Vick plea does not include killing dogs or gambling (1 Viewer)

[ILUVBEER99]

In paragraph 1, Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and conspiracy to engage in interstate dog fighting.

Meh, were arguing semantics which never gets anywhere.

Yes, you are this dumb.

I've never once made a personal attack in any of these Vick threads despite having numerous others make them against me.I'd appreciate you not getting personal in the future. Thanks.

 

[j3r3m3y]

In paragraph 1, Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and conspiracy to engage in interstate dog fighting.

Meh, were arguing semantics which never gets anywhere.

Yes, you are this dumb.

I've never once made a personal attack in any of these Vick threads despite having numerous others make them against me.I'd appreciate you not getting personal in the future. Thanks.

That isn't a personal attack, it is a factual observation. Some people are dumb. But that's OK, the world needs ditch diggers too.If you need a link to realize that a guilty plea is a conviction and you think being completely wrong about a fact is "semantics" then anyone reading what you write can only come to two conclusions. You are trolling, or you lack intelligence. I assumed the latter but I could be convinced of the former.

 

[ILUVBEER99]

In paragraph 1, Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and conspiracy to engage in interstate dog fighting.

Meh, were arguing semantics which never gets anywhere.

Yes, you are this dumb.

I've never once made a personal attack in any of these Vick threads despite having numerous others make them against me.I'd appreciate you not getting personal in the future. Thanks.

That isn't a personal attack, it is a factual observation. Some people are dumb. But that's OK, the world needs ditch diggers too.If you need a link to realize that a guilty plea is a conviction and you think being completely wrong about a fact is "semantics" then anyone reading what you write can only come to two conclusions. You are trolling, or you lack intelligence. I assumed the latter but I could be convinced of the former.

Whether i lack intelligence or not is irrelevant. There is no need to personally attack me one way or the other.

 

[2stix]

So are you renigging on your word.

You are on hiatus for a year because of Vicks guilt.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

there's one thing that is confusing me a little on this story.

I've heard some talking heads on ESPN mentioning how the gambling issue is huge, and that if he admits to gambling on dog fights the NFL will punish him harshly, etc.

But, it's not like it's illegal for NFL players to go play blackjack in Vegas, bet on the kentucky derby, or play the lottery. why would the gambling part of this story even matter since it has no connection to betting on football?

 

[Capella]

Looks like less than a year. Without having to admit to the gambling he'll be back in the NFL by 09' at the latest.

1. With your track record, why are you even speculating?2. Aren't you supposed to be taking a year off?

He hasn't been convicted.

A guilty plea is a conviction.

Show me a link to that please.

 

[Doug B]

But, it's not like it's illegal for NFL players to go play blackjack in Vegas, bet on the kentucky derby, or play the lottery. why would the gambling part of this story even matter since it has no connection to betting on football?

The only thing I can think of -- and I'm just speculating here -- is that there may be a distinction between "on the books" gambling and "off the books" gambling. If a player buys a Kentucky Derby ticket, the ticket itself is evidence that the bet is not for pro football. Ditto with Lotto and casino chips -- although clearly, if a player cashes in chips and then goes to use that money at a sportsbook to bet on the NFL, there will be a record.But when a player is involved in heavy, off-the-books activity, then there may be some room for doubt about what all has been bet on.

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

When will the title of this thread be changed?

Granted it bothers me a lot less now, when I know it is incorrect, as opposed before, when I thought... "Damn, that sure would suck to if he got off so lightly."

 

[mad sweeney]

there's one thing that is confusing me a little on this story.I've heard some talking heads on ESPN mentioning how the gambling issue is huge, and that if he admits to gambling on dog fights the NFL will punish him harshly, etc.But, it's not like it's illegal for NFL players to go play blackjack in Vegas, bet on the kentucky derby, or play the lottery. why would the gambling part of this story even matter since it has no connection to betting on football?

he NFL doesn't want any players linked to any type of illegal gambling.

 

[cobalt_27]

In paragraph 1, Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and conspiracy to engage in interstate dog fighting.

Meh, were arguing semantics which never gets anywhere.

Yes, you are this dumb.

I've never once made a personal attack in any of these Vick threads despite having numerous others make them against me.I'd appreciate you not getting personal in the future. Thanks.

