Thurman#1 Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Again, his suspension the past two years is MEANINGLESS. He was either in jail or in the process of negotiating his guilty play. Either way, he couldn't have played. Goodell could have suspended a Unicorn for the difference it made to either Vick or the Unicorn. Did he miss the games? Then he was punished. Goodell obviously thinks that he was punished almost enough already. I personally agree.
SouthernMan Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Let's not forget: Lynch's situation involves a weapon! Oh...noooo.... So you have to add in the idiot-NYC-Madison Avenue-Oprahfied-PC adjustment to the "rules" for suspensions. I love it when this agenda nonsense becomes so convoluted that it trips over it's own vagina, as in, 3 games for a gun in a box vs. 1 game for hitting a woman? Now that makes sense. Where are all the feminists? You get less suspensions for hitting a woman than killing dogs or having a gun....sitting in a glove box? Since this is of course all about "sending messages to the children", what's the message here ladies? Notice...they will say nothing because "gun bad" trumps "hit woman bad" in their sad, screwy little worlds. You sound like one of those wacko right-wing conservatives trying to be all logical, rather than using emotion to form your position and reactions. I'll bet you voted for a Bush at least once! Aghhhh...what to do. Excellent post BTW - spot on. Side note: As an illustration of the left wing agenda and Hollywood's stance on guns, read the Grisham book, Runaway Jury, then watch the movie version. The basis of the book was a lawsuit against big tobacco. Hollywood loves tobacco and hates guns (in theory). So what do they do in the movie version? Completely change the premise to a lawsuit against a gun manufacturer. Ironic, considering the way Hollywood glorifies gratuitous use of handguns. Could it be they don't want to bite the hand that feeds them? I swear that movie budgets are subsidized by Phillp Morris or Reynolds, since they can no longer advertise in print or broadcasting. There's constant cigarette smoking by lead characters for absolutely no reason, other than to promote the use. Just to play devil's advocate for a second....Goodell was being politcally correct and covering his arse. There's little chance Vick will be involved again in the doggie business. On the other hand, if somewhere down the road, Lynch were to get into another bad situation involving a gun, the outcry would be, why didn't the NFL do more to prevent it after the first incident. Should dumbass Lynch get all trigger happy one day, at least Goodell and the NFL can say they addressed it with a reasonable suspension. Bottom line: guns bad. They go out of the house (or glovebox) on their own and randomly kill people.
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Vick went to jail. He has already missed a huge amount of time for his crimes. Marshawn hasn't. That's why. For what do you think that Lynch should have gone to jail?
TheMadCap Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 I swear that movie budgets are subsidized by Phillp Morris or Reynolds, since they can no longer advertise in print or broadcasting. There's constant cigarette smoking by lead characters for absolutely no reason, other than to promote the use. Nope, not even remotely close, but there have been MUCH less instances of showing smoking on TV since 1998. What most people don't seem to realize is that cigarettes are PLENTY addictive by themselves, there is NO need to try and make people get addicted, they do a great job of that themselves. Cigarette sales are declining at ~3-4% per year, but since the new excise tax, sales were down ~12% in the first quarter this year. It is a dying industry that will finally be killed off by government intervention (FDA regulation).
The Poojer Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 OK, missed that...i had only seen where he said accomplices had been responsible for actually killing dogs....that said...he was not convicted of killing any dogs Yes, he did.According to the statement, Vick also was involved with the others in killing six to eight dogs that did not perform well in testing sessions last April. The dogs were executed by drowning or hanging. “Vick agrees and stipulates that these dogs all died as a result of the collective efforts” of Vick, Phillips and Peace, the statement said. http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/20417707/
The Dean Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 GODell shouldn't be suspending the guys who do jail time they served their time[/size] Stunningly ignorant comment. Goodell is the head of a multi-billion dollar industry. He has the right and obligation to protect the league (and its image). I have no problem with giving a convicted felon a second chance. But there is nothing that requires him to hire that felon for a very public position...in fact good sense dictates against something like that.
