Paup 1995MVP Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 You guys realize that Vick's operation would no doubt have been responsible for the deaths of THOUSANDS of animals; not just the dogs in the matches, but people's small pets that wander too far from the front yard, and all the ones advertised "Free To Good Homes" in the papers, many, MANY of those go to dogfighting pits, to be used for "practice", basically to get the fighting dogs used to the act of viciously tearing an animal to pieces. Vick, in my opinion, should have been publicly hanged and the message sent to anyone else engaging in such atrocities against sentient creatures that they're next. I hope he dies on the field. You are one sick F-CK!!! What you said is disgraceful. I for one will be excited like everyone else on this message board to see Mike Vick do his thing on the field once again. What he did was very wrong. I think we can all agree with that. But he served his time in prison, and will always have disgraced his name. However, time will march on and his misdeeds will leave the spotlight. And like everything else it will be pretty much forgotten. So stop getting all worked up like a dumb psycho and move on with your hate. Football and the NFL is awesome. Goodell is a smart guy. I am sure he had his reasons for his decision on Vick. So just relax.
Kelly the Dog Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 I agree, Goodell has to deal with facts and real world scenarios. But I still don't see how you can argue that he's been suspended from the league for the past 2 years. The league didn't suspend him at all. They routinely said it was a mute point to discuss because he was in jail. OK, my initial analogy was poor. Let's say, Vick took it to trial. And spent the last two years fighting it in court. He wouldn't have been able to play because he would be too busy in court. Yesterday, the judge declares mistrial. Do you allow Vick to play tomorrow? Maybe that's bad ananlogy. I don't know. My point is, at some point the league needs to acknowledge what he did and dish out an appropriate punishment. If you're giving other guys 4 weeks for misdemeanor drug charges, how can you call this fair? Are they going to say, we think he's been punished enough? What is the perception of that statement? Oh, something we both, or all, seem to have forgotten, at least I did. Vick has been officially suspended without pay from the league for all this time, since August of 2007. So how is that not acknowledging punishment? http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2990157
DC Tom Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 Okay, just getting home from work and checking up on this. And I'd like to know where in either the original link or in this one from ESPN it says that Goodell has made a decision? Holy jumping to conclusions based on anonymous sources, Batman. You expect me to actually read the article and forego a Khmer Rouge reference?
Dan Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 I hear what you're saying, but I think it's all pretty simple: 1] Mike Vick did something heinous and must pay a price. 2] Mike Vick, outside of the league's control, spends two years in prison and away from the game. so 3] Is two plus years away from the game the most fair punishment, or is three or four years away from the game the most fair punishment? I think the league says two plus years is the most fair. That punishment most clearly fits the crime. It's not much different than a judgment call from a court on two crimes committed at the same time. Say a guy named Mike Vick assaults two guys in a bar. He goes to trial and gets convicted on two counts of assault for the same fight, each worth two years. Should they run concurrently or consecutively? Sometimes the guy goes to jail for two years total, sometimes he goes to jail for two and then another two for four total. The judge or jury or statute decides which is the most fair, two years or four years. Very good points. But, the NFL is completely different from the court system. Remove the prison sentence for a second, how many players are suspended with no jail time? They plead, the court gives them community service, yet the league determines their behavior warrants more than just community service - it deserves multiple games suspension. So, in this case, the league has only decided the behavior is worth an additional 4 games. At least that's how I see it. I thought the Falcons cut him or suspended him and went after his pay? Not so much a league action, but a team action. I could easily be wrong though. Okay, just getting home from work and checking up on this. And I'd like to know where in either the original link or in this one from ESPN it says that Goodell has made a decision? Holy jumping to conclusions based on anonymous sources, Batman. Yeah, huge assumption any of us - myself included - read the article. Personally, I try to read as little as possible.
Lori Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/...pension-report/
Pitta Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 I have no problem with the suspension. Its about what I expected and I think its fair. Im also sure it has other conditions as well. So now the question is who will pick him up. And remember it only takes one. One owner to okay it, one injury, one garbage QB. It takes just one guys. And I think just before training camp one team and probably a couple of more will get interested in Mike Vick. And honestly would have been the benefit of any team saying they wanted Mike Vick before he was reinstated? There was no pressure to say so and why risk public backlash. Even if I am interested in Mike Vick I don't say so because there is no advantage I would have gained by saying so. Once he's officially reinstated teams will no longer have that cover to hide behind. I think we will see about 3 teams showing real interest in Mike Vick. My guesses... San Francisco 49ers Miami Dolphins Carolina Panthers Denver Broncos Seattle Seahawks Also, put Minnesota at the top of that list if Brett Favre decides against returning. Vick and Peterson would be deadly...