Stop being such a tool, and we will.

 

[ImTheScientist]

In paragraph 1, Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and conspiracy to engage in interstate dog fighting.

Meh, were arguing semantics which never gets anywhere.

Yes, you are this dumb.

I've never once made a personal attack in any of these Vick threads despite having numerous others make them against me.I'd appreciate you not getting personal in the future. Thanks.

That isn't a personal attack, it is a factual observation. Some people are dumb. But that's OK, the world needs ditch diggers too.If you need a link to realize that a guilty plea is a conviction and you think being completely wrong about a fact is "semantics" then anyone reading what you write can only come to two conclusions. You are trolling, or you lack intelligence. I assumed the latter but I could be convinced of the former.

Whether i lack intelligence or not is irrelevant. There is no need to personally attack me one way or the other.

The level of maturity declines around the start of training camp here.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

there's one thing that is confusing me a little on this story.I've heard some talking heads on ESPN mentioning how the gambling issue is huge, and that if he admits to gambling on dog fights the NFL will punish him harshly, etc.But, it's not like it's illegal for NFL players to go play blackjack in Vegas, bet on the kentucky derby, or play the lottery. why would the gambling part of this story even matter since it has no connection to betting on football?

he NFL doesn't want any players linked to any type of illegal gambling.

of course.but what is more important there....the legality or the gambling?the NFL doesn't want its players breaking the law, but they don't care if players gamble in legal ways (with some obvious exceptions like betting on football).some commentators act like Vick admitting to gambling on dog fights would be a death knell for his career. I don't see how it's that different from being convicted of the other charges while having a history of placing bets at a greyhound track or something.

 

[j3r3m3y]

No link, but I just got a text message from ESPN that says the NFL has suspended Vick indefinitely.

 

[whitem0nkey]

breaking news - vick is suspended indefinitely with out pay, per the afternoon blitz on radio.

 

[StuntRock]

In paragraph 1, Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and conspiracy to engage in interstate dog fighting.

Meh, were arguing semantics which never gets anywhere.

Yes, you are this dumb.

I've never once made a personal attack in any of these Vick threads despite having numerous others make them against me.I'd appreciate you not getting personal in the future. Thanks.

That isn't a personal attack, it is a factual observation. Some people are dumb. But that's OK, the world needs ditch diggers too.If you need a link to realize that a guilty plea is a conviction and you think being completely wrong about a fact is "semantics" then anyone reading what you write can only come to two conclusions. You are trolling, or you lack intelligence. I assumed the latter but I could be convinced of the former.

Whether i lack intelligence or not is irrelevant. There is no need to personally attack me one way or the other.

For what it's worth, you're arguing with the guy who argued that Vick's co-conspirators agreeing to testify against Vick was worse than their setting up an illegal gambling ring and fighting and murdering dogs for sport, so I wouldn't bank on intelligent discourse or a high level of maturity.

 

[Billy1x]

breaking news - vick is suspended indefinitely with out pay, per the afternoon blitz on radio.

Also, Goodall has given Atlanta the go ahead to do whatever they want including recouping bookoo bucks!

 

[2stix]

Vick suspended indefinitely

National Football League

Commissioner Roger Goodell notified Michael Vick on Friday that he is suspended indefinitely without pay from the National Football League, effective immediately.

Following are excerpts from Commissioner Goodell’s letter to Vick:

» "Your admitted conduct was not only illegal, but also cruel and reprehensible. Your team, the NFL, and NFL fans have all been hurt by your actions."

» "Your plea agreement and the plea agreements of your co-defendants also demonstrate your significant involvement in illegal gambling. Even if you personally did not place bets, as you contend, your actions in funding the betting and your association with illegal gambling both violate the terms of your NFL Player Contract and expose you to corrupting influences in derogation of one of the most fundamental responsibilities of an NFL player."

» "You have engaged in conduct detrimental to the welfare of the NFL and have violated the league’s Personal Conduct Policy."

» "I will review the status of your suspension following the conclusion of the legal proceedings. As part of that review, I will take into account a number of factors, including the resolution of any other charges that may be brought against you, whether in Surry County, Virginia, or other jurisdictions, your conduct going forward, the specifics of the sentence imposed by Judge Hudson and any related findings he might make, and the extent to which you are truthful and cooperative with law enforcement and league staff who are investigating these matters."

