Arthur Blank releases a statement (1 Viewer)

[ConstruxBoy]

The only way Vick gets some lesser charge is if rats out a whole bunch of other his NFL high profile buddies, like Portis, who also gamble on dog fights.

I hadn't thought of that. The court proceedings could get very ugly for Goodell here. After all, people don't give a crud about the fact that Vick broke the law; all they care about is that he harmed dogs. If he insinuates that other NFL players did the same --- and really, he must have seen some other players at these fights --- the NFL is going to have a big problem on its hands.

Why do I get the feeling that if other players where involved we would have heard something about it by now?

Well, I'm sure they weren't involved at the level Vick was. But if Vick could rattle off a list of 20 names (which I bet he could) of NFL players who were there with him at the fights and maybe laying down a couple thousand dollars, that's very bad news for Goodell. Why haven't we heard about it yet? Because Vick hasn't yet felt motivated to go into "if I'm going down I'm taking everyone else down with me" mode.

You guys are crazy if you think Vick is the only NFL player involved in dog fighting. Maybe he's the "most" involved, but it could easily get embarrassing for the NFL if the number of players involved were made public. Look, high level, competitive athletes like to gamble. It keeps their competitive juices flowing when they're not on the field of play. From Paul Hornung to Pete Rose to Michael Jordan. And if you think Gretzky had nothing at all to do with that gambling ring, you're naive. Dog fighting is a form of gambling that, it seems, is popular with young, mostly black, athletes who have money and are very competitive. Think there are any people like that in the NFL?

I'm not saying that other players are not "involved." Only that there would have to be some sort of case made against them other than just Mike Vick, a proven liar already, saying so. The names of Vick's associates are clearly stated. I highly doubt the Feds are targeting NFL players for just being there. What good does that do them? Do you think they are looking to make an example of the NFL? That wouldn't make sense. They want the big players in this thing. Unless other NFL players are linked in that way, I don't see much else coming of it.

Maybe so and just to be clear, I certainly don't endorse any of them doing anything with dog fighting. I'm merely pointing out that if they start digging deep, or Vick starts talking, you could certainly see some other NFL players with a problem.

 

[NoFBinLA]

Vick may make the league alot of money, he could lose them as much very quickly. This has happened in TV more than once - the American dollar will neccesitate Vick being on the sideline at some point. Blank knows it.I can only assume Goodell does as well.

Not necessarily. The public is always ready for the next big sports star. IF Vince Young is exciting and a winner in 07 it's more like a shift from Vick to Young. If Bush improves as expected, if Peterson is a superstud......you can go on and on, if there's a next big sports star in the NFL(and I think there is) then I doubt there's much $ changed.Ideally, it's an addition onto Vick's status but it's not a loss if another player's popularity/sales covers it and to me that seems very likely.

I should have been clearer --

it was fine the first time man

I guess we're sorta saying the same thing -- Vick is replaceable and ultimately he'll be gone. And there are plenty of somebody's to take his place.

 

[Jason Wood]

The only way Vick gets some lesser charge is if rats out a whole bunch of other his NFL high profile buddies, like Portis, who also gamble on dog fights.

I hadn't thought of that. The court proceedings could get very ugly for Goodell here. After all, people don't give a crud about the fact that Vick broke the law; all they care about is that he harmed dogs. If he insinuates that other NFL players did the same --- and really, he must have seen some other players at these fights --- the NFL is going to have a big problem on its hands.

The only way Vick gets some lesser charge is if rats out a whole bunch of other his NFL high profile buddies, like Portis, who also gamble on dog fights.

I hadn't thought of that. The court proceedings could get very ugly for Goodell here. After all, people don't give a crud about the fact that Vick broke the law; all they care about is that he harmed dogs. If he insinuates that other NFL players did the same --- and really, he must have seen some other players at these fights --- the NFL is going to have a big problem on its hands.

Why do I get the feeling that if other players where involved we would have heard something about it by now?

I think there are clearly other NFL players (and probably other celebrities from other walks of life) that have been involved in the dog fighting on some level, and there's no question Goodell and the NFL is wondering is somehow, some way other names will surface. However, I don't think there's any reason to believe the prosecutors are interested in targeting those in attendance, much like those who are found in illegal gambling parlors are rarely prosecuted; but those running the parlors are targets. Realistically, as Roger Cossack said today on ESPN Radio, the federal indictment gets into such specific detail that you can be sure AT LEAST one credible witness is singing like a canary. I don't see Vick naming names (since he's playing the innocent card) but during depositions I would also be quite surprised if the canary and any of the co-defendants didn't name other names.

