Teams will always gamble on natural talent. I don't think there is anyone in the NFL that had the natural talent of Vick when he played. Sure he has been out of the league for a few years, but I am willing to bet he's been working out like a mad man in prison just waiting for his chance to prove he can still play. And I think there is zero question that he will get that chance.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Will Vick get blackballed from the NFL? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Hoss_Cartwright
- Start date
Phurfur
Footballguy
It is hard to make a point when you make up the facts.You guys are clearly missing the point he was trying to make.You don't have a clue if the majority of PETA members are practicing Christians. You have no business making this statement without proof. Practicing Christians are more concerned about your soul that your dog.Did I say that? Sorry you took it that way. Clearly I was suggesting not forgiving a person and practicing Christianity would be the hypocrisy. In no way do I support animal torture. You really need to tighten up your analyses.This is just about the dumbest thing I have ever seen. Protesting animal torture is hypocritical?twitch said:
Adebisi
Footballguy
Many people believe in forgiveness, for reasons religious or otherwise. Many of those same people will also be protesting Vick playing in the NFL again because of what he's done. There is hypocrisy in this.Better?It is hard to make a point when you make up the facts.You guys are clearly missing the point he was trying to make.You don't have a clue if the majority of PETA members are practicing Christians. You have no business making this statement without proof. Practicing Christians are more concerned about your soul that your dog.Did I say that? Sorry you took it that way. Clearly I was suggesting not forgiving a person and practicing Christianity would be the hypocrisy. In no way do I support animal torture. You really need to tighten up your analyses.This is just about the dumbest thing I have ever seen. Protesting animal torture is hypocritical?twitch said:
Phurfur
Footballguy
Much better! Sorry to be a pain but I am sick of people (especially politicians) making things up and presenting them as facts.Many people believe in forgiveness, for reasons religious or otherwise. Many of those same people will also be protesting Vick playing in the NFL again because of what he's done. There is hypocrisy in this.Better?It is hard to make a point when you make up the facts.You guys are clearly missing the point he was trying to make.You don't have a clue if the majority of PETA members are practicing Christians. You have no business making this statement without proof. Practicing Christians are more concerned about your soul that your dog.Did I say that? Sorry you took it that way. Clearly I was suggesting not forgiving a person and practicing Christianity would be the hypocrisy. In no way do I support animal torture. You really need to tighten up your analyses.This is just about the dumbest thing I have ever seen. Protesting animal torture is hypocritical?twitch said:
Chicago Hooligan
Footballguy
He also had a positive test for weed though I doubt that will get much coverage.
twitch
Footballguy
Wow, holy snowballs rolling out of control. Didnt mean to present opinions as 'facts'. Seem a fairly common sensical statement to make. Around 80% (give or take) of the population is Christian. Therefore, a large percentage of any particular group that may possibly picket would be made up of Christians. Not hammering Christians, Im one myself. But I'll withdraw the assumption. Though again, logic tells me its fairly safe to make. But here's a link to support the general notion. Not that anyone needs it.
Im actually a dog lover myself.
But Id agree with someone earlier that said the NFL would be a better league with Mike Vick in it, because it would imo be a more interesting league. He's one of the most dynamic players in league history. And who knows how or if he'll come back. But many, many people will be interested to see what happens.
Im actually a dog lover myself.
But Id agree with someone earlier that said the NFL would be a better league with Mike Vick in it, because it would imo be a more interesting league. He's one of the most dynamic players in league history. And who knows how or if he'll come back. But many, many people will be interested to see what happens.
Couch Potato
Footballguy
I think it would be fitting if he ended up in Cleveland. Hellooooo Dawg Pound.
cphk96
Footballguy
I believe that Vick will not be blackballed. He have a hard time getting a team to look at him.
Nobody will look at him until ATL cuts him, teams will not be able to afford him.
I think the first thing he should do when he gets released is to hire a personal PR team.
