Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Vick Indicted ! ?


Recommended Posts

Obviously a lot of the things i wrote were tongue in cheek.I stand by the stance that it was wrong for people to come out so strongly against him when up until today there was 0 credible evidence known to the public that linked him directly to the dogfighting.I have no problem changing my stance once CREDIBLE news comes out, but i wasn't about to tear down a person before hearing any real evidence.Yes it looks like my initial assumption was wrong, but that doesn't mean my initial stance of giving him the benefit of the doubt was.

Wow. This is the biggest load of chickenpoop I've read in a long while. For dozens of posts you defended Vick causing major flame wars and personally forcing threads to be locked. Now you're claiming that you were just kidding?!?!?!Were you also kidding about banning yourself from FBG if you were wrong, because I was looking forward to that.
:bag: Major Purple Helmet award to jerkymont.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 670
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

One thing that I don't think has been mentioned is Blank's interests outside the NFL. I'm sure the average FBG knows Blank owns Home Depot, but I don't think the average person on the street knows that. They probably will very soon, PETA and HSUS will make sure of that. If Blank doesn't do something about this you might see a publicity campaign to quit shopping there. I'm guessing Blank takes Home Depot a lot more seriously than his NFL team. There's only one stadium that the Falcons play in to protest in front of; there's a whole lot of Home Depots, all within a short drive for nearly any PETA member in the country.

Another aspect of this is that, as much as the cap hit will hurt, I would guess Falcons merchandise will not be selling too well as long as Vick is on the team. One more thing Blank has to take into consideration.

Regarding the NFLPA, I haven't heard them raise much of an issue with what Goodell has done so far. Maybe they have gotten enough feedback from the players that aren't criminals, and don't want to continue to stick up for guys that do this kind of stuff. Maybe they realize sticking up for Vick would be a publicity nightmare. Maybe they're trying to bank some political capital to use in their push to improve benefits for retired players. For a number of reasons, I don't think they are going to be backing Vick much regardless of what happens to him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really thought Vick was toast way back when the law enforcement wouldn’t use a search warrant due to some issues with it, which I think were pretty minor. They instead waited to get a new and revised search warrant before proceeding with the search. This told me that they had Vick by the balls and are all too well aware of the fact that everything will be scrutinized with a microscope by Vick’s multi-million dollar lawyer team. At that point, I felt it was just a matter of time before charges were filed. It was obvious then that they were proceeding with the investigation knowing that nothing can be done incorrectly or Vick will walk free in the end.

Haven’t read too much of the detail regarding the investigation, but my thought is that they have been following Vick and this case for years. Just building up evidence and testimony over the course of time. I usually have the gut feeling that the star is going to be set free in these cases, but I’m not getting that same feeling here. This is actually the first time my gut feeling is that Vick will be found guilty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Vick plays this season each appearance will be a three hour advertisement against the NFL. The league will literally suffer hundreds of millions of dollars of damage to its reputation. I question whether that will be allowed to happen. I see a statement coming fairly soon from the Falcons more or less along these lines: "The Atlanta Falcons abhor dog fighting and animal abuse. We also abhor persons speculating about the guilt or innocence of a young man as if that were sport. The dignity of our judicial process should deserve better. That said, it is clear that Mr. Vick (He wil no longer be called Michael by them) needs to devote himself fully to his pending legal matters. Doing so will not allow him to devote himself to the job of being our Quarterback this year. The Falcons support him in this decision and wish him well. When (unstated "if" and "yeah right") the matter is resolved the Falcons will discuss and redefine their future relationship with Mr. Vick. The Atlanta Falcons hope the future will include an exonerated Mr. Vick and that the process will run expeditiously."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leonard Little killed someone, he's still playing. As despicable as the dog fighting biz is, robbing a family of their mother is worse.

Agreed, he shouldn't be playing either. In fact, he should be in jail. The fact that he got busted for DUI AGAIN after killing someone while driving drunk is just unbelievable to me. But that doesn't mean that Vick should get off lighter for what he has done.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leonard Little killed someone, he's still playing. As despicable as the dog fighting biz is, robbing a family of their mother is worse.

Agreed, he shouldn't be playing either. In fact, he should be in jail. The fact that he got busted for DUI AGAIN after killing someone while driving drunk is just unbelievable to me. But that doesn't mean that Vick should get off lighter for what he has done.
:loco:
Link to post
Share on other sites

If Vick plays this season each appearance will be a three hour advertisement against the NFL. The league will literally suffer hundreds of millions of dollars of damage to its reputation. I question whether that will be allowed to happen. I see a statement coming fairly soon from the Falcons more or less along these lines: "The Atlanta Falcons abhor dog fighting and animal abuse. We also abhor persons speculating about the guilt or innocence of a young man as if that were sport. The dignity of our judicial process should deserve better. That said, it is clear that Mr. Vick (He wil no longer be called Michael by them) needs to devote himself fully to his pending legal matters. Doing so will not allow him to devote himself to the job of being our Quarterback this year. The Falcons support him in this decision and wish him well. When (unstated "if" and "yeah right") the matter is resolved the Falcons will discuss and redefine their future relationship with Mr. Vick. The Atlanta Falcons hope the future will include an exonerated Mr. Vick and that the process will run expeditiously."

:loco: This is what I see happening as well. Mike Vick's value in '07 may be less than his brother Marcus.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leonard Little killed someone, he's still playing. As despicable as the dog fighting biz is, robbing a family of their mother is worse.

