
Strange Famous follower of the child's crusade?	I am not trying to get a rise out of people. Michael Vick is a football player, not a role model. If he is a horrible person, it hasnt got much to do with his ability to play football - unless he is so wretched that his team mates wont play with him. I genuinely belive the NFL has no right to ban anyone for any grounds other than football grounds. If Michael Vick abuses animals it is nothing to do with the NFL. If I committed a crime my employer would of course have the right to sack me for it, but I wouldnt expect the Office of Fair Trading to enforce my sacking... its the same with Vick. The Falcons should have the right to sack someone if they commit a crime, but again it has nothing to do with the NFL. __________________ "Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered." The Gospel of Thomas

07-24-2007, 12:08 PM	#20 (permalink)
Mister Coaster Big & Brassy Location: The "Canyon"	Vick ordered NOT to show up at Falcon's Training Camp: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/10266380 I do believe in innocent until proven guilty, and I did mention (my very first words in this topic, post #10) that IF HE'S GUILTY the NFL should step in and ban his ass. It looks like there is enough uproar to cause the league to do something. Press conference with Falcon's owner today. Personal opinion, not based on any facts... it looks to me like there is now way he's going to slip out of this one. This is one major fuck up on his part, and this will not go away quietly. __________________ If you have any poo... fling it NOW!

07-25-2007, 11:44 AM	#24 (permalink)
jorgelito All important elusive independent swing voter... Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia	What? What do you mean? Pan asked if he thought race was a factor and I replied that yes, I do think so but in the other direction. How is that "complete bosh"?

08-15-2007, 04:40 PM	#29 (permalink)
essendoubleop Psycho	I was going to post a long diatribe about how much more attention people give to dogs than OTHER PEOPLE, but I decided Jim Rome can say it much better. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERNI0...elated&search=

08-15-2007, 05:42 PM	#30 (permalink)
Glory's Sun Registered User	Jim Rome is an idiot. While I didn't watch the video I'm sure he says that dogs are lower than people. While I agree to a certain extent, there are a massive amount of people who feel their pets are family members. I don't think it's the fact that the dog's were harmed, it's <b>HOW</b> the dogs were harmed and killed. Vick is in a position to better himself and the image of his "race" (since people want to play the race card) yet he goes out and apparantly funds a dog fighting ring. Is it any less than rape or murder? That's up to the courts and the public as a whole to decide. While I'd put this a few notches down from those crimes, the fact is that Carruth and Kobe were found innocent and have rebuilt their images and their sponsorships. With Vick copping a plea deal.. his image is ruined forever. The fact that he wants to barter a plea shows he has no balls. With his amount of money and how much he could "lawyer up", he's basically saying that he's guilty. People can claim that he's out of options considering the other people in his group are agreeing to testify against him, but he has the money to really do some damage with great lawyers in court. Now what should the NFL do?? There will be a massive PR problem if the league lets him back in after he serves his time. Will a team be willing to take on that kind of bad PR?? I guess we'll just have to wait and see. You can bet he won't get shit for sponsors any more however.

08-17-2007, 02:20 PM	#31 (permalink)
hunnychile Alien Anthropologist Location: Between Boredom and Nirvana	Let's just hang him by the neck for a while and then when he's almost dead, push his head under water till he dies. Good ridence. What a piece of shit. The NFL can survive without the likes of that dog killing non-human. __________________ "I need compassion, understanding and chocolate." - NJB

08-20-2007, 11:01 AM	#33 (permalink)
The_Jazz Asshole Administrator Location: Chicago	Looks like he's pleading guilty but no word on what deal he's cut. He may still go to jail. Vick accepts plea deal I'd guess that his NFL career is over for at least the next few years. I doubt the Canadians will take him with a felony conviction, assuming he stays out of jail, so the CFL is out. NFLEurope got shut down after the last season, so that leaves the Arena Football League. I'm not sure how well he'd do there since there seems to be a higher premium on accuracy than speed at the QB position. If he does land there, I can see a return to the NFL if he becomes the anti-dog fighting champion, gives money, makes public appeals, etc. Then again, I've never given ol' Ron Mexico much credit in the smarts department, although he seems to have some smart folks working for him. Maybe they'll try to weather the storm with him. Only time will tell. __________________ "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

08-20-2007, 11:10 AM	#34 (permalink)
Mister Coaster Big & Brassy Location: The "Canyon"	The Jazz beat me to it. People don't cop a guilty plea when they are innocent. If he is ever allowed to play again, it will be a black eye for the sport/organization that allows it. __________________ If you have any poo... fling it NOW!

08-20-2007, 11:24 AM	#36 (permalink)
Glory's Sun Registered User	I'll just choose to disagree on the "people don't cop plea's unless they're guilty" bit.. people will do what they have to in certain situations.. but that's a totally different thread. In this case, however, I do believe Vick had some part in the killing of the dogs. It really doesn't matter because the judge has already told the co-defendants he was going to go above and beyond the recommendations of the plea.. which spells bad news for Vick. The agreement is probably for a year in jail with some community service and probation tacked on at the end of term. I expect the judge to throw at minimum 2 years prison Vick's way. This judge is known as being a tough sentencer.

08-20-2007, 12:08 PM	#37 (permalink)
spectre Junkie	I don't think we'll ever see Vick back in the NFL. If he does come back, he'll have to fight his way onto a roster since most teams won't want to take a chance. Plus, he's a mediocre quarterback at best. The only thing he only really has going for him is his ability to run. Not to mention the fact that Goodell still has to decide whether or not to even let him back in the NFL, which, with all of his fire and brimstone talk about player conduct in the NFL, I don't see it happening. __________________ "Fuck these chains No goddamn slave I will be different" ~ Machine Head

08-20-2007, 01:18 PM	#40 (permalink)
Glory's Sun Registered User	Goodell will be looking at the gambling charges harder than anything.. with the recent bombshell that hit the NBA, Goodell isn't going to take a chance looking as stupid as the NBA Comish. The only team I can see taking Vick is the Raiders.. they don't really give a fuck what you did .. That being said, I'll be surprised if we see Vick on an NFL field again.