I think teams will require something along the lines of a Combine for Vick to partcipate,
to see if he still has an athletic ability.
Nobody will look at him until ATL cuts him, teams will not be able to afford him.
I think the first thing he should do when he gets released is to hire a personal PR team.
I think teams will require something along the lines of a Combine for Vick to partcipate,
to see if he still has an athletic ability.
There is more than the NFL for him. He files for bankruptcy and has to start from square one. Thousands if not millions of Americans find themselves in the same predicament. But because he used to be an NFL star he is not capable of doing anything else? It sucks but stuff happens and it happened to him. If an NFL team really wanted to sign him, so be it. But I dont think he has any right to play in the NFL more than any other guy at this point. Go play in CFL or arena if football is all you have. Coach high school or be an assistant in college. Be a social worker, something anything, but if the NFL doesnt want him that's fine. He's not entitled to it.What if he was smart enough to never get himself in this situation and was cut from the Falcons after a horrendous season and was never able to sign on to another team again. He'd find work sure enough, that's what normal people have to do.
Last edited by a moderator:
fatness
Footballguy
Yenrub
Footballguy
I didn't think the CFL would let him play there because of his felony
hahhahahhaha I didn't really read down but this was great already, and true.
Rockchild
Footballguy
I could see the league give him a suspension of a season with the caveat of keeping clean for that year before allowing him to be eligible for play again. Didn't they do something similar with Chris Henry? At that point I could see some team sign him for a one year league minimum contract and see how things work out.
Tanner9919
Footballguy
the racism claims, if they happen, will come from Steven A Smith , among others..I just hope Sharpton doesn't get involved as he always does..I don't think Vick is being blackballed as much as I think teams are afraid of the negative PR surrounding him..
for the most part, the NFL is most forgiving if you're a great athlete/star player like Vick was..
but I'm just not sure any team is ready, or will be ready ,to deal with any kind of protests, or negative press..
Hoss_Cartwright
Footballguy
Why should the league suspend him? Hasn't he served his time? Also, the time served didn't fit the crime IMO.
Carver
Footballguy
Zoomanji
Footballguy
Why should the league suspend him? Because they can and have set a precedent of suspending players in trouble with the law Hasn't he served his time? Mandated by federal law but he still may be prosecuted by the state and also possibly have a suspension by his employer Also, the time served didn't fit the crime IMO. We can agree to disagree here. You have very little support on this comment but you can keep saying it.
Hoss_Cartwright
Footballguy
When you consider what people have done to other humans and served less time, yes, the punishment didn't fit the crime. Hey, I'm a dog lover and have always owned one, but come on now, look at what people do and don't serve time for it. How long has Vick served? Maybe a few months in prison would have sufficed.That sentence was completely ridiculous.
Last edited by a moderator:
bonesman
Footballguy
I think the systematic day in and day out torture he subjected these animals to, for who knows how long, is probably worse that smacking your woman up in a drunkin fit of rage in a heated argument.I hope someone gives him a chance to compete for a job though and I wouldn't root for my team any less if they signed him.
I agree that Vick has already served more than enough time for what he did. Part of the problem is that Vick basically took the fall for what a large group of people were doing; dog fighting is commonplace in the south and in the black community. You had people, like Clinton Portis, who joked after it first happened saying that it was no big deal and happens all the time. Of course, he quickly retracted that comment, but it spoke just how common and socially accpetable this is among certain groups of people.Does this make it right, no! But, it does give some insight into the pysche behind why Vick did what he did. The problem with Vick is that his dumb ### put everything in his name and fronted a lot of money for the operation. Where were his advisors to tell him to have nothing in his name?When you consider what people have done to other humans and served less time, yes, the punishment didn't fit the crime. Hey, I'm a dog lover and have always owned one, but come on now, look at what people do and don't serve time for it. How long has Vick served? Maybe a few months in prison would have sufficed.That sentence was completely ridiculous.