» "I have advised the Falcons that, with my decision today, they are no longer prohibited from acting and are now free to assert any claims or remedies available to them under the Collective Bargaining Agreement or your NFL

 

[j3r3m3y]

Vick suspended indefinitelyNational Football League Commissioner Roger Goodell notified Michael Vick on Friday that he is suspended indefinitely without pay from the National Football League, effective immediately.Following are excerpts from Commissioner Goodell’s letter to Vick:» "Your admitted conduct was not only illegal, but also cruel and reprehensible. Your team, the NFL, and NFL fans have all been hurt by your actions."» "Your plea agreement and the plea agreements of your co-defendants also demonstrate your significant involvement in illegal gambling. Even if you personally did not place bets, as you contend, your actions in funding the betting and your association with illegal gambling both violate the terms of your NFL Player Contract and expose you to corrupting influences in derogation of one of the most fundamental responsibilities of an NFL player."» "You have engaged in conduct detrimental to the welfare of the NFL and have violated the league’s Personal Conduct Policy."» "I will review the status of your suspension following the conclusion of the legal proceedings. As part of that review, I will take into account a number of factors, including the resolution of any other charges that may be brought against you, whether in Surry County, Virginia, or other jurisdictions, your conduct going forward, the specifics of the sentence imposed by Judge Hudson and any related findings he might make, and the extent to which you are truthful and cooperative with law enforcement and league staff who are investigating these matters."» "I have advised the Falcons that, with my decision today, they are no longer prohibited from acting and are now free to assert any claims or remedies available to them under the Collective Bargaining Agreement or your NFL

Will never play in the NFL again.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

there's one thing that is confusing me a little on this story.I've heard some talking heads on ESPN mentioning how the gambling issue is huge, and that if he admits to gambling on dog fights the NFL will punish him harshly, etc.But, it's not like it's illegal for NFL players to go play blackjack in Vegas, bet on the kentucky derby, or play the lottery. why would the gambling part of this story even matter since it has no connection to betting on football?

he NFL doesn't want any players linked to any type of illegal gambling.

of course.but what is more important there....the legality or the gambling?the NFL doesn't want its players breaking the law, but they don't care if players gamble in legal ways (with some obvious exceptions like betting on football).some commentatros act like Vick admitting to gambling on dog fights would be a death knell for his career. I don't see how it's that different from being convicted of the other charges while having a history of placing bets at a greyhound track or something.

I think this relates to the "corrupting influences" referenced in Goodell's letter. Playing the lottery or losing in Vegas isn't the same as being associated with illegal gambling activity, which implicates a risk of game-fixing, at least perhaps in the public eye.

 

[GroveDiesel]

there's one thing that is confusing me a little on this story.I've heard some talking heads on ESPN mentioning how the gambling issue is huge, and that if he admits to gambling on dog fights the NFL will punish him harshly, etc.But, it's not like it's illegal for NFL players to go play blackjack in Vegas, bet on the kentucky derby, or play the lottery. why would the gambling part of this story even matter since it has no connection to betting on football?

he NFL doesn't want any players linked to any type of illegal gambling.

of course.but what is more important there....the legality or the gambling?the NFL doesn't want its players breaking the law, but they don't care if players gamble in legal ways (with some obvious exceptions like betting on football).some commentatros act like Vick admitting to gambling on dog fights would be a death knell for his career. I don't see how it's that different from being convicted of the other charges while having a history of placing bets at a greyhound track or something.

I wish that I could remember it off of the top of my head, but I can't. But the NFL's policy addresses this in some way. I think that it's something to the effect of players shall not associate with gambling that casts a negative light on the NFL. Here's one thing I found:"The League has a long standing policy against any advertising or promotional activities by players, clubs, coaches or other management personnel that can reasonably be perceived as constituting affiliation with or endorsement of gambling or gambling-related activities."

 

[GroveDiesel]

Anyone else think that the ESPN guy that wrote the article saying that Vick wasn't going to be admitting anything should be investigated by ESPN to see if he has conflicts of interest in his reporting? Seems like ESPN (or at least certain writers) were really shilling for Vick throughout this entire thing. Perhaps ESPN needs to decide if they like their writers carrying the water of certain agents/players instead of going after the truth and and calling it like it is.

