Vick To Take LOA (1 Viewer)

[msommer]

After reading up on all this extensively the past week or so, if the NFL is hanging their hat on the Personal Conduct Policy to bail them out, I'm not sure that that is 100% going to get them where they want to go. The new policy seems to indicate that first time offenders can't be suspended for first time criminal violations.

IMO, this is a temproary fix until they can figure out how best to keep Vick off the firld, because I'm not sure this one will stick long term. Again, they could have plenty other things cooking that has not yet been reported, but I'm not sure this is the best way to pin him with a suspension.

It's definitely a temporary fix, but it's the best thing for all involved right now. The League and Blank had to do SOMETHING or risk torch bearing PETA members (and tearful Congressmen) assaulting them on the streets.And Goodell came down hard on PacMan and the others -- somebody had to do something or else those decisions could have been called into question.

This gives the NFL breathing room, the Falcons some leeway to try and move forward without Vick and Vick perhaps a break from the endless questions he would have rightfully faced at TC.

Many people have wondered how PacMan could have been suspended without having been convicted of anything. But the league policy has has provisions more repeat offenders and grants the ability to suspend repeat offenders without due process. The policy states that first time offenders must be found guily or plead guilty to a criminal act before being suspended. As I interpret the new policy, Vick on paper should not be a candidate suspension BASED ON THAT SECTION OF THE NFL CONDUCT POLICIES.Now, there may be other broader provisions that are grounds for suspension and I suspect that hte league is exploring those and this is a temporary fix until they feel they have the legal grounds to cover them in other areas.

At this point I suspect that not many people would want Vick playing, so they need to come up with a way to keep him out and this will buy them more time.

Right -- and except for the water bottle thing and the finger.... Vick hadn't done anything.Also, the first time offender thing - as I have said before - doesn't wash with me. One crime does not equal another - outside of this case, what if this was an indictment of a triple homicide? Should that first offense be held to the same standard as a first time DUI?

There are differences - they haven't been clearly spelled out, but they need to be. You can't swipe all first time offenses with the same brush - it just doesn't work.

It's why we have this half-measure now - and it buys everyone time to see what to do next.

Lying to Goodell might constitute a second offense though (assuming the allegations that he was active in dogfighting as late as end April are proven).

 

[chris1969]

Killing a dog is much worse than beating your pregnant wife.

There is no worse, both people should be shot in the head an equal amount of times.

 

[Family Matters]

After reading up on all this extensively the past week or so, if the NFL is hanging their hat on the Personal Conduct Policy to bail them out, I'm not sure that that is 100% going to get them where they want to go. The new policy seems to indicate that first time offenders can't be suspended for first time criminal violations.

IMO, this is a temproary fix until they can figure out how best to keep Vick off the firld, because I'm not sure this one will stick long term. Again, they could have plenty other things cooking that has not yet been reported, but I'm not sure this is the best way to pin him with a suspension.

It's definitely a temporary fix, but it's the best thing for all involved right now. The League and Blank had to do SOMETHING or risk torch bearing PETA members (and tearful Congressmen) assaulting them on the streets.And Goodell came down hard on PacMan and the others -- somebody had to do something or else those decisions could have been called into question.

This gives the NFL breathing room, the Falcons some leeway to try and move forward without Vick and Vick perhaps a break from the endless questions he would have rightfully faced at TC.

Many people have wondered how PacMan could have been suspended without having been convicted of anything. But the league policy has has provisions more repeat offenders and grants the ability to suspend repeat offenders without due process. The policy states that first time offenders must be found guily or plead guilty to a criminal act before being suspended. As I interpret the new policy, Vick on paper should not be a candidate suspension BASED ON THAT SECTION OF THE NFL CONDUCT POLICIES.Now, there may be other broader provisions that are grounds for suspension and I suspect that hte league is exploring those and this is a temporary fix until they feel they have the legal grounds to cover them in other areas.

At this point I suspect that not many people would want Vick playing, so they need to come up with a way to keep him out and this will buy them more time.

Right -- and except for the water bottle thing and the finger.... Vick hadn't done anything.Also, the first time offender thing - as I have said before - doesn't wash with me. One crime does not equal another - outside of this case, what if this was an indictment of a triple homicide? Should that first offense be held to the same standard as a first time DUI?

There are differences - they haven't been clearly spelled out, but they need to be. You can't swipe all first time offenses with the same brush - it just doesn't work.

It's why we have this half-measure now - and it buys everyone time to see what to do next.

2 things stand out on your comments.1. I'm surprised you or amyone would be defending Vick. Most reasonable people feel the suspension (with pay for now) is the right thing. Let the dust settle and the facts will bear out the truth. But considering his position as a starting NFL QB you can't really allow him to continue in his role until it's resolved.

2. This is another example of the NFL and owners clearing owning the players. So while the stars are usually paid quit well, they are always at the mercy of their employer and that's not changing anytime soon.

At the end of the day Vick is at a minimum quilty of bad judgement and poor decision making based on the crowd he hangs with. He was in control but he's allowed that control to be taken away by his decision making to this point. Even if we learn he's not personally quilty of a crime, he should never of allowed himself to be affiliated with those that are quilty. So he's fully accountable for the situation he's in today.

 

[NoFBinLA]

After reading up on all this extensively the past week or so, if the NFL is hanging their hat on the Personal Conduct Policy to bail them out, I'm not sure that that is 100% going to get them where they want to go. The new policy seems to indicate that first time offenders can't be suspended for first time criminal violations.

IMO, this is a temproary fix until they can figure out how best to keep Vick off the firld, because I'm not sure this one will stick long term. Again, they could have plenty other things cooking that has not yet been reported, but I'm not sure this is the best way to pin him with a suspension.

It's definitely a temporary fix, but it's the best thing for all involved right now. The League and Blank had to do SOMETHING or risk torch bearing PETA members (and tearful Congressmen) assaulting them on the streets.And Goodell came down hard on PacMan and the others -- somebody had to do something or else those decisions could have been called into question.

This gives the NFL breathing room, the Falcons some leeway to try and move forward without Vick and Vick perhaps a break from the endless questions he would have rightfully faced at TC.