Also, it is ironic that hunting is socially acceptable, while dog fighting is not. I'm sure that will lit a fire under many hunting enthusist, but it's the truth.
Phurfur
Footballguy
WOW!!!!!!! You just don't get it do you?I agree that Vick has already served more than enough time for what he did. Part of the problem is that Vick basically took the fall for what a large group of people were doing; dog fighting is commonplace in the south and in the black community. You had people, like Clinton Portis, who joked after it first happened saying that it was no big deal and happens all the time. Of course, he quickly retracted that comment, but it spoke just how common and socially accpetable this is among certain groups of people.Does this make it right, no! But, it does give some insight into the pysche behind why Vick did what he did. The problem with Vick is that his dumb ### put everything in his name and fronted a lot of money for the operation. Where were his advisors to tell him to have nothing in his name?When you consider what people have done to other humans and served less time, yes, the punishment didn't fit the crime. Hey, I'm a dog lover and have always owned one, but come on now, look at what people do and don't serve time for it. How long has Vick served? Maybe a few months in prison would have sufficed.That sentence was completely ridiculous.
Also, it is ironic that hunting is socially acceptable, while dog fighting is not. I'm sure that will lit a fire under many hunting enthusist, but it's the truth.
fatness
Footballguy
I don't.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
You keep saying that, but he actually got a lighter sentence than the max sentencing under the guildelines for his crime(s) - albeit only slightly below the max. There's alot more to it that just the cruely towards the dogs - there's illegal gambling for one thing (a fact the NFL may find disturbing). I'm pretty sure you wouldn't want some one starting up a dog fighting operation in your neighborhood.
Carver
Footballguy
Maybe you misunderstood.... I agree with you. I don’t think he deserved that kind of prison term. I know it isn’t a popular sentiment, but dogs are just dogs to me. Some are bred to hunt, others are bred to race or herd sheep. Some dogs (such as mine) make for wonderful loving companions... but some dogs :gulp: are in fact bred to fight in pit contests. It doesn’t mean that I think it is OK (it is against the law), or the method in which he and his cronies dispatched of the weak links in their stock of animals any less despicable... I just think that people tend to (too often) value a dogs life a little too close to that of a human. To me that is justWhen you consider what people have done to other humans and served less time, yes, the punishment didn't fit the crime. Hey, I'm a dog lover and have always owned one, but come on now, look at what people do and don't serve time for it. How long has Vick served? Maybe a few months in prison would have sufficed.
Last edited by a moderator:
Traders2001
Footballguy
No one wants Vick until the Falcons release him , then most teams needing a Qb qill take a look at him.
It s not him they dont want its is big contract.
It s not him they dont want its is big contract.
GregR_2
Footballguy
I'm not sure that it will help him. It really won't be any different than having him in at QB, will it? My understanding is that the wildcat is based off of having in a normal personnel package and then moving your QB out to WR. The QB is normally bigger than the CB who is stuck out there defending, and that gives you a blocking advantage when you run the other WR on a reverse. The defense has to shift over to compensate and that opens up additional holes for the RB to run it up the middle.If you put Vick at QB in a wildcat, is that really any different than having him doing QB draws from a shotgun formation like he's done throughout his career? You haven't done anything to create that personnel mismatch on the outside that the wildcat is made to exploit.
No, enlighten me.Phurfur said:WOW!!!!!!! You just don't get it do you?Bill S said:I agree that Vick has already served more than enough time for what he did. Part of the problem is that Vick basically took the fall for what a large group of people were doing; dog fighting is commonplace in the south and in the black community. You had people, like Clinton Portis, who joked after it first happened saying that it was no big deal and happens all the time. Of course, he quickly retracted that comment, but it spoke just how common and socially accpetable this is among certain groups of people.Does this make it right, no! But, it does give some insight into the pysche behind why Vick did what he did. The problem with Vick is that his dumb ### put everything in his name and fronted a lot of money for the operation. Where were his advisors to tell him to have nothing in his name?When you consider what people have done to other humans and served less time, yes, the punishment didn't fit the crime. Hey, I'm a dog lover and have always owned one, but come on now, look at what people do and don't serve time for it. How long has Vick served? Maybe a few months in prison would have sufficed.