Things could get really interesting but there's nothing Goodell can really do at this point.

 

[Doug Drinen]

I think there are clearly other NFL players (and probably other celebrities from other walks of life) that have been involved in the dog fighting on some level, and there's no question Goodell and the NFL is wondering is somehow, some way other names will surface. However, I don't think there's any reason to believe the prosecutors are interested in targeting those in attendance, much like those who are found in illegal gambling parlors are rarely prosecuted; but those running the parlors are targets.

No, I certainly don't think that anyone else from the NFL is going to get indicted.My point is this: from a PR standpoint, it matters very little whether they do or not. Unless my read is wrong, no one cares that Vick broke laws. NFL players break laws all the time. The fan reaction to this is solely because Vick allegedly used dog-torture for his own amusement. If it becomes clear that dozens of NFL players were also taking pleasure in dog-torture, even if only through attending the fights and possibly witnessing the aftermath, that's a major, major problem for Goodell.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I think there are clearly other NFL players (and probably other celebrities from other walks of life) that have been involved in the dog fighting on some level, and there's no question Goodell and the NFL is wondering is somehow, some way other names will surface. However, I don't think there's any reason to believe the prosecutors are interested in targeting those in attendance, much like those who are found in illegal gambling parlors are rarely prosecuted; but those running the parlors are targets.

No, I certainly don't think that anyone else from the NFL is going to get indicted.My point is this: from a PR standpoint, it matters very little whether they do or not.

Unless my read is wrong, no one cares that Vick broke laws. NFL players break laws all the time. The fan reaction to this is solely because Vick allegedly used dog-torture for his own amusement. If it becomes clear that dozens of NFL players were also taking pleasure in dog-torture, even if only through attending the fights and possibly witnessing the aftermath, that's a major, major problem for Goodell.

And I think he has that problem Doug.Clinton Portis' "aw, it's jus dog fightin'" thing drove that point home.

Just yesterday, Marcellus Wiley was on the leagues own network hosting Total Access and talked about he guessed now dog fighting was a little more serious a crime than speeding or jaywalking. YESTERDAY he said this.

I think Goodell has a much bigger problem and he knows it.

J

 

[Joe Bryant]

I figured there weren't enough Falcons posts going on today :(

Arthur Blank just released a statement, that's worded ultra-carefully:

We know you’re anxious to hear more from us regarding the indictment of Michael Vick

and its implications to the Falcons. Pleased be assured that we are working diligently on

exploring our options and getting the right people involved in this situation.

This is an emotionally charged and complicated matter. ere are a wide range of interests

and legal issues that need to be carefully considered as we move ahead, including our need to

respect the due process that Michael is entitled to. Also, this situation affects everyone – our

club, our players and associates, our sponsors, our fans and the Atlanta community among

them – so we must consider all of our customers in making any decisions.

Given the differing perspectives and strong feelings around this issue, we probably won’t

make everyone happy, but we are committed to doing the right thing. As the owner of this

club that’s, ultimately, my responsibility.

In the meantime, know that I’m saddened and distressed about this – not for myself, but for

our fans and community who have been so loyal to us. We will do our very best to continue

to earn your support.

I personally interpret this to mean..."We're looking into exercising our Out clause in Michael's contract but aren't sure if we have the legal right to do so before giving him his due process."What do you think?

Hi Jason,Here's how I see this. From the Daily Email Update that will go out in the morning.

I think it's really helpful to compare the two releases.

ATL - Falcons Statement From Owner Blank

Source: WSB-TV In Atlanta

Atlanta Falcons owner Arthur Blank made a statement Thursday afternoon on the indictment of QB Michael Vick.

Here is the full text of Blank's statement:

"We know you're anxious to hear more from us regarding the indictment of Michael Vick and its implications to the Falcons. Please be assured that we are working diligently on exploring our options and getting the right people involved in this situation. This is an emotionally charged and complicated matter. There are a wide range of interests and legal issues that need to be carefully considered as we move ahead, including our need to respect the due process that Michael is entitled to. Also, this situation affects everyone-- our club, our players and associates, our sponsors, our fans and the Atlanta community among them-- so we must consider all of our customers in making any decision. Given the differing perspectives and strong feelings around this issue, we probably won't make everyone happy; we are committed to doing the right thing. As the owner of this club that's ultimately my responsibility. In the meantime, know that I'm saddened and distressed about this not for myself, but for our fans and community who have been so loyal to us. We will do our very best to earn your support."

The NFL Players union said yesterday that the allegations against Vick "are extremely disturbing and offensive." But it said the case is in the hands of the judicial system, and the legal process must be allowed to run its course.