Many people have wondered how PacMan could have been suspended without having been convicted of anything. But the league policy has has provisions more repeat offenders and grants the ability to suspend repeat offenders without due process. The policy states that first time offenders must be found guily or plead guilty to a criminal act before being suspended. As I interpret the new policy, Vick on paper should not be a candidate suspension BASED ON THAT SECTION OF THE NFL CONDUCT POLICIES.Now, there may be other broader provisions that are grounds for suspension and I suspect that hte league is exploring those and this is a temporary fix until they feel they have the legal grounds to cover them in other areas.

At this point I suspect that not many people would want Vick playing, so they need to come up with a way to keep him out and this will buy them more time.

Right -- and except for the water bottle thing and the finger.... Vick hadn't done anything.Also, the first time offender thing - as I have said before - doesn't wash with me. One crime does not equal another - outside of this case, what if this was an indictment of a triple homicide? Should that first offense be held to the same standard as a first time DUI?

There are differences - they haven't been clearly spelled out, but they need to be. You can't swipe all first time offenses with the same brush - it just doesn't work.

It's why we have this half-measure now - and it buys everyone time to see what to do next.

2 things stand out on your comments.1. I'm surprised you or amyone would be defending Vick. Most reasonable people feel the suspension (with pay for now) is the right thing. Let the dust settle and the facts will bear out the truth. But considering his position as a starting NFL QB you can't really allow him to continue in his role until it's resolved.

2. This is another example of the NFL and owners clearing owning the players. So while the stars are usually paid quit well, they are always at the mercy of their employer and that's not changing anytime soon.

At the end of the day Vick is at a minimum quality of bad judgement and poor decision making based on the crowd he hangs with. He was in control but he's allowed that control to be taken away by his decision making to this point. Even if we learn he's not personally quilty of a crime, he should never of allowed himself to be affiliated with those that are quilty. So he's fully accountable for the situation he's in today.

I don't think that's directed at me, but just to clarify, I am not defending Vick. Like Latrell Sprewell said this weekend 'You have to know when to let go of the people you grew up with, when they';ll get you into trouble' (paraphrasing, but that's the gist).I do think Vick is wholly responsible for his dilemma, both in terms of the crime, and his status with the league.

 

[AB in DC]

Where does it say that the CBA only addresses repeat offenses?

Last I checked, Goodell can act any time he determined that there was conduct detrimental to the NFL.

 

[Family Matters]

After reading up on all this extensively the past week or so, if the NFL is hanging their hat on the Personal Conduct Policy to bail them out, I'm not sure that that is 100% going to get them where they want to go. The new policy seems to indicate that first time offenders can't be suspended for first time criminal violations.

IMO, this is a temproary fix until they can figure out how best to keep Vick off the firld, because I'm not sure this one will stick long term. Again, they could have plenty other things cooking that has not yet been reported, but I'm not sure this is the best way to pin him with a suspension.

It's definitely a temporary fix, but it's the best thing for all involved right now. The League and Blank had to do SOMETHING or risk torch bearing PETA members (and tearful Congressmen) assaulting them on the streets.And Goodell came down hard on PacMan and the others -- somebody had to do something or else those decisions could have been called into question.

This gives the NFL breathing room, the Falcons some leeway to try and move forward without Vick and Vick perhaps a break from the endless questions he would have rightfully faced at TC.

Many people have wondered how PacMan could have been suspended without having been convicted of anything. But the league policy has has provisions more repeat offenders and grants the ability to suspend repeat offenders without due process. The policy states that first time offenders must be found guily or plead guilty to a criminal act before being suspended. As I interpret the new policy, Vick on paper should not be a candidate suspension BASED ON THAT SECTION OF THE NFL CONDUCT POLICIES.Now, there may be other broader provisions that are grounds for suspension and I suspect that hte league is exploring those and this is a temporary fix until they feel they have the legal grounds to cover them in other areas.

At this point I suspect that not many people would want Vick playing, so they need to come up with a way to keep him out and this will buy them more time.

Right -- and except for the water bottle thing and the finger.... Vick hadn't done anything.Also, the first time offender thing - as I have said before - doesn't wash with me. One crime does not equal another - outside of this case, what if this was an indictment of a triple homicide? Should that first offense be held to the same standard as a first time DUI?

There are differences - they haven't been clearly spelled out, but they need to be. You can't swipe all first time offenses with the same brush - it just doesn't work.

It's why we have this half-measure now - and it buys everyone time to see what to do next.

2 things stand out on your comments.1. I'm surprised you or amyone would be defending Vick. Most reasonable people feel the suspension (with pay for now) is the right thing. Let the dust settle and the facts will bear out the truth. But considering his position as a starting NFL QB you can't really allow him to continue in his role until it's resolved.

2. This is another example of the NFL and owners clearing owning the players. So while the stars are usually paid quit well, they are always at the mercy of their employer and that's not changing anytime soon.

At the end of the day Vick is at a minimum quality of bad judgement and poor decision making based on the crowd he hangs with. He was in control but he's allowed that control to be taken away by his decision making to this point. Even if we learn he's not personally quilty of a crime, he should never of allowed himself to be affiliated with those that are quilty. So he's fully accountable for the situation he's in today.

I don't think that's directed at me, but just to clarify, I am not defending Vick. Like Latrell Sprewell said this weekend 'You have to know when to let go of the people you grew up with, when they';ll get you into trouble' (paraphrasing, but that's the gist).I do think Vick is wholly responsible for his dilemma, both in terms of the crime, and his status with the league.

Sorry if I misunderstood your comment. And you're right about Vick. Again, not sure if Vick committed the crime he's charged with but he certainly didn't do anything to prevent himself from being in the middle. That's just not smart on his part.

 

[kellumsboys]

so what is Vick's dynasty value now?if someone offered you one of these QBs: Kolb/Beck/Stanton, would you take it LOL?

Vick straight up for Pacman ?

 

[David Yudkin]

Where does it say that the CBA only addresses repeat offenses?

Last I checked, Goodell can act any time he determined that there was conduct detrimental to the NFL.