Also, it is ironic that hunting is socially acceptable, while dog fighting is not. I'm sure that will lit a fire under many hunting enthusist, but it's the truth.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
It had more to do with the gambling right? I don't really care for Vick. Let him work a real job if he can find one. He blew his opportunity.That sentence was completely ridiculous.
Phurfur
Footballguy
I don't have the time.No, enlighten me.Phurfur said:WOW!!!!!!! You just don't get it do you?Bill S said:I agree that Vick has already served more than enough time for what he did. Part of the problem is that Vick basically took the fall for what a large group of people were doing; dog fighting is commonplace in the south and in the black community. You had people, like Clinton Portis, who joked after it first happened saying that it was no big deal and happens all the time. Of course, he quickly retracted that comment, but it spoke just how common and socially accpetable this is among certain groups of people.Does this make it right, no! But, it does give some insight into the pysche behind why Vick did what he did. The problem with Vick is that his dumb ### put everything in his name and fronted a lot of money for the operation. Where were his advisors to tell him to have nothing in his name?When you consider what people have done to other humans and served less time, yes, the punishment didn't fit the crime. Hey, I'm a dog lover and have always owned one, but come on now, look at what people do and don't serve time for it. How long has Vick served? Maybe a few months in prison would have sufficed.
Also, it is ironic that hunting is socially acceptable, while dog fighting is not. I'm sure that will lit a fire under many hunting enthusist, but it's the truth.
dparker713
Footballguy
I think most people are saying Vick would be replacing the back/receiver that takes the snap in the wildcat, not the QB. So if you want the QB to still be on the field he can be, but if you're really just looking for a blocking advantage on the outside, wouldnt you be better served with a TE, any TE?GregR said:
No, I think it is just a moral issue and that you realize that. So, we stand on opposite sides of the issue. Thanks for the enlightenment.I don't have the time.No, enlighten me.Phurfur said:WOW!!!!!!! You just don't get it do you?Bill S said:I agree that Vick has already served more than enough time for what he did. Part of the problem is that Vick basically took the fall for what a large group of people were doing; dog fighting is commonplace in the south and in the black community. You had people, like Clinton Portis, who joked after it first happened saying that it was no big deal and happens all the time. Of course, he quickly retracted that comment, but it spoke just how common and socially accpetable this is among certain groups of people.Does this make it right, no! But, it does give some insight into the pysche behind why Vick did what he did. The problem with Vick is that his dumb ### put everything in his name and fronted a lot of money for the operation. Where were his advisors to tell him to have nothing in his name?When you consider what people have done to other humans and served less time, yes, the punishment didn't fit the crime. Hey, I'm a dog lover and have always owned one, but come on now, look at what people do and don't serve time for it. How long has Vick served? Maybe a few months in prison would have sufficed.
Also, it is ironic that hunting is socially acceptable, while dog fighting is not. I'm sure that will lit a fire under many hunting enthusist, but it's the truth.
Phurfur
Footballguy
Yes, you are correct but it has to do with accountability too.No, I think it is just a moral issue and that you realize that. So, we stand on opposite sides of the issue. Thanks for the enlightenment.I don't have the time.No, enlighten me.Phurfur said:WOW!!!!!!! You just don't get it do you?Bill S said:I agree that Vick has already served more than enough time for what he did. Part of the problem is that Vick basically took the fall for what a large group of people were doing; dog fighting is commonplace in the south and in the black community. You had people, like Clinton Portis, who joked after it first happened saying that it was no big deal and happens all the time. Of course, he quickly retracted that comment, but it spoke just how common and socially accpetable this is among certain groups of people.Does this make it right, no! But, it does give some insight into the pysche behind why Vick did what he did. The problem with Vick is that his dumb ### put everything in his name and fronted a lot of money for the operation. Where were his advisors to tell him to have nothing in his name?When you consider what people have done to other humans and served less time, yes, the punishment didn't fit the crime. Hey, I'm a dog lover and have always owned one, but come on now, look at what people do and don't serve time for it. How long has Vick served? Maybe a few months in prison would have sufficed.