 

[mad sweeney]

there's one thing that is confusing me a little on this story.I've heard some talking heads on ESPN mentioning how the gambling issue is huge, and that if he admits to gambling on dog fights the NFL will punish him harshly, etc.But, it's not like it's illegal for NFL players to go play blackjack in Vegas, bet on the kentucky derby, or play the lottery. why would the gambling part of this story even matter since it has no connection to betting on football?

he NFL doesn't want any players linked to any type of illegal gambling.

of course.but what is more important there....the legality or the gambling?the NFL doesn't want its players breaking the law, but they don't care if players gamble in legal ways (with some obvious exceptions like betting on football).some commentatros act like Vick admitting to gambling on dog fights would be a death knell for his career. I don't see how it's that different from being convicted of the other charges while having a history of placing bets at a greyhound track or something.

I wish that I could remember it off of the top of my head, but I can't. But the NFL's policy addresses this in some way. I think that it's something to the effect of players shall not associate with gambling that casts a negative light on the NFL. Here's one thing I found:"The League has a long standing policy against any advertising or promotional activities by players, clubs, coaches or other management personnel that can reasonably be perceived as constituting affiliation with or endorsement of gambling or gambling-related activities."

i don't recall the details but a couple of years ago Bettis wanted to invest in a reataurant or bar or something but the league told him he couldn't because it would have slot machines or something. The players can gamble legally, though not on NFL football, but they cannot be associated with any gambling outfit, either as an investor or spokesman. and of course only the most dense can't or refuse to seriously see the risks involved in associating with illegal gambling.

 

[BlackHole]

Why does everyone keep saying "associating with" illegal gambling? He admitted he flat out bankrolled it. That is not association, that's ownership and he was the owner, not a partner, THE owner. Associating is way too euphemistic in my book.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

there's one thing that is confusing me a little on this story.I've heard some talking heads on ESPN mentioning how the gambling issue is huge, and that if he admits to gambling on dog fights the NFL will punish him harshly, etc.But, it's not like it's illegal for NFL players to go play blackjack in Vegas, bet on the kentucky derby, or play the lottery. why would the gambling part of this story even matter since it has no connection to betting on football?

he NFL doesn't want any players linked to any type of illegal gambling.

of course.but what is more important there....the legality or the gambling?the NFL doesn't want its players breaking the law, but they don't care if players gamble in legal ways (with some obvious exceptions like betting on football).some commentatros act like Vick admitting to gambling on dog fights would be a death knell for his career. I don't see how it's that different from being convicted of the other charges while having a history of placing bets at a greyhound track or something.

I'm with Rudni on his one.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Why does everyone keep saying "associating with" illegal gambling? He admitted he flat out bankrolled it. That is not association, that's ownership and he was the owner, not a partner, THE owner. Associating is way too euphemistic in my book.

Right, Vick basically took his $120 million and turned himself into the MGM Grand for dogfighting

 

[mad sweeney]

there's one thing that is confusing me a little on this story.I've heard some talking heads on ESPN mentioning how the gambling issue is huge, and that if he admits to gambling on dog fights the NFL will punish him harshly, etc.But, it's not like it's illegal for NFL players to go play blackjack in Vegas, bet on the kentucky derby, or play the lottery. why would the gambling part of this story even matter since it has no connection to betting on football?

he NFL doesn't want any players linked to any type of illegal gambling.

of course.but what is more important there....the legality or the gambling?the NFL doesn't want its players breaking the law, but they don't care if players gamble in legal ways (with some obvious exceptions like betting on football).some commentatros act like Vick admitting to gambling on dog fights would be a death knell for his career. I don't see how it's that different from being convicted of the other charges while having a history of placing bets at a greyhound track or something.

I'm with Rudni on his one.

I don't even get what he's saying. Legal betting on anything but football is perfectly acceptable for NFL players. Bankrolling an illegal gambling venture is not.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

I don't even get what he's saying. Legal betting on anything but football is perfectly acceptable for NFL players. Bankrolling an illegal gambling venture is not.

well, that's a connection I hadn't necessarily made before now. I thought they were simply referring to him placing bets on the dogs as him admitting to gambling. I see your point that bankrolling the kennel, hosting the fights on his property, etc. is more serious than just placing a few bets.I guess the people I've heard discussing this on ESPN weren't that specific. They just kept talking about how him admitting to having gambled was going to be so devastating to his career and I kept thinking...players can gamble, just not on footballl. Just seemed odd to me, but this makes more sense.