This was covered in the Vick Indicted?!? thread. IIRC, Maurile posted a link to the policy.Here is the LINK to what I believe is the old Criminal Personal Conduct Policy.

Here is a SUMMARY of the charges.

I posted other articles explaining that the policy as written distinuighed in first time and repeat offenders with the main difference being that first time offenders had to have plead to or been found guilty of criminal charges before they were suspended.

As I've mentioned many times, there are several other areas within the NFL code of ethics and conduct that they could try to enforce, more noticable conduct unbecoming the league. I wonder if that one is harder to prove or if that also may involve someone being convicted of something (but again I don't have the complete language to look at).

That's the other thing we don't know for sure. Some of the CBA policies may only be summary statements and not the full text of the rules, so there may be provisions and legalise that we are not privy to.

 

[CravenM]

One thing to remember about the indictment and pending indictments:

The quantity and specificity of the indictments are about to start piling up from both the Feds and State of Virginia. Virginia has a law that also hold criminally liable of the owner of a house where dogfighting, business of dogfighting and raising of dogfighting dogs is going on, EVEN IF the owner doesn't know it's happening.

The one thing that is NOT disputed is that Michael Vick owns the property and know the occupants very well.

If Vick had Johnny Cochran, Al Sharpton, Harriet Tubman, John Quincy Adams, Mother Theresa and Condi Rice defending him, he's still not going to come out of this thing unscathed. It is 100% guaranteed that he's going to be held accountable for something and he needs to start preparing his defense immediately.

I just hope Arthur Blank can bring in Duante Culpepper and another QB in camp as soon as possible to challenge JoeyH for the starting job. And if CPep gets signed to the Jags, bring in David Garrard - he's got good skills.

 

[burd]

my 2 cents ....

Vick won't be putting on a Falcons jersey this season ...

Vick won't be putting on a Falcons jersey next season ....

Vick will either be putting on another team's jersey or prison blues in 2009

 

[3C's]

The Fox story is almost two hours old yet it's not being reported elsewhere. It makes me wonder why it's not all over the news.

Only thing ESPN's Bottom Line is saying is that local prosecutors won't be indicting him. Nothing about a LOA

For now. Surry Grand Jury meets tomorrow. Poindexter and crew aren't ready. Next GJ meeting is in September. Expect something then.

 

[Loomba]

Does Terrell Owens still play in the NFL?

 

[Andy Herron]

After reading up on all this extensively the past week or so, if the NFL is hanging their hat on the Personal Conduct Policy to bail them out, I'm not sure that that is 100% going to get them where they want to go. The new policy seems to indicate that first time offenders can't be suspended for first time criminal violations.

IMO, this is a temproary fix until they can figure out how best to keep Vick off the firld, because I'm not sure this one will stick long term. Again, they could have plenty other things cooking that has not yet been reported, but I'm not sure this is the best way to pin him with a suspension.

It's definitely a temporary fix, but it's the best thing for all involved right now. The League and Blank had to do SOMETHING or risk torch bearing PETA members (and tearful Congressmen) assaulting them on the streets.And Goodell came down hard on PacMan and the others -- somebody had to do something or else those decisions could have been called into question.

This gives the NFL breathing room, the Falcons some leeway to try and move forward without Vick and Vick perhaps a break from the endless questions he would have rightfully faced at TC.

Many people have wondered how PacMan could have been suspended without having been convicted of anything. But the league policy has has provisions more repeat offenders and grants the ability to suspend repeat offenders without due process. The policy states that first time offenders must be found guily or plead guilty to a criminal act before being suspended. As I interpret the new policy, Vick on paper should not be a candidate suspension BASED ON THAT SECTION OF THE NFL CONDUCT POLICIES.Now, there may be other broader provisions that are grounds for suspension and I suspect that hte league is exploring those and this is a temporary fix until they feel they have the legal grounds to cover them in other areas.

At this point I suspect that not many people would want Vick playing, so they need to come up with a way to keep him out and this will buy them more time.

Right -- and except for the water bottle thing and the finger.... Vick hadn't done anything.Also, the first time offender thing - as I have said before - doesn't wash with me. One crime does not equal another - outside of this case, what if this was an indictment of a triple homicide? Should that first offense be held to the same standard as a first time DUI?

There are differences - they haven't been clearly spelled out, but they need to be. You can't swipe all first time offenses with the same brush - it just doesn't work.

It's why we have this half-measure now - and it buys everyone time to see what to do next.

2 things stand out on your comments.1. I'm surprised you or amyone would be defending Vick. Most reasonable people feel the suspension (with pay for now) is the right thing. Let the dust settle and the facts will bear out the truth. But considering his position as a starting NFL QB you can't really allow him to continue in his role until it's resolved.

2. This is another example of the NFL and owners clearing owning the players. So while the stars are usually paid quit well, they are always at the mercy of their employer and that's not changing anytime soon.

At the end of the day Vick is at a minimum quality of bad judgement and poor decision making based on the crowd he hangs with. He was in control but he's allowed that control to be taken away by his decision making to this point. Even if we learn he's not personally quilty of a crime, he should never of allowed himself to be affiliated with those that are quilty. So he's fully accountable for the situation he's in today.

Very good!

 

[Andy Herron]

Where does it say that the CBA only addresses repeat offenses?Last I checked, Goodell can act any time he determined that there was conduct detrimental to the NFL.

Correct!

 

[Andy Herron]

Does Terrell Owens still play in the NFL?

Thank you. Wasn't sure if anybody outside of Dallas was noticing. Though a lifetime Cowboys fan, I was never a fan of T.O., and was DEFINITELY not a fan of him coming here. However, T.O. seems to have matured and/or found his ground. Not that he has any left. I can tell you this, he's going to be a real danger on the field this season. Barring injury, count on it. He and Tony Romo seem to click, and T.O. even seems to really like him. This was not widely reported, but in the days to follow the Romo fumble in the Seattle playoff game, T.O. was texting him daily telling him to keep his head up and things along those lines. Basically, being supportive. I'm still not a T.O. fan, but since he's been here I have learned that he has more compassion than he's given credit for.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Does Terrell Owens still play in the NFL?