Also, it is ironic that hunting is socially acceptable, while dog fighting is not. I'm sure that will lit a fire under many hunting enthusist, but it's the truth.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chicago Hooligan
Footballguy
Not that this breaks down precisely over political lines, but I think it is interesting that a large portion of NFL fans, overall a pretty conservative demographic, will argue passionately to go easy on criminal players.
Turbo
Footballguy
It is my opinion that any team should explore this situation, with consideration to a possible destination. The population of the nation should disregard the insinuation that a man is guilty of incrimination based solely on his desperation. The team that without hesitation shows illumination with their evaluation will be rewarded with a cultivation of football talent for the duration.Sorry that's all the Jesse I could muster for this.I know it won't be about race, but Jesse and Al will say it is
notdarkyet
Footballguy
I lol'd.I think he will get a shot eventually. People want to stay away from the PR issues though, especially in a time when season ticket renewals are coming due.
loose circuits
Footballguy
was wondering the same thing. Is the purpose of the QB, really to run block out there?
I don't think that is accurate at all. I'd be willing to bet that NFL fans are as evenly divided as the general population with possibly a slight skew towards being more conservative.
DawgPoundNJ
Footballguy
Especially in this economic climate, owners have to protect their brands. Michael Vick will be looked at like any other business acqusition through a cost/benefit analysis. If owners deem that the talent and physical skills are still there, then the potential reward increases. If their focus groups deem the risk with negative press and protests outweigh the rewards, the team won't act.
Michael Vick doesn't "deserve" another chance. He has to earn his way back into the league just like anyone else.
Michael Vick doesn't "deserve" another chance. He has to earn his way back into the league just like anyone else.
Exactly, if a team crunches the numbers and determines that having Vick will bring in more revenue than he cost, then a team will do it. Vick will probably have to take a 1-year deal for the minimum, so I think someone will probably be willing to do it.The list of players who have received a 2nd chance (and sometimes 3rd, 4th, etc) chances in the NFL is quite long.Here are a few that come to mind:Adam "Pacman" JonesAntonio BryantDavid BostonMaurice ClarettRicky Williams
Tau837
Footballguy
How many of those guys were convicted felons when they got their second chances? How many got a second chance after 2-3 years out of the NFL?ETA: And note that none of them are QBs. QB is a position that is mentally challenging and also requires good timing. IMO it is harder to be away from the game for 2+ years and return successfully at QB than at other positions.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ricky Williams was out of the league for over 2 years and he failed many drug tests.Also, Vick is not a tradition QB by any means. His skills will come back faster than others as he can be thrust into a Slash role.
I don't think many people disagree. But he won't come back as a high priced game changer. He may get a chance as a role player. When the '09 season kicks off, it will be nearly 3 years since he's taken an NFL hit. And he may look good/great in training camp, but how will he hold up 6 games in? No one knows. Not many teams are going to take a high priced risk on that. I don't think you'll see him come back as someone the offense revolves around. And this all assumes his legal troubles will be behind him and he's allowed back for '09. Nothing is certain yet and that's why teams aren't lining up to make offers to the Falcons right now.
i don't even know who your WR's are, but i'm pretty sure mine blow yours away.:brag:
FavreCo
Footballguy
You would be wrong.Andre, Calvin, Jennings, Marshall, Royal and L. Robinson. All drafted via 14 team dynasty league.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