Vick won't be on the field when the Atlanta Falcons open training camp a week from Thursday.

Instead, Vick and three associates must appear in Richmond, Virginia, for bond hearings and arraignments on dogfighting charges.

[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ OUR VIEW ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]

It's easy to dissect Blank's statement and read into it what you like.

One thing that caught my interest was how much it differs from the team's initial statement issued the day before.

(Bold emphasis added is mine)

“This situation has been troubling to many people, including our fans, during the last few months. With today's news, our club and team will continue to be tested as Michael works through the legal process toward a conclusion. We are disappointed that one of our players -- and therefore the Falcons -- is being presented to the public in a negative way, and we apologize to our fans and the community for that. Obviously, we are disturbed by today's news from Virginia. However, we are prepared to deal with it, and we will do the right thing for our club as the legal process plays out. We have a season to prepare for and training camp opens next week. Our plan is to continue to do everything we can to support our players and coaches.”

The initial release was very much in the "wait and see how the legal process works out" theme as the team supports "our players and coaches".

Today's release was dramatically different turning the focus to the responsibility Mr. Blank is entrusted with and how he wants to consider and support his "customers". Blank dramatically broadened the scope of those he's considering as he defined "customers" as "our club, our players and associates, our sponsors, our fans and the Atlanta community".

I sarcastically said last night that I was amazed Blank hadn't asked my counsel. But it sounds to me like he's starting to think like I am on this subject.

I'd be shocked to see an outright release now given the salary cap implications but I could absolutely see a paid leave of absence scenario happening here. Stay tuned as sadly we'll be talking about this for a while.

 

[CravenM]

Point 1: Arthur Blank and the Falcons are going to lose a lot of money this year, no matter what happens from here on out

Point 2: Arthur Blank is a very astute businessman who is going to make the best decision for the business

Point 3: Michael Vick is going to be rich for the rest of his life, regardless of what happens in the next year

To me, I see one of 3 options for Blank:

1) Drop him: team takes a major cap hit, many fans boycott, but many other fans support it, Blank goes after the money next year if Vick is in the pokey, Al Sharpton moves to Atlanta and calls Blank a racist until he signs Culpepper

2) Suspend him with pay: team still needs a QB so they bring on Culpepper, few fans boycott, but most support it, Vick still gets paid

3) Wait and see: Vick plays, case goes to trial early next year, most fans don't support the team which loses him a lot of money, Falcons go 8-8 and miss the playoffs

Personally, I think he should suspend him with pay. He can still go after his signing money next year if he's found guilty but he keeps the good graces of all involved.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Blank's statement says almost nothing at all really. Mostly it says "Not Me"

I didn't get that at all from it.

Given the differing perspectives and strong feelings around this issue, we probably won't make everyone happy; we are committed to doing the right thing. As the owner of this club that's ultimately my responsibility. In the meantime, know that I'm saddened and distressed about this not for myself, but for our fans and community who have been so loyal to us. We will do our very best to earn your support."

I'm not sure how you'd get much further away from "passing the buck" than that.J

 

[sholditch]

I figured there weren't enough Falcons posts going on today

Arthur Blank just released a statement, that's worded ultra-carefully:

We know you’re anxious to hear more from us regarding the indictment of Michael Vick

and its implications to the Falcons. Pleased be assured that we are working diligently on

exploring our options and getting the right people involved in this situation.

This is an emotionally charged and complicated matter. ere are a wide range of interests

and legal issues that need to be carefully considered as we move ahead, including our need to

respect the due process that Michael is entitled to. Also, this situation affects everyone – our

club, our players and associates, our sponsors, our fans and the Atlanta community among

them – so we must consider all of our customers in making any decisions.

Given the differing perspectives and strong feelings around this issue, we probably won’t

make everyone happy, but we are committed to doing the right thing. As the owner of this

club that’s, ultimately, my responsibility.

In the meantime, know that I’m saddened and distressed about this – not for myself, but for

our fans and community who have been so loyal to us. We will do our very best to continue

to earn your support.

I personally interpret this to mean..."We're looking into exercising our Out clause in Michael's contract but aren't sure if we have the legal right to do so before giving him his due process."What do you think?

Sounds like you nailed it

 

[BigRed]

Agree Joe. He's not "hiding" - he's just not tipping his hand, to say the least.

 

[buck naked]

I don't see Vick naming names (since he's playing the innocent card) but during depositions I would also be quite surprised if the canary and any of the co-defendants didn't name other names.

Just so you know, there are no depositions in a criminal case.