Agreed, he shouldn't be playing either. In fact, he should be in jail. The fact that he got busted for DUI AGAIN after killing someone while driving drunk is just unbelievable to me. But that doesn't mean that Vick should get off lighter for what he has done.
No, he shouldnt get off and I dont think he will. I also dont think this trial will be done before the end of the upcoming season so I think Vick will play this year. I dont see the commish suspending him until found guilty and after the trial he wont need to suspend him cuz he'll be in jail.
Link to post
Share on other sites

If Vick plays this season each appearance will be a three hour advertisement against the NFL.

Not only that, but the opening NFL Network game this season is Colts @ Falcons. The NFL didn't have to pick that game to be on their network, but they did, and Mr. Vick is one of the reasons they picked that game (and they can't spin it otherwise IMO).
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to disagree with Dodds and Yudkin on this one. I don't think there's any way Vick is on the field when the season starts. The Commissioner has a lot of latitude in dealing out suspensions, he has repeatedly referred to the image of the game as his overriding principle, and this Vick mess is a major black eye to the league. He simply can't ignore this while waiting for an actual conviction. Remember, due process (innocent until proven guilty) is a legal concept, and the NFL is not bound by the same standards when suspending players.

I would rue the day that the NFL suspends someone for an extended period and then that player be cleared of wrongdoing or found not guilty in court. The lawsuit against them would be HUGE.From what I've been reading, there seem to be some differences in this case compared to other dog fighting cases including federal involvement, the amount of resources being allocated to it, how things have been handled, etc.Vick's attorneys could very well contend that he is receiving unfair treatment for being a famous athlete if indeed these types of cases typically are handled differently and have led to less severe outcomes.I clearly am not a lawyer and have no legal credentials, so take everything with a grain of salt.To also clarify, I am not supporting Vick at all but am only referencing what traditionally has been the wait and see approach that the league has shown in the past. I personally think Vick is not all sweet and innocent, but again it's not my place to try him. I know the new sherriff has said he does not want to wait on outcomes and wants to get involved sooner. We'll have to see what happens, I guess.
You have to consider that Not Guilty doesn't mean innocent. Merely the fact that an indictment has come down means that there is strong evidence, in the eyes of the courts, that the crime occured. This is before the legal spinning of a trial. At Trial, Vick can pay attorneys to beat the rap. It happens, a lot. But, innocence is a long way away. He may not go to jaill for it (I think he will), but there's no question as to what he was financing and participating in. Does the NFL want that man as one of their players? My read on the new commish is that he'll act, ir Arthur Blank doesn't first. The NFL doesn't meed a preponderance of the evidence, or to meet the burden of reasonable doubt. IT's a private corporation, with an out for personal conduct. This meets the standard.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Vick could be viewed under one color lense as a "first time offender". However, such term is usually used for things like DUI, bar fights, drug busts, etc. This indictment suggest that Vick has been engaged in dog fighting consistently for the last 6 years with multiple incidents cited.

Some crimes are too offensive to the mainstream to take a "wait and see" approach. If an NFL star was indicted on multiple counts of running a child pornography ring involving children under the age of 12, would Goodell take a "wait and see" approach?

Most likely outcome:

Blank "parks" Vick on the sidelines until the process plays out in the Court. NFL drops hammer upon any conviction.

Upon conviction Blank looks to negated Vick contract and sue for a return of some of the upfront bonus money -- NFL cuts Blank a break given challenge to bonus money with respect to salary cap ramifications.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Curious, his cousin, the tenant most discussed, Mr. Davon Boddie, is not mentioned in the indictment... :lmao:

That's what I was thinking also. Boddie was the target of the first federal search of the property I believe. I suppose that means he's one of the anonymous informants now?
I haven't put this under a microscope, but if I remember right. His cousin Boddie, was busted away from the property for drugs. He said he lived at Vicks, which they then searched and found the Dog fighting stuff. He may be the snitch getting out of his drug charges.
Excellent points. Is he the cooperating witness? Since Vick essentially threw him under the bus with the comments about not going there, and being taken advantage by family, this is very possible. "Mr. Boddie, you don't have the means to run this operation, but you're looking at 20 years in prison, but we'll cut it to five if you tell us who the money man is." Cut the head from the best, and this case, the beast is Mike Vick. Without his funds, his home, his involvement, probably none of this is taking place.
Link to post
Share on other sites

If Vick were to be released, the Falcons would have to eat a $6 million-plus cap hit for for 2007 and about $15 million for 2008.

They will lose alot more than that if they don't cut ties with Vick, empty seats and apparel left on the racks etc. People care a helluva lot more about dogs than they do criminal s.o.b.s. Slamming a dog to the ground over and over until it is dead. Sick just ####### sick.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Vick could be viewed under one color lense as a "first time offender". However, such term is usually used for things like DUI, bar fights, drug busts, etc. This indictment suggest that Vick has been engaged in dog fighting consistently for the last 6 years with multiple incidents cited.Some crimes are too offensive to the mainstream to take a "wait and see" approach. If an NFL star was indicted on multiple counts of running a child pornography ring involving children under the age of 12, would Goodell take a "wait and see" approach?Most likely outcome:Blank "parks" Vick on the sidelines until the process plays out in the Court. NFL drops hammer upon any conviction. Upon conviction Blank looks to negated Vick contract and sue for a return of some of the upfront bonus money -- NFL cuts Blank a break given challenge to bonus money with respect to salary cap ramifications.

I agree with this. I think any Vick sitting out before this all really plays out will come from the Falcons and not the NFL.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Upon conviction Blank looks to negated Vick contract and sue for a return of some of the upfront bonus money -- NFL cuts Blank a break given challenge to bonus money with respect to salary cap ramifications.