 

[mad sweeney]

I don't even get what he's saying. Legal betting on anything but football is perfectly acceptable for NFL players. Bankrolling an illegal gambling venture is not.

well, that's a connection I hadn't necessarily made before now. I thought they were simply referring to him placing bets on the dogs as him admitting to gambling. I see your point that bankrolling the kennel, hosting the fights on his property, etc. is more serious than just placing a few bets.

Not just funding the kennel but paying out on bets his dogs lost. Although he paid out when he lost, he supposedly did not keep any bet money when his dogs won. He alleges it all went to his 3 guys as payment.

 

[freshly_shorn]

I don't even get what he's saying. Legal betting on anything but football is perfectly acceptable for NFL players. Bankrolling an illegal gambling venture is not.

well, that's a connection I hadn't necessarily made before now. I thought they were simply referring to him placing bets on the dogs as him admitting to gambling. I see your point that bankrolling the kennel, hosting the fights on his property, etc. is more serious than just placing a few bets.

Not just funding the kennel but paying out on bets his dogs lost. Although he paid out when he lost, he supposedly did not keep any bet money when his dogs won. He alleges it all went to his 3 guys as payment.

It appears for players that the league makes a distinction between legal gambling and illegal gambling. I'm sure that they are also prohibited from betting on any sport. So table games, lottery and slots must be ok where legal. Just guessing.

 

[j3r3m3y]

Why does everyone keep saying "associating with" illegal gambling? He admitted he flat out bankrolled it. That is not association, that's ownership and he was the owner, not a partner, THE owner. Associating is way too euphemistic in my book.

Right, Vick basically took his $120 million and turned himself into the MGM Grand for dogfighting

Does scale really matter here?

 

[freshly_shorn]

Why does everyone keep saying "associating with" illegal gambling? He admitted he flat out bankrolled it. That is not association, that's ownership and he was the owner, not a partner, THE owner. Associating is way too euphemistic in my book.

Right, Vick basically took his $120 million and turned himself into the MGM Grand for dogfighting

Does scale really matter here?

This is what the current CBA says about gambling (from NFLPA.org):"15. INTEGRITY OF GAME. Player recognizes the detriment to the League and professional football that would result from impairment of public confidence in the honest and orderly conduct of NFL games or the integrity and good character of NFL players. Player therefore acknowledges his awareness that if he accepts a bribe or agrees to throw or fix an NFL game; fails to promptly report a bribe offer or an attempt to throw or fix an NFL game; bets on an NFL game; knowingly associates with gamblers or gambling activity; uses or provides other players with stimulants or other drugs for the purpose of attempting to enhance on-field performance; or is guilty of any other form of conduct reasonably judged by the League Commissioner to be detrimental to the League or professional football, the Commissioner will have the right, but only after giving Player the opportunity for a hearing at which he may be represented by counsel of his choice, to fine Player in a reasonable amount; to suspend Player for a period certain or indefinitely; and/or to terminate this contract."

 

[cobalt_27]

So, does ILUVBEER understand the relationship between a guilty plea and a conviction now?

 

[trader jake]

Anyone else think that the ESPN guy that wrote the article saying that Vick wasn't going to be admitting anything should be investigated by ESPN to see if he has conflicts of interest in his reporting? Seems like ESPN (or at least certain writers) were really shilling for Vick throughout this entire thing. Perhaps ESPN needs to decide if they like their writers carrying the water of certain agents/players instead of going after the truth and and calling it like it is.

I've posted this exact same thing numerous times in the Shark Pool. Len P. is the worst at this BTW. Reading about what ESPN says in regards to any in depth story has become a hit or miss venture at this point. Hopefully big mistakes like this one will open the eyes of those who have failed to notice their lack of journalistic integrity over the last year or so.

 

[mad sweeney]

In an unsurprising move, Nike has terminated Vick's contract, as per Yahoo.

 

[Doug B]

In an unsurprising move, Nike has terminated Vick's contract, as per Yahoo.