 

[BigRed]

And I think he has that problem Doug.

Clinton Portis' "aw, it's jus dog fightin'" thing drove that point home.

Just yesterday, Marcellus Wiley was on the leagues own network hosting Total Access and talked about he guessed now dog fighting was a little more serious a crime than speeding or jaywalking. YESTERDAY he said this.

I think Goodell has a much bigger problem and he knows it.

J

You mean there's more than one person in the NFL that qualifies as human based only on a biological technicality??Shocking.

 

[3C's]

Point 3: Michael Vick is going to be rich for the rest of his life, regardless of what happens in the next year

Mike Tyson was rich at one time too.

 

[seahawk 17]

I read it as...Squeaky wheel gets the grease....

We lose a fan base for keeping him, we cut him. We lose a fan base for cutting him, we keep him.

Money talks until found guilty.

 

[OneEastRiver]

Point 3: Michael Vick is going to be rich for the rest of his life, regardless of what happens in the next year

Mike Tyson was rich at one time too.

History can confirm that Vick will be broke 10 years from now, at the latest. Guaranteed. Tyson is one of many, many examples. The combination of being unemployed, a gambler, and having a huge payroll for houses, cars, cousins, lawyers, etc will drain every penny.

 

[gianmarco]

Point 3: Michael Vick is going to be rich for the rest of his life, regardless of what happens in the next year

Mike Tyson was rich at one time too.

History can confirm that Vick will be broke 10 years from now, at the latest. Guaranteed. Tyson is one of many, many examples. The combination of being unemployed, a gambler, and having a huge payroll for houses, cars, cousins, lawyers, etc will drain every penny.

Looks like it's up to Marcus to start earning the bread, then.

 

[sholditch]

Point 1: Arthur Blank and the Falcons are going to lose a lot of money this year, no matter what happens from here on out

Point 2: Arthur Blank is a very astute businessman who is going to make the best decision for the business

Point 3: Michael Vick is going to be rich for the rest of his life, regardless of what happens in the next year

To me, I see one of 3 options for Blank:

1) Drop him: team takes a major cap hit, many fans boycott, but many other fans support it, Blank goes after the money next year if Vick is in the pokey, Al Sharpton moves to Atlanta and calls Blank a racist until he signs Culpepper

2) Suspend him with pay: team still needs a QB so they bring on Culpepper, few fans boycott, but most support it, Vick still gets paid

3) Wait and see: Vick plays, case goes to trial early next year, most fans don't support the team which loses him a lot of money, Falcons go 8-8 and miss the playoffs

Personally, I think he should suspend him with pay. He can still go after his signing money next year if he's found guilty but he keeps the good graces of all involved.

Maybe I am talking to the wrong Falcons fans, but I have never spoken to one who would be upset about Vick leaving.

 

[Couch Potato]

Maybe Vick can go on the PUP list for awhile. Oh, wait a minute...

 

[BigRed]

History can confirm that Vick will be broke 10 years from now, at the latest. Guaranteed. Tyson is one of many, many examples. The combination of being unemployed, a gambler, and having a huge payroll for houses, cars, cousins, lawyers, etc will drain every penny.

As pathetic as both of them are, Vick isn't Tyson, so I seriously question the validity of that comparison, esp the "gambler" bit. Just because he was involved in this doesn't exactly make him a "gamble-holic." Can't speak to others leaching off of him. Bottom line - it wouldn't surprise me in the least if he lived a very comfortable life with little if any jail time between now and whenever. In fact, it would surprise me a great deal more if he did serve anything more than a brief token jail term, if that.

 

[Loomba]

I think there are clearly other NFL players (and probably other celebrities from other walks of life) that have been involved in the dog fighting on some level, and there's no question Goodell and the NFL is wondering is somehow, some way other names will surface. However, I don't think there's any reason to believe the prosecutors are interested in targeting those in attendance, much like those who are found in illegal gambling parlors are rarely prosecuted; but those running the parlors are targets.

No, I certainly don't think that anyone else from the NFL is going to get indicted.My point is this: from a PR standpoint, it matters very little whether they do or not.

Unless my read is wrong, no one cares that Vick broke laws. NFL players break laws all the time. The fan reaction to this is solely because Vick allegedly used dog-torture for his own amusement. If it becomes clear that dozens of NFL players were also taking pleasure in dog-torture, even if only through attending the fights and possibly witnessing the aftermath, that's a major, major problem for Goodell.

And I think he has that problem Doug.Clinton Portis' "aw, it's jus dog fightin'" thing drove that point home.