sfladave Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 Cmon now, how stupid is this logic. A suspension results only when a player is available to play in a game and is not allowed to. That is, the suspension prevents him from playing in the game, when he otherwise could have played. You cannot "suspend" a person when the person cannot play anyways. It makes no sense. It would be like firing someone for not being at work when they are vacation---you have no logical expectation that employee will be at work, yet you hold that against them in some way... If the guy can't play anyways because he is jail, you can't logically argue that he has been "suspended" that whole time. A suspension only counts when the player is missing games that he otherwise would have played in. While I agree with what you're saying in principle, I think that the NFL does consider the sentance he served as time served for them also, the 4 games are a token gesture. You also have to consider the fact that the NFL is also dealing with a work force that has an average work life span of 1 to 4 years on average. This is probably a very generous estimate on the players behalf. Like Michael Vick or not, he deserves a chance at rehabilitation just as much as anyone else does.* That being said, I hope he is killed by a pack of dogs while he is taking a jog through a park! KARMA! *The Pats* still cheat and I consider that a MUCH bigger offense to the league!
crazyDingo Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 How long did Goodell suspend Ron Mexico? Is it concurrent?
Dan Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/...pension-report/ Well, there ya go again. Ruining perfectly good baseless discussions with facts. Thaaanks. I'll still contend that I think Vick deserves more than 4 games, but I'll withdraw my "Goodell is a tool" statements for the time being.
Kelly the Dog Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 Well, there ya go again. Ruining perfectly good baseless discussions with facts. Thaaanks. I'll still contend that I think Vick deserves more than 4 games, but I'll withdraw my "Goodell is a tool" statements for the time being. He's been officially suspended by the league for 32 games already. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2990157
sfladave Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 So, if Vick didn't do any jail time, but decided to take a year off and tour Europe, does that still count as suspension? The league has repeatedly said they don't have to comment on any possible suspension for Vick because he's in jail and it's a mute point. If the jail time was part of his suspension, why didn't they say he's currently serving a 2 year suspension? Fact is, Goodell dodged the issue for 2+ years and now hands down a "slap on the wrist" punishment. Who here has had a couple drinks, but maybe just a little over the legal limit, then has then driven home? What if... You accidently killed someone on your way home or someone in your car? Is this a more serious offense than what Vick did? How many people here have put themselves in this situation? What if? Most of us here are probably guilty of the "thank god it didn't happen to me" mentioned above. What if your drive home resulted in tragedy? I may be much more responsible now, BUT I also know I have not chosen the wise path through some parts of my life. I suspect some here will think they are righteously proclaiming that they are casting the first stone at Vick, but I suspect most here cannot cast that stone with good conscience. Seriously... who here can claim a perfect life with the perfect right to summarily judge anyone????? I laugh and then cry at some of the posts from people who proclaim complete disassociation to anything due to (insert any topic here) tarnishing the image they hold. I do have to add that, I do believe in what I'm saying above, BUT in all honesty, the human in me says that I hope Michael Vick does get killed by a pack of dogs while he is jogging through a park! I'm just saying.
Dan Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 He's been officially suspended by the league for 32 games already.http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2990157 Good find. I hadn't recalled all those details. That certainly changes my opinion somewhat; to see that the league actually said he was suspended indefinitely and they would revisit at the end of his legal proceedings (i.e. jail sentence). I'm still not sure I like the idea of jail time being considered as part of your suspension. As others have suggested, I view a suspension as being barred from the game when you're legally and physically capable of playing. Otherwise, it's kinda like taking the easy way out. You mentioned the perception earlier and as I see it, the perception is he hasn't been suspended, he's been in jail. That may not be reality, I agree. So, if you're in the hot seat how do you reconcile that perception with the reality? IMO, you give him a year. I see it kinda like the Pats*. The reality is Goodell gave out the biggest fine he had ever given out when they cheated. The perception, however, is that he coddled them and brushed it off (at least in this fan's mind). A 4 game suspension for the coach, IMO, would have helped to balance the perception to the reality a little more. I know Vick probably should be cleared to play again, whether it be this year or next. But, I really don't envy Goodell in this situation. He's going to be crucified by all sorts of activist groups the moment he's reinstated regardless of the time frame. On the other hand, if he doesn't reinstate, he probably gets the NFLPA coming down on him.