I don't think this will ever happen because it would just open a potential loop hole where other teams may look for similar treatment if they cut players that have been suspended. Buyer beware. If you sign a guy to a long term deal you have to know the character you are getting into bed with.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Upon conviction Blank looks to negated Vick contract and sue for a return of some of the upfront bonus money -- NFL cuts Blank a break given challenge to bonus money with respect to salary cap ramifications.

I don't think this will ever happen because it would just open a potential loop hole where other teams may look for similar treatment if they cut players that have been suspended. Buyer beware. If you sign a guy to a long term deal you have to know the character you are getting into bed with.
:thumbup:

I doubt very much the NFL is going to encorage teams to take risks on shady characters by giving them breaks when a player gets arrested.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gee, and look who recently picked a fight with Home Depot anyway ...

"In May of 2007 PETA asked The Home Depot to stop selling a notoriously inhumane product — glue trap. Glue traps are a pest-control device where animals get stuck to the board, often suffer for days before they finally succumb to starvation, dehydration, self-mutilation, and shock. Patches of skin, fur, or feathers are torn from their bodies as victims struggle frantically to escape the relentless adhesive. Many animals chew off their own limbs trying to free themselves, and others get their noses, mouths, or beaks stuck in the glue and suffocate. [10] Home Depot's response is, "While we respect the views of animal welfare organizations and their members, in no case should the interests of rats be placed above human health and safety considerations. For many consumers, glue traps provide a poison-free alternative to other pest control methods, and they ensure safety for humans and pets alike."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Orcasgirl/Home_Depot

Arthur Blank may be hearing more from them soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael Vick wasn't supposed to be indicted. Chris Mortensen of ESPN said so a couple of weeks ago and Chris is always right and we should believe everything he says. So this is all some kind of mistake.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that I don't think has been mentioned is Blank's interests outside the NFL. I'm sure the average FBG knows Blank owns Home Depot, but I don't think the average person on the street knows that. They probably will very soon, PETA and HSUS will make sure of that. If Blank doesn't do something about this you might see a publicity campaign to quit shopping there. I'm guessing Blank takes Home Depot a lot more seriously than his NFL team. There's only one stadium that the Falcons play in to protest in front of; there's a whole lot of Home Depots, all within a short drive for nearly any PETA member in the country.

I don't think that's realistic --- that this will somehow transfer to a loss of sales revenue at Home Depot. Many of the people upset about what Vick is charged with doing also dislike PETA. And most Home Depot (opr Lowes, or Walmart) customers don't stop to consider Michael Vick or PETA before going out to buy plumbing fixtures.
Link to post
Share on other sites

First time poster - and I have to say of all the boards discussing the Vick situation I think this has been the most above board discussion. Lots of good points on different aspects of the situation. While it is painfully obvious, there are several murky issues - with no clearly defined lines separating them. I see the four main issues as 1) rush to judgment; 2) Innocent until proven guilty; 3) What will/Can the NFL do; and, 4) what will/can the Falcons do.

1. Rush to judgment - I have gone back to read a few threads that have evolved over the last few months. There was plenty of back and forth as to Vick's guilt or innocence (sort of like ESPN). It looks like the pendulum has swung back in favor of those who believe Vick is guilty of something. But, I would caution to judge slowly. The indictment, as many have pointed out, is very serious. It is also very specific, and the Feds clearly have cooperating witnesses feeding them this story. Taken on its face, it is a very damning document. But, we have not heard Vick's side of the story. We also do not know anything about the credibility of the cooperating witnesses. There are always multiple sides to every story - form your judgments, but keep an open mind for a different version of facts.

2. Innocent until proven guilty - this has been the rallying cry of those who believe (or desperately want) Vick to be innocent. The problem is that standard has only one place - a criminal court of law. In a criminal case the government bears the burden of proving a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Nobody else has to meet that burden. Not a civil plaintiff, not an employer, not a sponsor, and certainly not the court of public opinion. Don't be fooled into thinking that simply because the government can not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, that someone is innocent.

3. What will/can the NFL do - many posters have pointed out the various clauses in collective bargaining agreement that would allow the NFL to impose punishment - personal conduct, gambling, etc. At the end of the day, Goodell and the NFL will act just like you or I - They will act in their own self-preservation. If public interests builds to the point that the NFL feels it is damaging the league, Vick will be gone. If the public outcry is muted, Vick will stick around. This will have nothing to do with Vick's actual guilt or innocense, but rather the verdict (and punishment) delivered by the court of public opinion. (See Don Imus). I am certain that Goodell will weigh the results of his own investigation with the likelihood of Vick's ultimate conviction, and with the financial consequences of not acting.

4. What will the Falcons do - they will be governed by the same principles. They will act when they feel it is in their best interests to act. Blank has more at stake than just the Falcons, but the team also has to consider the impact of having Vick on the team in short-term and long-term. If it will cost the team money and/or value Blank will cut his ties, otherwise he will ride it out.

The league and the Team can cut ties with Vick anytime they want - regardless of any language in the CBA or contract. The consequences of potential breaches of the CBA and/or player contract will be the subject of grievances or suits - but those are money damages (which can also be delayed ad infinitum). When the cost of keeping Vick exceeds the cost of cutting/suspending Vick the NFL and/or the Falcons will act.

We won't know the fallout until after the initial surge of publicity - we will see if advertisers and season ticket holders start putting real pressure on the league.

For the record, I am a former Falcon season-ticket holder (moved away from the area). I originally bought my season tickets the day the Falcon's drafted Vick. I also believe he is guilty of something here (if nothing else - bad judgment in picking friends), and is likely a big player in the dog-fighting world. If Blank or Goodell were to ask my advice, I would say they should cut bait as soon as practical. From the Falcon's perspective, they need to move on a quickly as possible to get a fresh start. This is probably going to be a lost season regardless - and I think it is clear that Vick is not the long-term solution at QB. From the NFL's perspective, they do not want the NBA to be known as the "Clean" league.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post Guapote. I actually didn't know that Blank owns the Home Depot, and that does add to the mess here.