Just yesterday, Marcellus Wiley was on the leagues own network hosting Total Access and talked about he guessed now dog fighting was a little more serious a crime than speeding or jaywalking. YESTERDAY he said this.

I think Goodell has a much bigger problem and he knows it.

J

Bingo! There is more to this than meets the eye.I've been scratching my head for the last day trying to figure out how Goodell can so coolly say that the league's going to wait and see how the legal process plays out. I think he knows this is a bigger problem than Vick and he too is buying some time to figure out what to do.

If the league were to suspend Vick now, which is what a lot of people would like to see and which could be justified by the league (Vick lied to the Commish; some previous, albeit, not ultraserious previous incidents; Pacman precedent), Vick might name a lot of names and then force the Commish to consider what to do about others. Goodell could probably navigate through that minefield by saying he'll suspend those that get indicted to avoid having to suspend 20 players, but it would be a PR nightmare.

Remember, Marcellus also said that there was a culture in the league, particularly of players from small towns or rural areas, that would go watch dogfights after practices, games, etc. Some probably bet on the activity.

 

[Loomba]

I've been suggesting the past two days that the best way to keep everyone happy (and legal) is for the Falcons to put Vick on a leaves of absence or team suspension with pay.

I'm not sure paying someone you are personally and professionally disgusted with millions of dollars despite getting no on-field return = keeping everyone happy.

Woodrow, Woodrow, Woodrow . . .You just don't get the way these things can work out.If the Falcons continue to pay Vick they cannot be assailed for failing to provide Vick with the right to make a living, not complying with his contract, or not meeting the terms of the CBA. It gets fans, sponsors, animal activists, etc. mostly what they want and gets the NFL and the Falcons some of what they want.When this goes to court and Vick pleads to a lesser charge and gets sentenced, the team can then use the conduct detrimental to the team clause to void his contract and sue for the money they paid him in salary and the prorated part of his signing bonus (80% of $37 million). And Vick's rights don't get violated at all and no one broke any rules.

If Blank were smart about this, he'd sit down with Vick and explain to him that he could cut him now but doesn't want to until the legal process works itself out. Assuming Vick would prefer not to be cut now, Blank could negotiate a deal with Vick that the Falcons pay his salary during a leave of absence into an escrow account. If Vick is found not guilty he gets the money. If he is found guilty, the Falcons get it.I think that would be the smarter deal and avoids the Falcons being out of pocket that cash.

 

[Loomba]

Also, this situation affects everyone – ourclub, our players and associates, our sponsors, our fans and the Atlanta community amongthem – so we must consider all of our customers in making any decisions.

translation IMO they want to make all the Falcons and NFL fans happy - and almost all of those people HATE Vick right nowVick will likely never take another snap in the NFL

I believe he won't take another snap in the NFL either. The Falcons will keep him off the field if the league doesn't do it for them (the NFL appears to be leaning towards "wait and see", I think because of the involvement of other players in this kind of activity). Can you imagine the signs in the stands and the stuff that people would throw on the field if Vick takes the field in a road game. Can you imagine 60,000 people "barking" each time he touches the ball? AND WITH ALL OF THIS ON TV EACH WEEK. It would be a collosal PR nightmare and could bring the league down a long ways and really hurt the Falcons franchise.

 

[Symbius]

Also, this situation affects everyone – our

club, our players and associates, our sponsors, our fans and the Atlanta community among

them – so we must consider all of our customers in making any decisions.

translation IMO they want to make all the Falcons and NFL fans happy - and almost all of those people HATE Vick right nowVick will likely never take another snap in the NFL

I believe he won't take another snap in the NFL either. The Falcons will keep him off the field if the league doesn't do it for them (the NFL appears to be leaning towards "wait and see", I think because of the involvement of other players in this kind of activity). Can you imagine the signs in the stands and the stuff that people would throw on the field if Vick takes the field in a road game. Can you imagine 60,000 people "barking" each time he touches the ball? AND WITH ALL OF THIS ON TV EACH WEEK. It would be a collosal PR nightmare and could bring the league down a long ways and really hurt the Falcons franchise.

I haven't looked at the schedule, but imagine if they go to Cleveland.......

 

[suchislife]

Also, this situation affects everyone – our

club, our players and associates, our sponsors, our fans and the Atlanta community among

them – so we must consider all of our customers in making any decisions.

translation IMO they want to make all the Falcons and NFL fans happy - and almost all of those people HATE Vick right nowVick will likely never take another snap in the NFL

I believe he won't take another snap in the NFL either. The Falcons will keep him off the field if the league doesn't do it for them (the NFL appears to be leaning towards "wait and see", I think because of the involvement of other players in this kind of activity). Can you imagine the signs in the stands and the stuff that people would throw on the field if Vick takes the field in a road game. Can you imagine 60,000 people "barking" each time he touches the ball? AND WITH ALL OF THIS ON TV EACH WEEK. It would be a collosal PR nightmare and could bring the league down a long ways and really hurt the Falcons franchise.