Justice is moving swift. Other financial dominos will be falling.

 

[2 Minute Drill w your mom]

Anyone else think that the ESPN guy that wrote the article saying that Vick wasn't going to be admitting anything should be investigated by ESPN to see if he has conflicts of interest in his reporting? Seems like ESPN (or at least certain writers) were really shilling for Vick throughout this entire thing. Perhaps ESPN needs to decide if they like their writers carrying the water of certain agents/players instead of going after the truth and and calling it like it is.

It is a blurry line between entertainment and news these days. I'm not sure that ESPN is overly disappointed that they were flip-flopping on their stories, because they were giving the story lots of air time, they needed to fill it with something, and I am guessing their ratings were good or at the very least they got a lot of coverage/people were referring to their headlines, etc. I don't know...I guess I'm a bit cynical but it is a business after all.

 

[mad sweeney]

Report: Vick to lose over $100 millionAugust 25, 2007ATLANTA (Ticker) - Michael Vick could lose over $100 million in salary and endorsements after pleading guilty to federal dogfighting charges, according to a report.Citing estimates from the University of Oregon's Warsaw Sports Marketing Center, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported the total cost for Vick could reach almost $150 million.If the Atlanta Falcons terminate the quarterback's contract - a 10-year $130 million deal signed in 2005 - he will lose $71 million. Legal experts say the team has the right to terminate Vick. The Falcons could also sue Vick to try and recover some of the $37 million already paid to Vick in bonuses.ADVERTISEMENTLost endorsements could top $50 million. On Friday, Nike reacted to Vick's guilty plea by terminating his endorsement contract with the company.On top of that, Vick is facing heavy legal bills and a possible fine of up to $250,000, which will come on top of any jail term.

Oof. Maybe he should've kept some of the money his dogs won.

 

[Capella]

Looks like less than a year. Without having to admit to the gambling he'll be back in the NFL by 09' at the latest.

another funny one

 

[j3r3m3y]

Can we get a mod to delete this thread or at least change the title.

The first half is completely incorrect and my brain hurts every time I see "Please entered,"

 

[Jules Winnfield]

ESPN is reporting that Vick will be pleading guilty to a charge of interstate commerce for the purpose of dogfighting.

One would assume that this does not pin Vick legally on killing dogs, actively participating in or attending the actual dog fights, or anything gambling related.

Given what else has come out, I wonder what this does to the NFL's position on what they are planning on doing (if that will change at all).

It's all about the gambling.Even if card games were Vick's hobby, he'd be in hot water with the NFL if he were illegally gambling tens of thousands of dollars playing cards. This is part of Paragraph 15 of the standard NFL player contract (entitled "INTEGRITY OF GAME"), and it's posted in every NFL locker room:

Among the types of conduct detrimental to the NFL and professional football that call for serious penalties are the following: [...]

4. Associating with gamblers or with gambling activities in a manner tending to bring discredit to the NFL.

Any such conduct may result in severe penalties, up to and including a fine and/or suspension from the NFL for life.

Disagree, gambling is a major "red herring" in this whole case. Perhaps it will be a shield used by Godell to keep Vick out of the league longer because of his role in DOGFIGHTING and not GAMBLING.If Vick were a breeder who put show dogs into a Dog Show and bet fellow dog breeders 20 grand a contest that he had the prettier poodle and some investigative reporter shined the light on this type of betting, Vick would under center for game 1 this year receiving nothing more than a slap on the wrist and fine from Godell. Jordan and Barkley routinely bet much larger sums of money on the golf course and elsewhere --- common knowledge within the NBA. There is a world of differnence between a person-to-person bet on which poodle will win in the Dog Show and betting the "over" with Vinny the local bookie in the Panthers/Saints game. Vick was just betting on his dogs to win. A violation of policy? YES, but a far cry from betting on pro sports with bookies.

However, Vick was not betting casual sums of cash at the MSG dog show, rather he was betting casual sums of cash as to which pit bull would maim and kill the other pit bull with all sorts of ugly and sordid surrounding facts. Thus, it is the context that has fried Vick in the NFL and not the fact that he bet $20 grand on his dog to win.

Wilber Wood with another feeble attempt

 

[Jules Winnfield]

In paragraph 1, Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and conspiracy to engage in interstate dog fighting.