Just to keep thinkgs factually straight -- Blank doesn't actually "own" Home Depot (he was one of the co-founders), and retired from their board of directors in 2001. While he no doubt still has much of his fortune in HD stock, he essentially has nothing to do with HD or its operations any longer.
Link to post
Share on other sites

As I mentioned earlier, this will be very interesting to see what the league does, if anything, for the Falcons. I suspect (still) that the LEAGUE will not act until the trial is COMPLETED. That leaves Atlanta as the ones that will have to make a call on this and the team iteself is in a terrible situation. As I see it, here are their options:

- Release him. This would cause them a $22 million salary cap hit in addition to a similar amount of prorated signing bonus that they would have to eat in real dollars. They likely would try to recoup that money after he was convicted or pled to a lesser charge, but for now they likely would have to take the salary cap hit. I am not sure if there are provisions in the CBA to allow for special exceptions and unusual circumstances, so I am not sure if the league could give the Falcons a get out of jail free card and grant them a salary cap exemption on the projected cap hit. Other teams that have been in similar situations would scream bloody murder. This would probably be the best P.R. move but not a great salary cap move. I'm not sure the Falcons would essentially "take one for the league."

- Suspend him with pay. That seems like the most likely way Vick would not play. Like I just mentioned, they could seek legal action AFTER his conviction to recoup the monies they paid out, but until then they would likely be stuck paying him. This could appease the people screaming for immediate disciplinary action.

- Bench him. But given they have $130 million long-term invested in Vick (at least on paper), that seems like a huge percentage of the salary cap wasted on a player that won't be playing. And I doubt the league could step in and award salary cap relief in this instance without special permission from the other owners and the NFLPA. IIRC, there are provisions on granting cap relief for players UNDER LEAGUE SUSPENSION, but for now Vick is not in that category.

- Play him. I've been listening to talk radio and tv last night and this morning and that seems to be the outcome that many are predicting, but I also see this one as a P.R. nightmare if that came to bear. It could turn into a 3-ring circus and could be detrimental to other players if protesters got rowdy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how you play him, Yudkin. Too much of a distraction and I bet he has lost the respect of a number of his teammates or at least confirmed what a tool he is in many of their eyes.

No way the NFL lets this circus stop in 8 cities this year.

It will be a rough year for the Falcons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

- Play him. I've been listening to talk radio and tv last night and this morning and that seems to be the outcome that many are predicting, but I also see this one as a P.R. nightmare if that came to bear. It could turn into a 3-ring circus and could be detrimental to other players if protesters got rowdy.

Also, how do his teammates react to all of this? Warrick Dunn is a pretty standup guy. What will he think of this and how will he treat Vick? How can Vick be a leader on the field if his guys don't respect him or revile him?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leonard Little killed someone, he's still playing. As despicable as the dog fighting biz is, robbing a family of their mother is worse.

Agreed, he shouldn't be playing either. In fact, he should be in jail. The fact that he got busted for DUI AGAIN after killing someone while driving drunk is just unbelievable to me. But that doesn't mean that Vick should get off lighter for what he has done.
Well unfortunately I dfailed to put the post I was responding to in mine. Tlove was saying a piece of crap like Vick would never play again because of his heinous crimes and I was simply pointing out an example of another POS who has been allowed to play after serving his joke of a sentence. And most definitely his more recent DUI should've got him kicked out of the league but he got off, by massive homerism, on a technicality. There is no doubt of the facts that he was slosehed and speeding close to 100 on the freeway but the jury voted not to prosecute because of a legal snafu. I would expect if that happened here in the Goodell era Little wouldn't fare as well as he did.So my post seemed to be taken a little out of context. I would like to se Vick and his whole operation ground to dust. I have thought of Vick as sub-human since he gave that chick herpes and paid her off so he didn't have to admit it publicly that he knew and didn't tell her.
Link to post
Share on other sites