I was thinking about what it could be like on the field if he plays. Could you imagine the abuse from the opposing defense? I imagine Vick lining up under center with a blitzing LB in his face barking like a dog. Or after a sack calling him "Ookie" and saying "that one's for 'Maniac'". Hell, some of that could come from his own teammates during practice.And of course, the song "Who Let the Dogs Out" playing when the Atlanta offense takes the field during away games.

 

[Obie Wan]

Also, this situation affects everyone – our

club, our players and associates, our sponsors, our fans and the Atlanta community among

them – so we must consider all of our customers in making any decisions.

translation IMO they want to make all the Falcons and NFL fans happy - and almost all of those people HATE Vick right nowVick will likely never take another snap in the NFL

I believe he won't take another snap in the NFL either. The Falcons will keep him off the field if the league doesn't do it for them (the NFL appears to be leaning towards "wait and see", I think because of the involvement of other players in this kind of activity). Can you imagine the signs in the stands and the stuff that people would throw on the field if Vick takes the field in a road game. Can you imagine 60,000 people "barking" each time he touches the ball? AND WITH ALL OF THIS ON TV EACH WEEK. It would be a collosal PR nightmare and could bring the league down a long ways and really hurt the Falcons franchise.

I was thinking about what it could be like on the field if he plays. Could you imagine the abuse from the opposing defense? I imagine Vick lining up under center with a blitzing LB in his face barking like a dog. Or after a sack calling him "Ookie" and saying "that one's for 'Maniac'". Hell, some of that could come from his own teammates during practice.And of course, the song "Who Let the Dogs Out" playing when the Atlanta offense takes the field during away games.

Vick should plead with Blank to suspend him with or without pay.Although there is a small core of thugs who support dog fighting in the NFL, the majority of players are disgusted by the activity.

Mike Vick has a very good chance of being seriously inljured or crippled on the field if he plays in 2007.

Payback will be a ##### -

 

[Two Deep]

I think what he is saying is, How in the hell did I get stuck with this worthless bum when we could have had Ladainian Tomliinson. Taylor Smith can kiss my ###.

 

[FavreCo]

Blank is and has been extremely furiousNot sure what exactly "sent him over the edge", but there's a level of disgust and anger that is more than the general public has been saying about this whole ordeal. Some is natural or a normal reaction, Blank's...this is more, alot more anger and disappointment and all.If punishment is necessary/conviction, I would not be surprised if Goodell doesn't know what to do by the time Blank's done with Vick. Really, he's THAT angry

He only has himself to blame. He has been made to look like a fool by this idiot/sub-human and there is nothing short of cutting the loser that will save face.

 

[Obie Wan]

The only way Vick gets some lesser charge is if rats out a whole bunch of other his NFL high profile buddies, like Portis, who also gamble on dog fights.

I hadn't thought of that. The court proceedings could get very ugly for Goodell here. After all, people don't give a crud about the fact that Vick broke the law; all they care about is that he harmed dogs. If he insinuates that other NFL players did the same --- and really, he must have seen some other players at these fights --- the NFL is going to have a big problem on its hands.

Why do I get the feeling that if other players where involved we would have heard something about it by now?

Well, I'm sure they weren't involved at the level Vick was. But if Vick could rattle off a list of 20 names (which I bet he could) of NFL players who were there with him at the fights and maybe laying down a couple thousand dollars, that's very bad news for Goodell. Why haven't we heard about it yet? Because Vick hasn't yet felt motivated to go into "if I'm going down I'm taking everyone else down with me" mode.

You guys are crazy if you think Vick is the only NFL player involved in dog fighting. Maybe he's the "most" involved, but it could easily get embarrassing for the NFL if the number of players involved were made public. Look, high level, competitive athletes like to gamble. It keeps their competitive juices flowing when they're not on the field of play. From Paul Hornung to Pete Rose to Michael Jordan. And if you think Gretzky had nothing at all to do with that gambling ring, you're naive. Dog fighting is a form of gambling that, it seems, is popular with young, mostly black, athletes who have money and are very competitive. Think there are any people like that in the NFL?