Meh, were arguing semantics which never gets anywhere.

Yes, you are this dumb.

I've never once made a personal attack in any of these Vick threads despite having numerous others make them against me.I'd appreciate you not getting personal in the future. Thanks.

That isn't a personal attack, it is a factual observation. Some people are dumb. But that's OK, the world needs ditch diggers too.If you need a link to realize that a guilty plea is a conviction and you think being completely wrong about a fact is "semantics" then anyone reading what you write can only come to two conclusions. You are trolling, or you lack intelligence. I assumed the latter but I could be convinced of the former.

Whether i lack intelligence or not is irrelevant. There is no need to personally attack me one way or the other.

A highlight of ILUVBEER99:Vick will be back in '09

He hasn't been convicted (When he copped a plea)

Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and yet you still think Vick didn't gamble

You know what. It is just a lot easier to call you dumb.

Have a nice year off. You are a man of your word right?

 

[Capella]

In paragraph 1, Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and conspiracy to engage in interstate dog fighting.

Meh, were arguing semantics which never gets anywhere.

Yes, you are this dumb.

I've never once made a personal attack in any of these Vick threads despite having numerous others make them against me.I'd appreciate you not getting personal in the future. Thanks.

That isn't a personal attack, it is a factual observation. Some people are dumb. But that's OK, the world needs ditch diggers too.If you need a link to realize that a guilty plea is a conviction and you think being completely wrong about a fact is "semantics" then anyone reading what you write can only come to two conclusions. You are trolling, or you lack intelligence. I assumed the latter but I could be convinced of the former.

Whether i lack intelligence or not is irrelevant. There is no need to personally attack me one way or the other.

Sorry, but the way you come off in this thread could only be classified as incredibly dumb. Sorry. Maybe this just isn't your kind of topic, but you should think twice before engaging that "add reply" button next time.

 

[freshly_shorn]

In paragraph 1, Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and conspiracy to engage in interstate dog fighting.

Meh, were arguing semantics which never gets anywhere.

Yes, you are this dumb.

I've never once made a personal attack in any of these Vick threads despite having numerous others make them against me.I'd appreciate you not getting personal in the future. Thanks.

That isn't a personal attack, it is a factual observation. Some people are dumb. But that's OK, the world needs ditch diggers too.If you need a link to realize that a guilty plea is a conviction and you think being completely wrong about a fact is "semantics" then anyone reading what you write can only come to two conclusions. You are trolling, or you lack intelligence. I assumed the latter but I could be convinced of the former.

Whether i lack intelligence or not is irrelevant. There is no need to personally attack me one way or the other.

Sorry, but the way you come off in this thread could only be classified as incredibly dumb. Sorry. Maybe this just isn't your kind of topic, but you should think twice before engaging that "add reply" button next time.

If a guilty plea is not a conviction, then why do they immediately schedule a sentencing hearing after a plea is entered? Also, read the first part of the plea- Vick is agreeing that the US would win its case. If that's not a conviction, I don't know what is.

 

[ILUVBEER99]

In paragraph 1, Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and conspiracy to engage in interstate dog fighting.

Meh, were arguing semantics which never gets anywhere.

Yes, you are this dumb.

I've never once made a personal attack in any of these Vick threads despite having numerous others make them against me.I'd appreciate you not getting personal in the future. Thanks.

That isn't a personal attack, it is a factual observation. Some people are dumb. But that's OK, the world needs ditch diggers too.If you need a link to realize that a guilty plea is a conviction and you think being completely wrong about a fact is "semantics" then anyone reading what you write can only come to two conclusions. You are trolling, or you lack intelligence. I assumed the latter but I could be convinced of the former.

Whether i lack intelligence or not is irrelevant. There is no need to personally attack me one way or the other.

Sorry, but the way you come off in this thread could only be classified as incredibly dumb. Sorry. Maybe this just isn't your kind of topic, but you should think twice before engaging that "add reply" button next time.

I've never denied that I'm dumb, my issue is being called it by others.I guess the be excellent to others doesn't apply when ILUVBEER99 is getting the short end of the stick.

 

[ILUVBEER99]

In paragraph 1, Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and conspiracy to engage in interstate dog fighting.