First time poster - and I have to say of all the boards discussing the Vick situation I think this has been the most above board discussion. Lots of good points on different aspects of the situation. While it is painfully obvious, there are several murky issues - with no clearly defined lines separating them. I see the four main issues as 1) rush to judgment; 2) Innocent until proven guilty; 3) What will/Can the NFL do; and, 4) what will/can the Falcons do.1. Rush to judgment - I have gone back to read a few threads that have evolved over the last few months. There was plenty of back and forth as to Vick's guilt or innocence (sort of like ESPN). It looks like the pendulum has swung back in favor of those who believe Vick is guilty of something. But, I would caution to judge slowly. The indictment, as many have pointed out, is very serious. It is also very specific, and the Feds clearly have cooperating witnesses feeding them this story. Taken on its face, it is a very damning document. But, we have not heard Vick's side of the story. We also do not know anything about the credibility of the cooperating witnesses. There are always multiple sides to every story - form your judgments, but keep an open mind for a different version of facts.2. Innocent until proven guilty - this has been the rallying cry of those who believe (or desperately want) Vick to be innocent. The problem is that standard has only one place - a criminal court of law. In a criminal case the government bears the burden of proving a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Nobody else has to meet that burden. Not a civil plaintiff, not an employer, not a sponsor, and certainly not the court of public opinion. Don't be fooled into thinking that simply because the government can not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, that someone is innocent.3. What will/can the NFL do - many posters have pointed out the various clauses in collective bargaining agreement that would allow the NFL to impose punishment - personal conduct, gambling, etc. At the end of the day, Goodell and the NFL will act just like you or I - They will act in their own self-preservation. If public interests builds to the point that the NFL feels it is damaging the league, Vick will be gone. If the public outcry is muted, Vick will stick around. This will have nothing to do with Vick's actual guilt or innocense, but rather the verdict (and punishment) delivered by the court of public opinion. (See Don Imus). I am certain that Goodell will weigh the results of his own investigation with the likelihood of Vick's ultimate conviction, and with the financial consequences of not acting. 4. What will the Falcons do - they will be governed by the same principles. They will act when they feel it is in their best interests to act. Blank has more at stake than just the Falcons, but the team also has to consider the impact of having Vick on the team in short-term and long-term. If it will cost the team money and/or value Blank will cut his ties, otherwise he will ride it out.The league and the Team can cut ties with Vick anytime they want - regardless of any language in the CBA or contract. The consequences of potential breaches of the CBA and/or player contract will be the subject of grievances or suits - but those are money damages (which can also be delayed ad infinitum). When the cost of keeping Vick exceeds the cost of cutting/suspending Vick the NFL and/or the Falcons will act.We won't know the fallout until after the initial surge of publicity - we will see if advertisers and season ticket holders start putting real pressure on the league.For the record, I am a former Falcon season-ticket holder (moved away from the area). I originally bought my season tickets the day the Falcon's drafted Vick. I also believe he is guilty of something here (if nothing else - bad judgment in picking friends), and is likely a big player in the dog-fighting world. If Blank or Goodell were to ask my advice, I would say they should cut bait as soon as practical. From the Falcon's perspective, they need to move on a quickly as possible to get a fresh start. This is probably going to be a lost season regardless - and I think it is clear that Vick is not the long-term solution at QB. From the NFL's perspective, they do not want the NBA to be known as the "Clean" league.

:confused: You should start posting more often.
Link to post
Share on other sites

As I mentioned earlier, this will be very interesting to see what the league does, if anything, for the Falcons. I suspect (still) that the LEAGUE will not act until the trial is COMPLETED. That leaves Atlanta as the ones that will have to make a call on this and the team iteself is in a terrible situation. As I see it, here are their options:- Release him. This would cause them a $22 million salary cap hit in addition to a similar amount of prorated signing bonus that they would have to eat in real dollars. They likely would try to recoup that money after he was convicted or pled to a lesser charge, but for now they likely would have to take the salary cap hit. I am not sure if there are provisions in the CBA to allow for special exceptions and unusual circumstances, so I am not sure if the league could give the Falcons a get out of jail free card and grant them a salary cap exemption on the projected cap hit. Other teams that have been in similar situations would scream bloody murder. This would probably be the best P.R. move but not a great salary cap move. I'm not sure the Falcons would essentially "take one for the league."- Suspend him with pay. That seems like the most likely way Vick would not play. Like I just mentioned, they could seek legal action AFTER his conviction to recoup the monies they paid out, but until then they would likely be stuck paying him. This could appease the people screaming for immediate disciplinary action.- Bench him. But given they have $130 million long-term invested in Vick (at least on paper), that seems like a huge percentage of the salary cap wasted on a player that won't be playing. And I doubt the league could step in and award salary cap relief in this instance without special permission from the other owners and the NFLPA. IIRC, there are provisions on granting cap relief for players UNDER LEAGUE SUSPENSION, but for now Vick is not in that category.- Play him. I've been listening to talk radio and tv last night and this morning and that seems to be the outcome that many are predicting, but I also see this one as a P.R. nightmare if that came to bear. It could turn into a 3-ring circus and could be detrimental to other players if protesters got rowdy.

Aren't suspend him with pay and bench him essentially the same thing? I think the Eagles showed that teams are capable and willing to bench players who's conduct is detrimental to the team. In the short run I think either of these options is viable and probable. As soon as the legal stuff starts to bear fruit they'll be able to go after Vick for a prorated portion of his signing bonus as well as cut him which will minimize cap issues. I suspect this is the route things may go.
Link to post
Share on other sites

As I mentioned earlier, this will be very interesting to see what the league does, if anything, for the Falcons. I suspect (still) that the LEAGUE will not act until the trial is COMPLETED. That leaves Atlanta as the ones that will have to make a call on this and the team iteself is in a terrible situation. As I see it, here are their options:

- Release him. This would cause them a $22 million salary cap hit in addition to a similar amount of prorated signing bonus that they would have to eat in real dollars. They likely would try to recoup that money after he was convicted or pled to a lesser charge, but for now they likely would have to take the salary cap hit. I am not sure if there are provisions in the CBA to allow for special exceptions and unusual circumstances, so I am not sure if the league could give the Falcons a get out of jail free card and grant them a salary cap exemption on the projected cap hit. Other teams that have been in similar situations would scream bloody murder. This would probably be the best P.R. move but not a great salary cap move. I'm not sure the Falcons would essentially "take one for the league."

- Suspend him with pay. That seems like the most likely way Vick would not play. Like I just mentioned, they could seek legal action AFTER his conviction to recoup the monies they paid out, but until then they would likely be stuck paying him. This could appease the people screaming for immediate disciplinary action.

- Bench him. But given they have $130 million long-term invested in Vick (at least on paper), that seems like a huge percentage of the salary cap wasted on a player that won't be playing. And I doubt the league could step in and award salary cap relief in this instance without special permission from the other owners and the NFLPA. IIRC, there are provisions on granting cap relief for players UNDER LEAGUE SUSPENSION, but for now Vick is not in that category.