Thank you. Wasn't sure if anybody outside of Dallas was noticing. Though a lifetime Cowboys fan, I was never a fan of T.O., and was DEFINITELY not a fan of him coming here. However, T.O. seems to have matured and/or found his ground. Not that he has any left. I can tell you this, he's going to be a real danger on the field this season. Barring injury, count on it. He and Tony Romo seem to click, and T.O. even seems to really like him. This was not widely reported, but in the days to follow the Romo fumble in the Seattle playoff game, T.O. was texting him daily telling him to keep his head up and things along those lines. Basically, being supportive. I'm still not a T.O. fan, but since he's been here I have learned that he has more compassion than he's given credit for.

Need a good TO, Overdose story right about now. Well, vick does anyway

 

[Loomba]

Does Terrell Owens still play in the NFL?

Thank you. Wasn't sure if anybody outside of Dallas was noticing. Though a lifetime Cowboys fan, I was never a fan of T.O., and was DEFINITELY not a fan of him coming here. However, T.O. seems to have matured and/or found his ground. Not that he has any left. I can tell you this, he's going to be a real danger on the field this season. Barring injury, count on it. He and Tony Romo seem to click, and T.O. even seems to really like him. This was not widely reported, but in the days to follow the Romo fumble in the Seattle playoff game, T.O. was texting him daily telling him to keep his head up and things along those lines. Basically, being supportive. I'm still not a T.O. fan, but since he's been here I have learned that he has more compassion than he's given credit for.

I think TO has a real shot at being WR#1 this year. Partly because nobody else seems to really standout from the crowd but largely because Romo looks his way a lot.Now back to the Vick saga... Is it just me, or has every offseason over the past few years become increasingly unusual??

 

[Andy Herron]

Hm. I posted this in the "Vick Indicted" discussion last Thursday morning and received alot of rebuttal. Still on track, and thanks to the others who gave me a for it. As a writer and reporter for footballguys.com, I take this story very seriously and hope to bring accurate reporting as well as insightful analogies to this website overall.

Jul 19 2007, 09:29 AM Post #515

The scope of these allegations and subsequent charges are far greater than most realize, it would seem. Folks, this is only the tip of the iceberg, mark my words. The Federal Government and FBI got involved in this case for a reason. Dogfighting in and of itself has been a growing concern among law enforcement officials for several years while they have been working towards a "landmark" case that they could bring to the courts to make precedent. Well, get ready, because this is it. The Feds have better than a 95% conviction rate, and if you think we already know what evidence they are bringing to the table, you are sadly mistaken. Sure, we know about the 65 dogs originally removed from the property, and the fighting pits and the rape stand(s) and the blood and the dead carcasses buried in the back yard...Michael Vick's back yard. Oh, and if you've read the 18 page indictment, they already have at least 4 corroborating witnesses as to Vick's presence and participation. Drop the O.J. and Kobe talk, a different animal altogether, no pun intended. A "one-time" incident with questionable intent and no witnesses. This case goes beyond the criminal aspect of it, there are serious character issues to look at here. This is where the personal conduct policy would indeed allow Goodell to act now if he wished to, in that it states you must conduct yourself in the best interest of the NFL and protect the "shield", which would include but not be limited to who you associate with and where you do it. This is where Pacman crossed the line, though he was never charged with anything. Only a number of recurring incidents. Vick's association has been an ongoing incident over a period of at least 6 years. That being said, I would fully expect Falcons owner Arthur Blank to act on this before Goodell does. Goodell is in a better position to allow the courts to take their course, while Blank is not. The Falcons are front and center, and you can bet that the Humane Society and PETA are watching very closely. It would already appear that hearings and the subsequent trial will disrupt Vick's participation with the team this season, not to mention the undoubted protesting and picketing that would take place at any and all Falcon functions, from training camp to any and all games whether they be home OR away. If Vick were to remain with the team, the public scrutiny would become increasingly unbearable for both the Falcons and the NFL. Chances are, Vick will be instructed to take a leave of absence until things are resolved, one way or another. What if he's found "not guilty", you ask? Don't you think that the Feds have considered that and what the repercussions would bring? I knew there was trouble when they got involved and were being so quiet and meticulous in their procedures. It was just too big for Surry County prosecutor Poindexter to handle or manage. This is only the beginning folks,...only the beginning. Vick has put himself in one pocket he can't escape from. I can assure you, he's headed for prison. The book on his NFL career can now be closed.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As far as alternatives for the Falcons at the QB position, obviously Daunte Culpepper is out there, but I wouldn't rule out D.J. Shockley getting an opportunity to compete with Joey Harrington for the starter's position through training camp. Not only a former star at the University of Georgia, but would be the strongest counter for the local Atlanta area to divert their attention to. Media and public both. Just something to keep in mind. I think it would be in their best interest to give Shockley every opportunity, but that's just my opinion, like the attached piece.

 

[North]

Whatever it takes to get him out of the news. I'm sick of watching NFL Live and seeing the first half of EVERY show be about this mediocre thug of a QB.

 

[Andy Herron]

Does Terrell Owens still play in the NFL?

Thank you. Wasn't sure if anybody outside of Dallas was noticing. Though a lifetime Cowboys fan, I was never a fan of T.O., and was DEFINITELY not a fan of him coming here. However, T.O. seems to have matured and/or found his ground. Not that he has any left. I can tell you this, he's going to be a real danger on the field this season. Barring injury, count on it. He and Tony Romo seem to click, and T.O. even seems to really like him. This was not widely reported, but in the days to follow the Romo fumble in the Seattle playoff game, T.O. was texting him daily telling him to keep his head up and things along those lines. Basically, being supportive. I'm still not a T.O. fan, but since he's been here I have learned that he has more compassion than he's given credit for.

I think TO has a real shot at being WR#1 this year.

I wouldn't doubt that one bit. Hell, he led the league in TD receptions last season and was considered to be a semi-disappointment in Dallas, overall. Mostly because of his costly drops. But, come to find at the end of the seaon that he had severely damaged a finger in October but played thru it. After 2 operations, I don't think you can question that. With his heart in the right place, he will most certainly be a danger this season. To his opponents, not himself.