Dan Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 Who here has had a couple drinks, but maybe just a little over the legal limit, then has then driven home?What if... You accidently killed someone on your way home or someone in your car? Is this a more serious offense than what Vick did? How many people here have put themselves in this situation? What if? Most of us here are probably guilty of the "thank god it didn't happen to me" mentioned above. What if your drive home resulted in tragedy? I may be much more responsible now, BUT I also know I have not chosen the wise path through some parts of my life. I suspect some here will think they are righteously proclaiming that they are casting the first stone at Vick, but I suspect most here cannot cast that stone with good conscience. Seriously... who here can claim a perfect life with the perfect right to summarily judge anyone????? I laugh and then cry at some of the posts from people who proclaim complete disassociation to anything due to (insert any topic here) tarnishing the image they hold. I do have to add that, I do believe in what I'm saying above, BUT in all honesty, the human in me says that I hope Michael Vick does get killed by a pack of dogs while he is jogging through a park! I'm just saying. I understand what you're trying to say, but this is a completely different scenario. He didn't make a bad decision and then have some bad luck. He made a multitude of conscious decisions to live a dual life of organized crime. Granted, maybe not on the level of the mafia. But, organized criminal activity for years, none the less. Sure we've all done some dumb things in our lives and hope for forgiveness. But, I'd say Vick's transgressions are a little more deliberate and, therefore, a little harder for some to forgive. Don't get me wrong; I'm not trying to judge or forgive him. I figure that's for someone other than me. I'm just trying to wrap my brain around what's best for a silly little sport like football.
sfladave Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 I understand what you're trying to say, but this is a completely different scenario. He didn't make a bad decision and then have some bad luck. He made a multitude of conscious decisions to live a dual life of organized crime. Granted, maybe not on the level of the mafia. But, organized criminal activity for years, none the less. Sure we've all done some dumb things in our lives and hope for forgiveness. But, I'd say Vick's transgressions are a little more deliberate and, theefore, a little harder for some to forgive. Don't get me wrong; I'm not trying to judge or forgive him. I figure that's for someone other than me. I'm just trying to wrap my brain around what's best for a silly little sport like football. Vick did make a multitude of bad decisions, I have no respect for him or what he stands for. However... Vick will be grabbed by a nfl team immediately as soon as teams have a right to do so. He will also get a decent buck for doing so, probably with multiple incentive clauses. While not worthy of most #1 positions on any NFL team he WILL draw tickets and TV coverage, end of story...however a pack of dogs will dispose of my theory post haste or so I hope I'm just saying
Jim in Anchorage Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 I don't care if Vick ate live kittens for breakfast. He was a POS QB.
generaLee83 Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 You aren't missing anything. The total games suspended is 37 I believe. That's if you believe he could have played the games while he was in prison.
generaLee83 Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 Good find. I hadn't recalled all those details. That certainly changes my opinion somewhat; to see that the league actually said he was suspended indefinitely and they would revisit at the end of his legal proceedings (i.e. jail sentence). I'm still not sure I like the idea of jail time being considered as part of your suspension. As others have suggested, I view a suspension as being barred from the game when you're legally and physically capable of playing. Otherwise, it's kinda like taking the easy way out. You mentioned the perception earlier and as I see it, the perception is he hasn't been suspended, he's been in jail. That may not be reality, I agree. So, if you're in the hot seat how do you reconcile that perception with the reality? IMO, you give him a year. I see it kinda like the Pats*. The reality is Goodell gave out the biggest fine he had ever given out when they cheated. The perception, however, is that he coddled them and brushed it off (at least in this fan's mind). A 4 game suspension for the coach, IMO, would have helped to balance the perception to the reality a little more. I know Vick probably should be cleared to play again, whether it be this year or next. But, I really don't envy Goodell in this situation. He's going to be crucified by all sorts of activist groups the moment he's reinstated regardless of the time frame. On the other hand, if he doesn't reinstate, he probably gets the NFLPA coming down on him. Yes he was suspended "indefinitely" but if anyone can show how he would have been able to participate while in prison I'd like to see it. I guess his suspension was served concurrently?
SoulMan Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 I don't think there is any chance in the world the Bills sign him. I would hope not.
koosh Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 "Today, Roger Goodell is expected to announce a 12-game suspension for Pol Pot. The Raiders are reportedly interested in acquiring him..." Niiiice !!!
tennesseeboy Posted July 24, 2009 Posted July 24, 2009 sounds okay..vick 37 games and Lynch is on his second infraction and is getting the appropriate punishment.
Recommended Posts