- Play him. I've been listening to talk radio and tv last night and this morning and that seems to be the outcome that many are predicting, but I also see this one as a P.R. nightmare if that came to bear. It could turn into a 3-ring circus and could be detrimental to other players if protesters got rowdy.

No way this guy should step on the field until this matter is cleared up. If he did the things alleged in the indictment and ends up playing a full season before it's cleared up, the NFL will have sunk to an all time low. The fact that there is some evidence that he may have been involved (use of his residence) and he has now been charged should be enough to keep him off the field until this is settled.
Link to post
Share on other sites

- Play him. I've been listening to talk radio and tv last night and this morning and that seems to be the outcome that many are predicting, but I also see this one as a P.R. nightmare if that came to bear. It could turn into a 3-ring circus and could be detrimental to other players if protesters got rowdy.

I think this is the most likely outcome. The team will take a wait and see approach and throw out a non-commital type release like "While we certainly don't like that Mike Vick's name has surfaced in this whole episode, everyone has a right to be heard in court and given a chance to present their side of the story. Based on the outcome of the trial the team will act accordingly."
Link to post
Share on other sites

As I mentioned earlier, this will be very interesting to see what the league does, if anything, for the Falcons. I suspect (still) that the LEAGUE will not act until the trial is COMPLETED. That leaves Atlanta as the ones that will have to make a call on this and the team iteself is in a terrible situation. As I see it, here are their options:- Release him. This would cause them a $22 million salary cap hit in addition to a similar amount of prorated signing bonus that they would have to eat in real dollars. They likely would try to recoup that money after he was convicted or pled to a lesser charge, but for now they likely would have to take the salary cap hit. I am not sure if there are provisions in the CBA to allow for special exceptions and unusual circumstances, so I am not sure if the league could give the Falcons a get out of jail free card and grant them a salary cap exemption on the projected cap hit. Other teams that have been in similar situations would scream bloody murder. This would probably be the best P.R. move but not a great salary cap move. I'm not sure the Falcons would essentially "take one for the league."- Suspend him with pay. That seems like the most likely way Vick would not play. Like I just mentioned, they could seek legal action AFTER his conviction to recoup the monies they paid out, but until then they would likely be stuck paying him. This could appease the people screaming for immediate disciplinary action.- Bench him. But given they have $130 million long-term invested in Vick (at least on paper), that seems like a huge percentage of the salary cap wasted on a player that won't be playing. And I doubt the league could step in and award salary cap relief in this instance without special permission from the other owners and the NFLPA. IIRC, there are provisions on granting cap relief for players UNDER LEAGUE SUSPENSION, but for now Vick is not in that category.- Play him. I've been listening to talk radio and tv last night and this morning and that seems to be the outcome that many are predicting, but I also see this one as a P.R. nightmare if that came to bear. It could turn into a 3-ring circus and could be detrimental to other players if protesters got rowdy.

Aren't suspend him with pay and bench him essentially the same thing? I think the Eagles showed that teams are capable and willing to bench players who's conduct is detrimental to the team. In the short run I think either of these options is viable and probable. As soon as the legal stuff starts to bear fruit they'll be able to go after Vick for a prorated portion of his signing bonus as well as cut him which will minimize cap issues. I suspect this is the route things may go.
The difference is that by suspending him they could bar him from team activities and facilities. Benching him he could be on the field and the sideline and create a sideshow by just being there.
Link to post
Share on other sites

- Play him. I've been listening to talk radio and tv last night and this morning and that seems to be the outcome that many are predicting, but I also see this one as a P.R. nightmare if that came to bear. It could turn into a 3-ring circus and could be detrimental to other players if protesters got rowdy.

Also, how do his teammates react to all of this? Warrick Dunn is a pretty standup guy. What will he think of this and how will he treat Vick? How can Vick be a leader on the field if his guys don't respect him or revile him?
Well, since the media all got it wrong(ESPN) that he was home free, clearly we can't trust their take.

Let's use our own common sense and assess the facts and possible repercussions appropriately - which I think has been done well on this board so far. Again, bottom line is the NFL is a golden child business and nobody is going to be allowd to take it down with street thug behavior. Killing animals - especially america's favorite pet is a one way ticket to public banishment if not prison. Vick will not play a down any time soon unless some very exculpatory evidence comes forth before the season begins.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cruelty to animals is one of them, a few notches below child molestation.

Yeah, I'm kinda surprised at all the outrage people show Vick compared to other stuff that goes in the world. For example, recently there was the absolute, worst nightmare of a gang rape that occured in Florida:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070707/ap_on_...PDk95eWwdlH2ocA

The perps poured various household cleansers into their eyes afterwards. Yet not much press about it. Perhaps because they are poor. Perhaps because it was so disturbing. Yet people get much more outraged over animals.

BTW, I think child molestation is as bad as it gets and animal cruelty is no where near as bad.

Well I didn't see much of it on ESPN or NFLN or the Shark Pool but it was all over the news every time I looked. Take this in context. We are not discussing non footbal related stuff here. If an NFL player or associate was involved in the rape/assault then you can e sure it will be all over here. Apples and oranges.
I watched NFL Live on ESPN last night, and they mentioned the Vick indictment just twice in the whole show, and spent a grand total of about 30 seconds on it, basically just reporting it, not giving any analysis. The wrap-up was a Q&A about how Edge getting rid of his gold teeth would affect him as a player!?!

WTF!?! Laughable, but I expect nothing less from ESPN.

Then I watched NFL Total Access. Over the hour, they spent I would say, approximately 75% of the show talking about the Vick situation and the many ramifications. They brought in numerous people to comment, including a lengthy interview with Deangelo Hall, an NFL attorney (who basically said Vick is screwed because of the "conspiracy" charge, but I'm paraphrasing), and about 3 or 4 other analysts or people close to the situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has this been asked?...