I'm not saying that other players are not "involved." Only that there would have to be some sort of case made against them other than just Mike Vick, a proven liar already, saying so. The names of Vick's associates are clearly stated. I highly doubt the Feds are targeting NFL players for just being there. What good does that do them? Do you think they are looking to make an example of the NFL? That wouldn't make sense. They want the big players in this thing. Unless other NFL players are linked in that way, I don't see much else coming of it.

Maybe so and just to be clear, I certainly don't endorse any of them doing anything with dog fighting. I'm merely pointing out that if they start digging deep, or Vick starts talking, you could certainly see some other NFL players with a problem.

GAMBLING is the key to the NFL's interest.Dog Fighting is disgusting, but if the NFL is tainted by gambling, especially by its star players in position to effect the outcome of games, everything starts to fall apart. Owners with franchise values approaching $1 billion will have a very big say in how this needs to be handled.

Although the indictment only lists the purses at modest amounts, there is talk of Vick betting $40,000 and up on individual fights. Vick may be able to handle the bets, but other lesser paid players may get in other their heads where they would shave points and throw games.

As noted above, Goodell may be suspending more than a few players before this is over depending on the precedent he sets with Vick.

 

[Bri]

Blank is and has been extremely furiousNot sure what exactly "sent him over the edge", but there's a level of disgust and anger that is more than the general public has been saying about this whole ordeal. Some is natural or a normal reaction, Blank's...this is more, alot more anger and disappointment and all.If punishment is necessary/conviction, I would not be surprised if Goodell doesn't know what to do by the time Blank's done with Vick. Really, he's THAT angry

He only has himself to blame. He has been made to look like a fool by this idiot/sub-human and there is nothing short of cutting the loser that will save face.

wha?I don't see any wrong doing in this by Blank at all

 

[fatness]

History can confirm that Vick will be broke 10 years from now, at the latest.

My head hurts after reading that.

 

[Stealthycat]

Things could get really interesting but there's nothing Goodell can really do at this point.

stop the infection by cutting off the diseased part

 

[sholditch]

Also, this situation affects everyone – our

club, our players and associates, our sponsors, our fans and the Atlanta community among

them – so we must consider all of our customers in making any decisions.

translation IMO they want to make all the Falcons and NFL fans happy - and almost all of those people HATE Vick right nowVick will likely never take another snap in the NFL

I believe he won't take another snap in the NFL either. The Falcons will keep him off the field if the league doesn't do it for them (the NFL appears to be leaning towards "wait and see", I think because of the involvement of other players in this kind of activity). Can you imagine the signs in the stands and the stuff that people would throw on the field if Vick takes the field in a road game. Can you imagine 60,000 people "barking" each time he touches the ball? AND WITH ALL OF THIS ON TV EACH WEEK. It would be a collosal PR nightmare and could bring the league down a long ways and really hurt the Falcons franchise.

I was thinking about what it could be like on the field if he plays. Could you imagine the abuse from the opposing defense? I imagine Vick lining up under center with a blitzing LB in his face barking like a dog. Or after a sack calling him "Ookie" and saying "that one's for 'Maniac'". Hell, some of that could come from his own teammates during practice.And of course, the song "Who Let the Dogs Out" playing when the Atlanta offense takes the field during away games.

Vick should plead with Blank to suspend him with or without pay.Although there is a small core of thugs who support dog fighting in the NFL, the majority of players are disgusted by the activity.

Mike Vick has a very good chance of being seriously inljured or crippled on the field if he plays in 2007.

Payback will be a ##### -

God let's hope so:

Too bad they only play the Vikes week 1. Wish it were someone like the Bears or Chargers or Baltimore or something. I hope somebody packs a taser in their belt and let's it loose on him in the pile. Maybe pick him up and slam him to the ground a few times after he's hit. Honestly, I would like to seee every team he plays suffer multiple ejections for dirty and late hits. True karma would be he gets both legs broken in the first game and he gets cut immediately by the Falcons. But I guess they can't cut a hurt player. Or can they?

 

[menobrown]

Different PR situation entirely but here is Blanks quote regarding Babineaux, another player on the team facing a felony charge of animal abuse who Blank did not suspend:

There's even a more recent local precedent: The Falcons haven't released Jonathan Babineaux, who himself faces a felony charge of animal abuse, or placed him on paid leave. This was Blank in February: "There's this thing called the legal process that's even above the NFL and sports ... [Cutting Babineaux] would be the worst possible thing we could do. It would be a slap in the face to the judicial system. Making the concession of throwing somebody on the fire would be the worst thing for our organization and the worst thing for Atlanta."