 

[pizzatyme]

Does Terrell Owens still play in the NFL?

Thank you. Wasn't sure if anybody outside of Dallas was noticing. Though a lifetime Cowboys fan, I was never a fan of T.O., and was DEFINITELY not a fan of him coming here. However, T.O. seems to have matured and/or found his ground. Not that he has any left. I can tell you this, he's going to be a real danger on the field this season. Barring injury, count on it. He and Tony Romo seem to click, and T.O. even seems to really like him. This was not widely reported, but in the days to follow the Romo fumble in the Seattle playoff game, T.O. was texting him daily telling him to keep his head up and things along those lines. Basically, being supportive. I'm still not a T.O. fan, but since he's been here I have learned that he has more compassion than he's given credit for.

I think TO has a real shot at being WR#1 this year.

I wouldn't doubt that one bit. Hell, he led the league in TD receptions last season and was considered to be a semi-disappointment in Dallas, overall. Mostly because of his costly drops. But, come to find at the end of the seaon that he had severely damaged a finger in October but played thru it. After 2 operations, I don't think you can question that. With his heart in the right place, he will most certainly be a danger this season. To his opponents, not himself.

Shhhhhhhhh...

 

[Andy Herron]

Back to the topic at hand:

INSIGHTS FROM A FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR

Since the federal prosecutors handling the Vick case won't be conducting many (or any) Poindexter-style press briefings, the closest thing we'll ever get to the thought processes of the federal prosecutors in this case will be via the insights of a former federal prosecutor.

Attorney Marc Garber of The Garber Law Firm, with offices in Atlanta and Marietta, Georgia, worked for eight years as a federal prosecutor in New Jersey and Nevada. He agreed to provide on-the-record observations regarding the Vick case, based on Garber's experiences working up and trying federal criminal cases on behalf of the United States of America.

As an initial matter, Garber believes that the mere existence of an indictment is the product of extensive work by prosecutors to marshal evidence that puts Vick in the places where they allege that he was, doing the things he allegedly did. That evidence, Garber believes, goes beyond the four unnamed cooperating witnesses mentioned in the indictment.

"If I had Vick's case," he said, "the testimony of four cooperators would be enough to prompt a search, but not an indictment. To pull the trigger on an indictment, I'd need documentary evidence that corroborates what the cooperators said.

"I'd start with Vick's credit-card bills to see where he's buying things and when. I'd check airline tickets or other evidence of travel to see when he was in Virginia. I'd check cell phone information. I'd check emails. Whatever kind of documented communication or evidence of travel or location you can imagine, that's what I'd want.

"There's no way, if you're a federal prosecutor, you pull the trigger on this case without [extensive] documents that let you plot out a time-line -- in multiple colors on a huge board that sits in front of the jury as you bury Vick witness by witness and document by document -- putting him at the dog fights on his property."

It all makes a lot of sense. As I previously explained, the feds aren't in this case to win an indictment and then lose a trial. They took on this fight because prosecutors believe that they have the proof to secure a conviction of great proportions.

Interestingly, Garber thinks that the prosecution ultimately will focus less on the dog fighting and more on the gambling.

"This case is not so much about animal abuse, though that's the hook that gets the jury impassioned," Garber said. "This case from the Justice Department's perspective is about an illegal-gambling ring which, though the NFL remains silent on this point, is why Vick should be staring at an instant suspension."

 

[Hammerage]

Back to the topic at hand:INSIGHTS FROM A FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTORSince the federal prosecutors handling the Vick case won't be conducting many (or any) Poindexter-style press briefings, the closest thing we'll ever get to the thought processes of the federal prosecutors in this case will be via the insights of a former federal prosecutor.Attorney Marc Garber of The Garber Law Firm, with offices in Atlanta and Marietta, Georgia, worked for eight years as a federal prosecutor in New Jersey and Nevada. He agreed to provide on-the-record observations regarding the Vick case, based on Garber's experiences working up and trying federal criminal cases on behalf of the United States of America.As an initial matter, Garber believes that the mere existence of an indictment is the product of extensive work by prosecutors to marshal evidence that puts Vick in the places where they allege that he was, doing the things he allegedly did. That evidence, Garber believes, goes beyond the four unnamed cooperating witnesses mentioned in the indictment."If I had Vick's case," he said, "the testimony of four cooperators would be enough to prompt a search, but not an indictment. To pull the trigger on an indictment, I'd need documentary evidence that corroborates what the cooperators said. "I'd start with Vick's credit-card bills to see where he's buying things and when. I'd check airline tickets or other evidence of travel to see when he was in Virginia. I'd check cell phone information. I'd check emails. Whatever kind of documented communication or evidence of travel or location you can imagine, that's what I'd want."There's no way, if you're a federal prosecutor, you pull the trigger on this case without [extensive] documents that let you plot out a time-line -- in multiple colors on a huge board that sits in front of the jury as you bury Vick witness by witness and document by document -- putting him at the dog fights on his property."It all makes a lot of sense. As I previously explained, the feds aren't in this case to win an indictment and then lose a trial. They took on this fight because prosecutors believe that they have the proof to secure a conviction of great proportions.Interestingly, Garber thinks that the prosecution ultimately will focus less on the dog fighting and more on the gambling."This case is not so much about animal abuse, though that's the hook that gets the jury impassioned," Garber said. "This case from the Justice Department's perspective is about an illegal-gambling ring which, though the NFL remains silent on this point, is why Vick should be staring at an instant suspension."

I bet they probably have more than eye witness testimony. SOMEBODY at these events had to be dumb enough to video tape the goings ons or take cell phone pics. If Vick was really up front in these things wouldn't be suprised at all if there was some very hard evidence.

 

[j3r3m3y]

Going to be some hurting fantasy teams out there now.

Shouldn't be - this has been on the horizon for a while- even before the indictment it smelled.

Some of us play in dynasties and are now stuck playing Rex Grossman.Have some compassion for others.

I have no compassion for those with so little sense they hitched their trailer to Vick.One of the things that separate the men from the boys.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Where does it say that the CBA only addresses repeat offenses?