Meh, were arguing semantics which never gets anywhere.

Yes, you are this dumb.

I've never once made a personal attack in any of these Vick threads despite having numerous others make them against me.I'd appreciate you not getting personal in the future. Thanks.

That isn't a personal attack, it is a factual observation. Some people are dumb. But that's OK, the world needs ditch diggers too.If you need a link to realize that a guilty plea is a conviction and you think being completely wrong about a fact is "semantics" then anyone reading what you write can only come to two conclusions. You are trolling, or you lack intelligence. I assumed the latter but I could be convinced of the former.

Whether i lack intelligence or not is irrelevant. There is no need to personally attack me one way or the other.

A highlight of ILUVBEER99:Vick will be back in '09

He hasn't been convicted (When he copped a plea)

Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and yet you still think Vick didn't gamble

You know what. It is just a lot easier to call you dumb.

Have a nice year off. You are a man of your word right?

I must have been drunk when i wrote that, so i don't think i should be held responsible for the year ban.

 

[j3r3m3y]

I've never denied that I'm dumb, my issue is being called it by others.I guess the be excellent to others doesn't apply when ILUVBEER99 is getting the short end of the stick.

This, my friends, is the most successful troll in the history of this forum. Touche` BEER, touche`.

 

[saichamp]

How often do you plan on visiting your buddy in the pen? You've got more man-love for Vick then Phil Simms has for Brady! Since you are going back on your word (big surprise), why don't you just admit that Vick is a bad guy and deserves to be in the position he finds himself in. This is HIS fault (6+ years of it) and now he must deal with it.

 

[Jules Winnfield]

In paragraph 1, Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and conspiracy to engage in interstate dog fighting.

Meh, were arguing semantics which never gets anywhere.

Yes, you are this dumb.

I've never once made a personal attack in any of these Vick threads despite having numerous others make them against me.I'd appreciate you not getting personal in the future. Thanks.

That isn't a personal attack, it is a factual observation. Some people are dumb. But that's OK, the world needs ditch diggers too.If you need a link to realize that a guilty plea is a conviction and you think being completely wrong about a fact is "semantics" then anyone reading what you write can only come to two conclusions. You are trolling, or you lack intelligence. I assumed the latter but I could be convinced of the former.

Whether i lack intelligence or not is irrelevant. There is no need to personally attack me one way or the other.

A highlight of ILUVBEER99:Vick will be back in '09

He hasn't been convicted (When he copped a plea)

Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and yet you still think Vick didn't gamble

You know what. It is just a lot easier to call you dumb.

Have a nice year off. You are a man of your word right?

I must have been drunk when i wrote that, so i don't think i should be held responsible for the year ban.

Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son

 

[j3r3m3y]

I must have been drunk when i wrote that, so i don't think i should be held responsible for the year ban.Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son

You have trumped my Caddyshack quote.

 

[mad sweeney]

In paragraph 1, Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and conspiracy to engage in interstate dog fighting.

Meh, were arguing semantics which never gets anywhere.

Yes, you are this dumb.

I've never once made a personal attack in any of these Vick threads despite having numerous others make them against me.I'd appreciate you not getting personal in the future. Thanks.

That isn't a personal attack, it is a factual observation. Some people are dumb. But that's OK, the world needs ditch diggers too.If you need a link to realize that a guilty plea is a conviction and you think being completely wrong about a fact is "semantics" then anyone reading what you write can only come to two conclusions. You are trolling, or you lack intelligence. I assumed the latter but I could be convinced of the former.

Whether i lack intelligence or not is irrelevant. There is no need to personally attack me one way or the other.

A highlight of ILUVBEER99:Vick will be back in '09

He hasn't been convicted (When he copped a plea)

Vick pleads guilty to conspiracy to establish, maintain, etc. an interstate gambling enterprise and yet you still think Vick didn't gamble

You know what. It is just a lot easier to call you dumb.

Have a nice year off. You are a man of your word right?

I must have been drunk when i wrote that, so i don't think i should be held responsible for the year ban.

Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son

That's just not right and is going to get this thread locked and bump Beer up to the second most clueless person in the thread. Be civil. Nothing BEER has opined about in the Vick threads has come to pass so I don't know why anyone thought this one would. He's completely shattered any credibility he has, but at least he's civil.