If he plays, what will fellow players think/do. There were rumblings that there were a lot of guys P.O.'d that Vick is pissing in their pool. What are the chances that one of them "Sweeps the knee."?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cruelty to animals is one of them, a few notches below child molestation.

Yeah, I'm kinda surprised at all the outrage people show Vick compared to other stuff that goes in the world. For example, recently there was the absolute, worst nightmare of a gang rape that occured in Florida:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070707/ap_on_...PDk95eWwdlH2ocA

The perps poured various household cleansers into their eyes afterwards. Yet not much press about it. Perhaps because they are poor. Perhaps because it was so disturbing. Yet people get much more outraged over animals.

BTW, I think child molestation is as bad as it gets and animal cruelty is no where near as bad.

Well I didn't see much of it on ESPN or NFLN or the Shark Pool but it was all over the news every time I looked. Take this in context. We are not discussing non footbal related stuff here. If an NFL player or associate was involved in the rape/assault then you can e sure it will be all over here. Apples and oranges.
I watched NFL Live on ESPN last night, and they mentioned the Vick indictment just twice in the whole show, and spent a grand total of about 30 seconds on it, basically just reporting it, not giving any analysis. The wrap-up was a Q&A about how Edge getting rid of his gold teeth would affect him as a player!?!

WTF!?! Laughable, but I expect nothing less from ESPN.

Then I watched NFL Total Access. Over the hour, they spent I would say, approximately 75% of the show talking about the Vick situation and the many ramifications. They brought in numerous people to comment, including a lengthy interview with Deangelo Hall, an NFL attorney (who basically said Vick is screwed because of the "conspiracy" charge, but I'm paraphrasing), and about 3 or 4 other analysts or people close to the situation.

I was talking about the gang rape story not being covered on ESPN or Total Access. You've taken my quote completely and totally out of context.
Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about this, the more I think Vick will agree to some type of suspension before being convicted and before the season starts. Vick agreeing to this is in the best interest of all parties; Vick begins to try and repair his image, NFL cleans up the league and stays within the Player Conduct Policy, Falcons do not have to deal with PR nightmare of possibly having to let him play until a sentence/conviction is made.

Some thoughts behind this theory:

- Looking back on Pacman backing down from his appeal, I can see Goodell sitting down with Vick and telling him to take a one year suspension or let due process take its course and possibly get a lifetime ban.

- I am assuming Vick will have good counsel and also realize how much money he stands to lose from fighting this. He desperately needs to repair his image to salvage what NFL career and endorsement deals he has left.

- Falcons would still take a cap hit but maybe some type of exemption could be worked out?

I also think about Michael Jordan first “retirement”. Many theorized that he was involved big time in gambling/mob and this retirement was really a one year suspension that allowed him to save his image. I am not comparing the reputation of Vick to Jordan since Jordan always did and said the right thing publicly but both players are/were marketing icons for their respective sports and the NBA was at its pinnacle when Jordan was there, the same can be said for the NFL today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cruelty to animals is one of them, a few notches below child molestation.

Yeah, I'm kinda surprised at all the outrage people show Vick compared to other stuff that goes in the world. For example, recently there was the absolute, worst nightmare of a gang rape that occured in Florida:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070707/ap_on_...PDk95eWwdlH2ocA

The perps poured various household cleansers into their eyes afterwards. Yet not much press about it. Perhaps because they are poor. Perhaps because it was so disturbing. Yet people get much more outraged over animals.

BTW, I think child molestation is as bad as it gets and animal cruelty is no where near as bad.

Well I didn't see much of it on ESPN or NFLN or the Shark Pool but it was all over the news every time I looked. Take this in context. We are not discussing non footbal related stuff here. If an NFL player or associate was involved in the rape/assault then you can e sure it will be all over here. Apples and oranges.
I watched NFL Live on ESPN last night, and they mentioned the Vick indictment just twice in the whole show, and spent a grand total of about 30 seconds on it, basically just reporting it, not giving any analysis. The wrap-up was a Q&A about how Edge getting rid of his gold teeth would affect him as a player!?!

WTF!?! Laughable, but I expect nothing less from ESPN.

Then I watched NFL Total Access. Over the hour, they spent I would say, approximately 75% of the show talking about the Vick situation and the many ramifications. They brought in numerous people to comment, including a lengthy interview with Deangelo Hall, an NFL attorney (who basically said Vick is screwed because of the "conspiracy" charge, but I'm paraphrasing), and about 3 or 4 other analysts or people close to the situation.

I was talking about the gang rape story not being covered on ESPN or Total Access. You've taken my quote completely and totally out of context.
Why the hell would or should it be? :confused:
Link to post
Share on other sites

- Falcons would still take a cap hit but maybe some type of exemption could be worked out?

This is an interesting point. I wonder if, going forward, the league will do something (in terms of cap hits) for teams that work with the league to punish players who do this kind of thing.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has this been asked?...If he plays, what will fellow players think/do. There were rumblings that there were a lot of guys P.O.'d that Vick is pissing in their pool. What are the chances that one of them "Sweeps the knee."?

:confused: This may give certain guys an extra incentive to go a little harder after Vick and put a little extra into every hit. For instance, Josh Stamer, LB of the Buffalo Bills raises show dogs that he treats like kids. He was NOT happy when he heard about Vick's dogfighting. Preseason Week 2 the Bills play the Falcons. My guess is that Vick won't see any playing time in that game, at least none with Stamer on the field. Although if Stamer just happens to be near the sidelines on a play and "accidentally" levels Vick it would be a shame.And I guarantee that there are other guys in the league that feel the same way that Stamer does.
Link to post
Share on other sites

- Falcons would still take a cap hit but maybe some type of exemption could be worked out?