Last I checked, Goodell can act any time he determined that there was conduct detrimental to the NFL.

This was covered in the Vick Indicted?!? thread. IIRC, Maurile posted a link to the policy.Here is the LINK to what I believe is the old Criminal Personal Conduct Policy.

Here is a SUMMARY of the charges.

I posted other articles explaining that the policy as written distinuighed in first time and repeat offenders with the main difference being that first time offenders had to have plead to or been found guilty of criminal charges before they were suspended.

As I've mentioned many times, there are several other areas within the NFL code of ethics and conduct that they could try to enforce, more noticable conduct unbecoming the league. I wonder if that one is harder to prove or if that also may involve someone being convicted of something (but again I don't have the complete language to look at).

That's the other thing we don't know for sure. Some of the CBA policies may only be summary statements and not the full text of the rules, so there may be provisions and legalise that we are not privy to.

I don't know the exact wording of the new policy as I haven't read what I am certain is the new policy with my own eyes. But I will say that Mike Florio seems pretty convinced that the new policy says that GENERALLY first time offenses must have a conviction or guilty plea before penalties are handed out. Saying that it MUST and saying that it GENERALLY MUST are two hugely different policies.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

Going to be some hurting fantasy teams out there now.

Shouldn't be - this has been on the horizon for a while- even before the indictment it smelled.

Some of us play in dynasties and are now stuck playing Rex Grossman.Have some compassion for others.

Your vick schtick has gone so far beyond tiresome, its embarrassing. Just stop.

 

[Pipes]

Killing a dog is much worse than beating your pregnant wife.

There is no worse, both people should be shot in the head an equal amount of times.

:( Why do some people assume the Vick bashers are defending the wife beaters? Pretty big leap.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Going to be some hurting fantasy teams out there now.

Shouldn't be - this has been on the horizon for a while- even before the indictment it smelled.

Some of us play in dynasties and are now stuck playing Rex Grossman.Have some compassion for others.

I have no compassion for those with so little sense they hitched their trailer to Vick.One of the things that separate the men from the boys.

Tell me again what part of playing a pretend football game with numbers separates men from boys.

 

[zadok]

Going to be some hurting fantasy teams out there now.

Shouldn't be - this has been on the horizon for a while- even before the indictment it smelled.

Some of us play in dynasties and are now stuck playing Rex Grossman.Have some compassion for others.

Your vick schtick has gone so far beyond tiresome, its embarrassing. Just stop.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

so what is Vick's dynasty value now?if someone offered you one of these QBs: Kolb/Beck/Stanton, would you take it LOL?

Vick straight up for Pacman ?

Believe it or not, I actually have both these guys one one of my dynasty teams.

 

[JAA]

If Vick is found innocent of these charges, where would this leave the NFL, it commish, and HIS practices on policy.

This whole thing is ridiculous. Our country was founded on innocent until proven guity, not guilty until proven innocent.

 

[j3r3m3y]

Going to be some hurting fantasy teams out there now.

Shouldn't be - this has been on the horizon for a while- even before the indictment it smelled.

Some of us play in dynasties and are now stuck playing Rex Grossman.Have some compassion for others.

I have no compassion for those with so little sense they hitched their trailer to Vick.One of the things that separate the men from the boys.

Tell me again what part of playing a pretend football game with numbers separates men from boys.

It is a figure of speech. I will try and use small words so as not to further confuse you. It is a way to separate those who pay attention and understand this hobby of ours from those who are just contributing to the prize pool year after year.

 

[j3r3m3y]

If Vick is found innocent of these charges, where would this leave the NFL, it commish, and HIS practices on policy.

It would leave him in very good shape. There are plenty of jobs that would force a person to take a leave of absence due to the distraction and public perception until things worked themselves out.

This whole thing is ridiculous. Our country was founded on innocent until proven guity, not guilty until proven innocent.

If he were sentenced by the government without a trial you might have a valid point. The NFL is not saying "Vick you are guilty." They are saying "Why don't you take some time off in order to deal with some personal issues." It also benefits the league as it keeps the distraction and media circus that surely would ensue away from the rest of the team. If he is found not guilty he will be welcomed back to the team, if he is convicted the league has been protected from negative press. It really is the right thing for all concerned.Also, if I was facing a trial that could land me in the slammer for 10 years, I might want some time off to make sure I can give it my undivided attention.

 

[Loomba]

If Vick is found innocent of these charges, where would this leave the NFL, it commish, and HIS practices on policy.This whole thing is ridiculous. Our country was founded on innocent until proven guity, not guilty until proven innocent.

You are absolutely correct. However, I think the difference here is that "innocent until proven guilty" applies to a court of law. The NFL is not a court of law. It is a business that needs to take actions in this instance to protect its franchise and goodwill.If you ran a business, say a daycare center (or a hardware store), and one of your employees was indicted on possession of child pornography charges (or theft and possession of stolen goods), what would you do? And consider, at least in the case of the daycare center, that it was publicly known. You would have to act to protect your business. Like almost any business, your employees, reputation and goodwill are your biggest assets. Anything that denigrates or devalues them has to be addressed quickly.The NFL had to act. The paid LOA that Vick is subject to right now is probably the fairest thing that could be done while trying to respect the legal process.

 

[JAA]

If Vick is found innocent of these charges, where would this leave the NFL, it commish, and HIS practices on policy.

It would leave him in very good shape. There are plenty of jobs that would force a person to take a leave of absence due to the distraction and public perception until things worked themselves out.

This whole thing is ridiculous. Our country was founded on innocent until proven guity, not guilty until proven innocent.

If he were sentenced by the government without a trial you might have a valid point. The NFL is not saying "Vick you are guilty." They are saying "Why don't you take some time off in order to deal with some personal issues." It also benefits the league as it keeps the distraction and media circus that surely would ensue away from the rest of the team. If he is found not guilty he will be welcomed back to the team, if he is convicted the league has been protected from negative press. It really is the right thing for all concerned.Also, if I was facing a trial that could land me in the slammer for 10 years, I might want some time off to make sure I can give it my undivided attention.