 

[mad sweeney]

Different PR situation entirely but here is Blanks quote regarding Babineaux, another player on the team facing a felony charge of animal abuse who Blank did not suspend:There's even a more recent local precedent: The Falcons haven't released Jonathan Babineaux, who himself faces a felony charge of animal abuse, or placed him on paid leave. This was Blank in February: "There's this thing called the legal process that's even above the NFL and sports ... [Cutting Babineaux] would be the worst possible thing we could do. It would be a slap in the face to the judicial system. Making the concession of throwing somebody on the fire would be the worst thing for our organization and the worst thing for Atlanta."

IIRC, Babs slammed his girlfriends dog during a domestic squabble. And while not right or excusable, it's a far cry from multiple federal felonies involving multiple counts of deliberate animal cruelty and torture. On top of probable pending interstate gambling and RICO charges yet to be filed. One dog killed in the heat of an argument, though not excusable, does not get 100K + emails calling for a player's dismissal nor does it get massive numbers of protesters planning a PR nightmare circus for the team and league. I think that what Blank needs to do is get Vick away from the team in a way that gets the public off his back while still doing what is "right" in accordance with the CBA and "due process of law". If Bab's crime created the same public outcry as this one, you can bet Blank's stance would be a little different.

 

[Jason Wood]

I don't see Vick naming names (since he's playing the innocent card) but during depositions I would also be quite surprised if the canary and any of the co-defendants didn't name other names.

Just so you know, there are no depositions in a criminal case.

Sorry, definitely not a lawyer so I'm definitely guilty of misusing terminology. Would "interrogatories" be more accurate?

 

[menobrown]

Different PR situation entirely but here is Blanks quote regarding Babineaux, another player on the team facing a felony charge of animal abuse who Blank did not suspend:There's even a more recent local precedent: The Falcons haven't released Jonathan Babineaux, who himself faces a felony charge of animal abuse, or placed him on paid leave. This was Blank in February: "There's this thing called the legal process that's even above the NFL and sports ... [Cutting Babineaux] would be the worst possible thing we could do. It would be a slap in the face to the judicial system. Making the concession of throwing somebody on the fire would be the worst thing for our organization and the worst thing for Atlanta."

IIRC, Babs slammed his girlfriends dog during a domestic squabble. And while not right or excusable, it's a far cry from multiple federal felonies involving multiple counts of deliberate animal cruelty and torture. On top of probable pending interstate gambling and RICO charges yet to be filed. One dog killed in the heat of an argument, though not excusable, does not get 100K + emails calling for a player's dismissal nor does it get massive numbers of protesters planning a PR nightmare circus for the team and league. I think that what Blank needs to do is get Vick away from the team in a way that gets the public off his back while still doing what is "right" in accordance with the CBA and "due process of law". If Bab's crime created the same public outcry as this one, you can bet Blank's stance would be a little different.

The point is Blank has stated he feels due process should be allowed to play out and good for him. The heat on the Vick case may prove to be to much but what I like about Blank is he's not willing to concede that yet. I applaud him for not bowing down so easily just because the public outcry is bigger in the Vick case. I've no doubt Blank wants Vick to remain on the team, what Blank will be doing over the next several days or weeks is deciding if his, and my guess the teams, desire to keep Vick is simply worth the hassle. In short, he's trying to keep Vick on the team this year but he might come to the conclusion it's just not worth it.

 

[redman]

This is simply a cryptic statement that is intentionally ambiguous so as to not commit to any particular course of action, but at the same time satisfy his PR team that is telling him that he needs to say something publicly.

 

[Bri]

The point is Blank has stated he feels due process should be allowed to play out and good for him.

He's in a darned if he does darned if he doesn't situation. If Vick is innocent he's wrong for cutting him.What would be an entertaining twist would be if this turns out like OJ where the public feels they know the verdict but it goes the other way. Does Vick wear gloves to dog fights?

 

[Mystery Achiever]

[The point is Blank has stated he feels due process should be allowed to play out and good for him. The heat on the Vick case may prove to be to much but what I like about Blank is he's not willing to concede that yet. I applaud him for not bowing down so easily just because the public outcry is bigger in the Vick case. I've no doubt Blank wants Vick to remain on the team, what Blank will be doing over the next several days or weeks is deciding if his, and my guess the teams, desire to keep Vick is simply worth the hassle. In short, he's trying to keep Vick on the team this year but he might come to the conclusion it's just not worth it.

I agree. He's not sending a message about his intentions - even between the lines. Simply acknowledging It's a big issue and I know you want to hear from me. But while not passing the buck, I can't say/do much yet and here's whyThis kind of response good crisis management.