sleaky72 Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 I had a dream that Michael Vick was abducted, killed, chopped up, and served as dog food at the local pound. Please make sure you take your meds dude! U have some serious issues
Big Curt Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 No. Because what he did was !@#$ing horrific and worthy of a bullet to the hgead, in my opinion. So no. Thanks for your astute advice, but no. I will not get off his back. You alright with that or you wanna defend the monster some more? Anyone who calls what Michael Vick was caught doing "screwing up" needs to explain to me just what part of it was a "mistake". A bullet to the head for killing dog? I admit what he did was wrong, but that is to the extreme. You are more than entitled to your opinion but no human deserves death for killing an animal. Some of these terrible killing methods are common in the dogfighting world. Maybe Vick is the best thing to happen, as far as stopping this practice. Vick was given his sentence and now see what can he to to prevent/stop this terrible sport. He is not the only one who dogfights and maybe now the others will be arrested as well. http://www.fbi.gov/page2/july09/dogfighting_070909.html http://www.azfamily.com/news/homepagetopst...ng.bc690ff.html
Mr. WEO Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Try again. Johnson wasn't riding around in an untagged car with an unregistered weapon to earn his much harsher suspension.
ThereIsNoDog Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Johnson wasn't riding around in an untagged car with an unregistered weapon to earn his much harsher suspension. The untagged car is immaterial. And in Cook County, you cannot have a gun in your car, period, even if it's unloaded, encased, and inaccessible. If you do, it's a felony. Johnson got it reduced to a misdemeanor. He was later arrested for aggravated assault and resisting arrest, but charges were dropped, because apparently it didn't happen ( ). His home was later raided, where in addition to finding the guns, which violated his probation, his bodyguard was found to be in felony possession of marijuana. So you see, to claim that Johnson got 8 games (reduced to 6) for having guns in his home is just plain old silly.
DC Tom Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Vick's suspension for the past two seasons was as meaningful as if I were suspended for the past two years. Neither one of us was going to play in the NFL those two years. I have backed Goodell for the most part, but this is totally disgusting. A huge embarrassment to the NFL. A point that's missed, too, is that the league has a stated policy of instituting their own disciplinary measures regardless of any result of any judicial proceedings. In other words, there is no "time served" allowance for suspensions. The league reserves the absolute right to administer any punishment they deem fit to protect the image and marketability of their product.
Mr. Dink Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 Vick is lucky he killed a bunch of dogs. It could've been alot worse if he accidentally shot himself.
The Dean Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 A bullet to the head for killing dog? A dog? He was the head honcho for an enterprise that engaged in the systematic tortrure and murder of hundreds of dogs. Let's not downplay Vick's crimes.
Big Curt Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 A dog? He was the head honcho for an enterprise that engaged in the systematic tortrure and murder of hundreds of dogs. Let's not downplay Vick's crimes. No one is down playing his crimes; this is why he went to federal prison. He deserved the punishment he got. With that being said, I am a dog lover. What he did was a sick business, business that harmed animals. He served his time and I am not going to judge him anymore. As long as he contributes back to society I'm ok with him. Hell, my brother went to prison for 15 yrs and he turned himself around, people can change their behavior if they really make an effort to do so. If he doesn't take advantage of his 2nd chance then it's his own fault, why should he continue to be punished after he's already paid the price?
Booster4324 Posted September 4, 2009 Posted September 4, 2009 A point that's missed, too, is that the league has a stated policy of instituting their own disciplinary measures regardless of any result of any judicial proceedings. In other words, there is no "time served" allowance for suspensions. The league reserves the absolute right to administer any punishment they deem fit to protect the image and marketability of their product. Nice point. I guess to be fair, the NFL gauged the effect of the suspension and deemed two games was a min/max decision on their marketability. As with many things, this will take time to see if they judged correctly. For me, the NFL lost a bit more luster with his reinstatement and now, a bit more with the light suspension. The glow was getting pretty meager already.
Recommended Posts