Your kidding right?If you were pulled over and an over zelous cop rings you for DUI and DWI while you were completely sober, would you be ok with your company taking a years worth of pay while "things got worked out"? You know ... cause it would be a huge distraction to the bottom line.

 

[corpcow]

Going to be some hurting fantasy teams out there now.

I just moved him to my practice squad in one dynasty... glad I grabbed Cutler and Croyle as well

 

[JAA]

If Vick is found innocent of these charges, where would this leave the NFL, it commish, and HIS practices on policy.This whole thing is ridiculous. Our country was founded on innocent until proven guity, not guilty until proven innocent.

You are absolutely correct. However, I think the difference here is that "innocent until proven guilty" applies to a court of law. The NFL is not a court of law. It is a business that needs to take actions in this instance to protect its franchise and goodwill.If you ran a business, say a daycare center (or a hardware store), and one of your employees was indicted on possession of child pornography charges (or theft and possession of stolen goods), what would you do? And consider, at least in the case of the daycare center, that it was publicly known. You would have to act to protect your business. Like almost any business, your employees, reputation and goodwill are your biggest assets. Anything that denigrates or devalues them has to be addressed quickly.The NFL had to act. The paid LOA that Vick is subject to right now is probably the fairest thing that could be done while trying to respect the legal process.

You make a good point, though I dont think it is apples to apples comparing day care/child porn to Vick/Dog fighting. Dog fighting doesnt effect Vick to do his job, nor is it seen in the same light and child pornography.

 

[Loomba]

My point wasn't to try and find other crimes on par with dog fighting. For some people it evokes a very emotional response and would rank very high on their list of heinous acts. Hopefully not higher than child abuse or violent crimes to people, but I'll bet not very far behind.

You could take the hardward store example and cross it with the child pornographer (being a child pornographer shouldn't affect your ability to work in a hardware store) or take the daycare example and cross it with the thief (I'll bet some thiefs are very good parents). I think you get the same results (i.e. the business owner would need to act to protect his business notwithstanding the person was not yet found guilty of the crime).

For Vick's sake, I hope this is all a bunch of hooey and he did not commit any crimes and comes out of this vindicated. I think the odds of that happenning are remote given the allegations and alleged supporting evidence etc.

We'll see.

 

[Family Matters]

If Vick is found innocent of these charges, where would this leave the NFL, it commish, and HIS practices on policy.This whole thing is ridiculous. Our country was founded on innocent until proven guity, not guilty until proven innocent.

I think the difference is that the NFL is an entertainment/sports business and is run by a different set of rules. Understand that there would be no NFL as we know it today without the public's interest/trust and the sponsorship of corproate America. Therefore, they play by a different set of rules. Trust me the players benefit by these rules but along with the privledge comes higher and different expectations that you find in the averege person's job. So the rules you and I are held accountable to are in fact different than these highly paid athletes and entertainers. Comparing them to us is an exercise in futility.As for the criminal charges, don't mix up his job expectations with the rights of due process. They seperate entities and have differning objectives. To date, only the expectations of being an athlete and entertainer have benn addressed. His due process as it relates to any criminal activity is forthcoming.

 

[zoonation]

Made an offer to a guy in my keeper league who has Vick and Culpepper as his kept QB's. His first pick in the draft is not until late 2nd round. We talked around when the indictment came out and he said he was not worried. Now maybe he will? He basically has NO shot of getting a starting QB by his draft pick so he has to make a move. I made him an offer: McGahee and Eli for Steven Jackson and Vick. Seem fair? Would give me a great 1-2 punch at RB with Larry Johnson and Steven Jackson plus TO and Chad Johnson as my WR. I also have Ben Rothliesberger and LenDale White as my other keepers.

You should be ashamed of yourself for this post. Try to live up to your member # in the future. TIA.

 

[Stealthycat]

think of the NFL as a no-fault state ....... the owners can fire you at anytime they want, its their "business" ie NFL team.

players like Vick need to understand its a privaledge to work/play in the NFL, its give and take, and Vick took too much for granted and it bit him in the ### and I for one have no sorry feeling for him at all

fire him, let Joey run the show, trade for a QB with integrity ..... Blank needs to do this for the Team

 

[zoonation]

If Vick is found innocent of these charges, where would this leave the NFL, it commish, and HIS practices on policy.

This whole thing is ridiculous. Our country was founded on innocent until proven guity, not guilty until proven innocent.

You are absolutely correct. However, I think the difference here is that "innocent until proven guilty" applies to a court of law. The NFL is not a court of law. It is a business that needs to take actions in this instance to protect its franchise and goodwill.If you ran a business, say a daycare center (or a hardware store), and one of your employees was indicted on possession of child pornography charges (or theft and possession of stolen goods), what would you do? And consider, at least in the case of the daycare center, that it was publicly known. You would have to act to protect your business. Like almost any business, your employees, reputation and goodwill are your biggest assets. Anything that denigrates or devalues them has to be addressed quickly.

The NFL had to act. The paid LOA that Vick is subject to right now is probably the fairest thing that could be done while trying to respect the legal process.

You make a good point, though I dont think it is apples to apples comparing day care/child porn to Vick/Dog fighting. Dog fighting doesnt effect Vick to do his job, nor is it seen in the same light and child pornography.

if you can't see why Vick shouldn't be playing football, I don't know what to tell you. He will get his day in court. He is innocent until proiven guilty.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

You make a good point, though I dont think it is apples to apples comparing day care/child porn to Vick/Dog fighting. Dog fighting doesnt effect Vick to do his job

Yes it does. Vick's job is to put sell tickets for the Atlanta Falcons. It is very clear that his ability to do his job has been greatly diminished as a result of these allegations.

 

[mad sweeney]

Going to be some hurting fantasy teams out there now.

Shouldn't be - this has been on the horizon for a while- even before the indictment it smelled.

Some of us play in dynasties and are now stuck playing Rex Grossman.Have some compassion for others.

Your vick schtick has gone so far beyond tiresome, its embarrassing. Just stop.

Now this to me, seems like a simple attempt at humor. More a self deprecating poke at his own team and a staba t Grossman rather than any pro-Vick shtick. I think he pretty much gave that up.