This is an interesting point. I wonder if, going forward, the league will do something (in terms of cap hits) for teams that work with the league to punish players who do this kind of thing.
The major problem with this is what other teams would say. The cap allowance wouldn't hurt the league, but does affect other teams in the league.

It also opens the door for teams to draft and sign players with character issues without much penalty. If they do something like this, they just can cut them without penalty. That would be a problem, I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cruelty to animals is one of them, a few notches below child molestation.

Yeah, I'm kinda surprised at all the outrage people show Vick compared to other stuff that goes in the world. For example, recently there was the absolute, worst nightmare of a gang rape that occured in Florida:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070707/ap_on_...PDk95eWwdlH2ocA

The perps poured various household cleansers into their eyes afterwards. Yet not much press about it. Perhaps because they are poor. Perhaps because it was so disturbing. Yet people get much more outraged over animals.

BTW, I think child molestation is as bad as it gets and animal cruelty is no where near as bad.

Well I didn't see much of it on ESPN or NFLN or the Shark Pool but it was all over the news every time I looked. Take this in context. We are not discussing non footbal related stuff here. If an NFL player or associate was involved in the rape/assault then you can e sure it will be all over here. Apples and oranges.
I watched NFL Live on ESPN last night, and they mentioned the Vick indictment just twice in the whole show, and spent a grand total of about 30 seconds on it, basically just reporting it, not giving any analysis. The wrap-up was a Q&A about how Edge getting rid of his gold teeth would affect him as a player!?!

WTF!?! Laughable, but I expect nothing less from ESPN.

Then I watched NFL Total Access. Over the hour, they spent I would say, approximately 75% of the show talking about the Vick situation and the many ramifications. They brought in numerous people to comment, including a lengthy interview with Deangelo Hall, an NFL attorney (who basically said Vick is screwed because of the "conspiracy" charge, but I'm paraphrasing), and about 3 or 4 other analysts or people close to the situation.

I was talking about the gang rape story not being covered on ESPN or Total Access. You've taken my quote completely and totally out of context.
Why the hell would or should it be? :confused:
That was my point. Like I said, madoka brought up a point that it was sad that a gang rape got less press than the Vick case and I was showing that it depends on where you look for your news and that outside football news outlets it was a big story, just not here. A complete non sequiter for this discussion pool. Sorry for not putting the original madoka post in my response. So here it is so that all confusion can be relieved.

Yeah, I'm kinda surprised at all the outrage people show Vick compared to other stuff that goes in the world. For example, recently there was the absolute, worst nightmare of a gang rape that occured in Florida:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070707/ap_on_...PDk95eWwdlH2ocA

The perps poured various household cleansers into their eyes afterwards. Yet not much press about it. Perhaps because they are poor. Perhaps because it was so disturbing. Yet people get much more outraged over animals.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Dogfighting is a serious federal and state crime, and enforcement authorities have treated this investigation with the seriousness it deserves," said Wayne Pacelle of The HSUS. "We will continue to work with law enforcement with the intention of bringing to justice any individual who contributed to this cruel and violent treatment of animals.""Now that Michael Vick has been indicted, the NFL should not hesitate to take appropriate disciplinary action under its internal guidelines," added Pacelle.

not good
Link to post
Share on other sites

- Falcons would still take a cap hit but maybe some type of exemption could be worked out?

This is an interesting point. I wonder if, going forward, the league will do something (in terms of cap hits) for teams that work with the league to punish players who do this kind of thing.
I don't think that would be a good idea. It basically allows teams to draft bad character guys but get bailed out as long as they cracked down on them when they screwed up. So it essentially would be a free pass for the teams to test out bad apples when they may otherwise stay away from them from the beginning. Keeping known low character guys out of the NFL to begin with does more for the NFL's image than constantly cracking down on guys.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is all just opinion, but I see this playing out one of two ways:

1a) Goodell suspends Vick, not solely based on the Conduct Policy, but because back in April, when the commissioner interviewed Vick about the allegations, Vick denied any involvement whatsoever. The commissioner will emphasize Vick's lying about his involvement, along with the federal evidence, and their own internal investigation of the charges and the evidence, and suspend Vick for either a year, or indefinitely. I think this happens BEFORE camp next week, because if they're going to suspend him, they don't want to wait and let the media circus get out of control at Falcons camp.

1b) If the league decided to wait before handing down a formal suspension, or if the Falcons decide to act even before the league, Blake may suspend Vick from the team pending the investigation. Remember that Blake is a no-nonsense owner who wants character guys as well. Vick would probably file a grievance, but I doubt it will get far, cause I just don't see the NFLPA backing him right now, and it will drag on.

Neither the league, nor the Falcons will want to go through a the full PR nightmare if Vick is going to be at camp or on the field this year. They will act swiftly, I think, to send a message to the public that they're not going to allow players with this sort of character on the field.

2) The Falcons will eventually cut Vick but not before going after his some of his signing bonus first, based on violations of terms of the contract, mainly conduct. During the course of the season, the Falcons will move to try to recover some money, but they cannot do this if they cut him right away. He must be on the team still in order for them to go after any of his bonus, etc, just like the Pacman situation.

3) The contract dispute will go to arbitration where the Falcons will recover a large portion of money back.

4) They will ultimately cut Vick.

5) In the off-season, this will go to trial, Vick will be convicted and end up serving jail time.

Again, all this is opinion, but that is what I'm predicting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...