 

[tomarken]

If Vick is found innocent of these charges, where would this leave the NFL, it commish, and HIS practices on policy.

It would leave him in very good shape. There are plenty of jobs that would force a person to take a leave of absence due to the distraction and public perception until things worked themselves out.

This whole thing is ridiculous. Our country was founded on innocent until proven guity, not guilty until proven innocent.

If he were sentenced by the government without a trial you might have a valid point. The NFL is not saying "Vick you are guilty." They are saying "Why don't you take some time off in order to deal with some personal issues." It also benefits the league as it keeps the distraction and media circus that surely would ensue away from the rest of the team. If he is found not guilty he will be welcomed back to the team, if he is convicted the league has been protected from negative press. It really is the right thing for all concerned.Also, if I was facing a trial that could land me in the slammer for 10 years, I might want some time off to make sure I can give it my undivided attention.

Your kidding right?If you were pulled over and an over zelous cop rings you for DUI and DWI while you were completely sober, would you be ok with your company taking a years worth of pay while "things got worked out"? You know ... cause it would be a huge distraction to the bottom line.

I don't see how this even remotely relates. Unless the Federal government is "an over zealous cop", owning property where dogfighting occurs is "driving while sober", and a PAID leave of absence for an undetermined amount of time is "your company taking a years worth of pay". In that case it makes perfect sense.

 

[j3r3m3y]

If Vick is found innocent of these charges, where would this leave the NFL, it commish, and HIS practices on policy.

It would leave him in very good shape. There are plenty of jobs that would force a person to take a leave of absence due to the distraction and public perception until things worked themselves out.

This whole thing is ridiculous. Our country was founded on innocent until proven guity, not guilty until proven innocent.

If he were sentenced by the government without a trial you might have a valid point. The NFL is not saying "Vick you are guilty." They are saying "Why don't you take some time off in order to deal with some personal issues." It also benefits the league as it keeps the distraction and media circus that surely would ensue away from the rest of the team. If he is found not guilty he will be welcomed back to the team, if he is convicted the league has been protected from negative press. It really is the right thing for all concerned.Also, if I was facing a trial that could land me in the slammer for 10 years, I might want some time off to make sure I can give it my undivided attention.

Your kidding right?If you were pulled over and an over zelous cop rings you for DUI and DWI while you were completely sober, would you be ok with your company taking a years worth of pay while "things got worked out"? You know ... cause it would be a huge distraction to the bottom line.

I would not be facing 10 years of jail for a DWI/DUI.It is a paid leave of absence.Your reading comprehension is horrible.As is your logic.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

You make a good point, though I dont think it is apples to apples comparing day care/child porn to Vick/Dog fighting. Dog fighting doesnt effect Vick to do his job

Yes it does. Vick's job is to put sell tickets for the Atlanta Falcons. It is very clear that his ability to do his job has been greatly diminished as a result of these allegations.

You honestly think there would be a decrease in ticket sales for games which Vick is a part of? I would bet the opposite. It would be similar to a car crash...people can not look away. It would not be good attention for the NFL, but the ticket sales would not suffer. As well, for the most part, the people who are very adamant/picketing about the dog fighting acts are people who would normally not buy NFL tickets anyways. Not saying that dog-fighting is ok by any means, but the average NFL fan would not boycott an NFL game or not get Falcon season tickets because of a dog fighting charge against Vick.The NFL is not ordering Vick to take a LOA to save the Atlanta Falcon ticket sales revenue stream, it's to put the NFL in the proper light as a whole (i.e. TV, advertising, etc.)

 

[j3r3m3y]

You make a good point, though I dont think it is apples to apples comparing day care/child porn to Vick/Dog fighting. Dog fighting doesnt effect Vick to do his job

Yes it does. Vick's job is to put sell tickets for the Atlanta Falcons. It is very clear that his ability to do his job has been greatly diminished as a result of these allegations.

You honestly think there would be a decrease in ticket sales for games which Vick is a part of? I would bet the opposite. It would be similar to a car crash...people can not look away. It would not be good attention for the NFL, but the ticket sales would not suffer. As well, for the most part, the people who are very adamant/picketing about the dog fighting acts are people who would normally not buy NFL tickets anyways. Not saying that dog-fighting is ok by any means, but the average NFL fan would not boycott an NFL game or not get Falcon season tickets because of a dog fighting charge against Vick.

But plenty of people would at least threaten to boycott the sponsors of the NFL and the TV networks that broadcast the games. Ticket sales are a drop in the bucket when it comes to revenue.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

You make a good point, though I dont think it is apples to apples comparing day care/child porn to Vick/Dog fighting. Dog fighting doesnt effect Vick to do his job

Yes it does. Vick's job is to put sell tickets for the Atlanta Falcons. It is very clear that his ability to do his job has been greatly diminished as a result of these allegations.

You honestly think there would be a decrease in ticket sales for games which Vick is a part of? I would bet the opposite. It would be similar to a car crash...people can not look away. It would not be good attention for the NFL, but the ticket sales would not suffer. As well, for the most part, the people who are very adamant/picketing about the dog fighting acts are people who would normally not buy NFL tickets anyways. Not saying that dog-fighting is ok by any means, but the average NFL fan would not boycott an NFL game or not get Falcon season tickets because of a dog fighting charge against Vick.

But plenty of people would at least threaten to boycott the sponsors of the NFL and the TV networks that broadcast the games. Ticket sales are a drop in the bucket when it comes to revenue.

See editted post above.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

Going to be some hurting fantasy teams out there now.

Shouldn't be - this has been on the horizon for a while- even before the indictment it smelled.

Some of us play in dynasties and are now stuck playing Rex Grossman.Have some compassion for others.

Your vick schtick has gone so far beyond tiresome, its embarrassing. Just stop.

Now this to me, seems like a simple attempt at humor. More a self deprecating poke at his own team and a staba t Grossman rather than any pro-Vick shtick. I think he pretty much gave that up.

He's gone way to far to start playing the "self-deprecating humor" card now. From someone else, it might be funny, but not in this case.