Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Vick Indicted ! ?


Recommended Posts

- 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.

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.

Good points. But I think the league has to work with teams that would be willing to jettison players for the good of the league.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 670
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

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.

freaking :goodposting: But you do understand that I love Doggies.Hopefully this fact will lessen the severity of the punishment. :thumbup:
Link to post
Share on other sites

Already conflicting "inside information" regarding whether or not the league will suspend Vick:

-- Vick Expected to be Suspended --

Wed Jul 18, 2007 --from FFMastermind.com

Yahoo Sports reports QB Michael Vick and the Atlanta Falcons took a huge hit a week before the start of training camp. Vick is expected to be suspended by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell after news broke Tuesday evening that Vick was indicted by federal authorities in connection with dog fighting in Virginia. The indictment followed a three-month investigation. While Goodell was not reached for comment, two sources said the commissioner has been monitoring the Vick case since April, when investigators initially found evidence of dog fighting at a home Vick owned in Smithfield. "Where (Vick) is in the most trouble is that he lied to the commissioner," a league source said. "He told (Goodell) in April that he didn't know anything about this. The commissioner gave (Vick) every chance to come clean, be straight about what was going on. Instead, he just kept denying it." The NFL released a statement that both cautioned in not prejudging the case and said Vick would be evaluated under the league's personal conduct policy. "We are disappointed that Michael Vick has put himself in a position where a federal grand jury has returned an indictment against him," the NFL statement read. "We will continue to closely monitor developments in this case, and to cooperate with law enforcement authorities. The activities alleged are cruel, degrading and illegal. Michael Vick's guilt has not yet been proven, and we believe that all concerned should allow the legal process to determine the facts. The matter will be reviewed under the League's Personal Conduct Policy." Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States, urged the league to take "appropriate" action.

-- Other Sources Say No Suspension for Vick Based Upon Indictment --

Wed Jul 18, 2007 --from FFMastermind.com

The New York Daily News reports sources said last night that NFL commissioner Roger Goodell will not suspend Atlanta Falcons QB Michael Vick based on the indictment handed down yesterday by a federal grand jury on charges related to dogfighting, which is a felony. The league will contend it's a long way from indictment to conviction, so Goodell will allow the legal process to play out. The NFL acknowledged the "activities alleged are cruel, degrading and illegal." For the moment, Vick should be more concerned about being sent away to jail for six years than getting kicked out of the NFL this season. This episode, at the very least, could eventually cost him his career with the Falcons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just posted this in the other Vick thread but figured it belonged here too:

I had the following email forwarded to me through a mutual friend from a guy I know who clerked for the late Justice Rehnquist and who worked in the D.C. area for the U.S. Attorney's office (yeah, he's pretty much a law stud) before going into private practice:

I know the US Attorney in Virginia overseeing the case. He is one of the best in the country and would not have proceeded unless he has the goods. Vick is in big trouble.

Obviously, I don't know the prosecutor in this case, but I can vouch for my friend's bona fides and assert unequivocally that he would be in a position to know of which he speaks.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Already conflicting "inside information" regarding whether or not the league will suspend Vick:-- Vick Expected to be Suspended --Wed Jul 18, 2007 --from FFMastermind.comYahoo Sports reports QB Michael Vick and the Atlanta Falcons took a huge hit a week before the start of training camp. Vick is expected to be suspended by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell after news broke Tuesday evening that Vick was indicted by federal authorities in connection with dog fighting in Virginia. The indictment followed a three-month investigation. While Goodell was not reached for comment, two sources said the commissioner has been monitoring the Vick case since April, when investigators initially found evidence of dog fighting at a home Vick owned in Smithfield. "Where (Vick) is in the most trouble is that he lied to the commissioner," a league source said. "He told (Goodell) in April that he didn't know anything about this. The commissioner gave (Vick) every chance to come clean, be straight about what was going on. Instead, he just kept denying it." The NFL released a statement that both cautioned in not prejudging the case and said Vick would be evaluated under the league's personal conduct policy. "We are disappointed that Michael Vick has put himself in a position where a federal grand jury has returned an indictment against him," the NFL statement read. "We will continue to closely monitor developments in this case, and to cooperate with law enforcement authorities. The activities alleged are cruel, degrading and illegal. Michael Vick's guilt has not yet been proven, and we believe that all concerned should allow the legal process to determine the facts. The matter will be reviewed under the League's Personal Conduct Policy." Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States, urged the league to take "appropriate" action. -- Other Sources Say No Suspension for Vick Based Upon Indictment --Wed Jul 18, 2007 --from FFMastermind.comThe New York Daily News reports sources said last night that NFL commissioner Roger Goodell will not suspend Atlanta Falcons QB Michael Vick based on the indictment handed down yesterday by a federal grand jury on charges related to dogfighting, which is a felony. The league will contend it's a long way from indictment to conviction, so Goodell will allow the legal process to play out. The NFL acknowledged the "activities alleged are cruel, degrading and illegal." For the moment, Vick should be more concerned about being sent away to jail for six years than getting kicked out of the NFL this season. This episode, at the very least, could eventually cost him his career with the Falcons.

The writer from Yahoo! is the only person that I have seen suggesting a suspension to Vick is somewhat imminent. And I have been searching for info since the news broke. A couple other places picked up on what Yahoo! had to say, but I have not seen another independent source suggest it.On the other hand, I've seen many places suggest that the league would not act. (And to clarify the team can chose to do something on its own).I think in the next few days there will be a ton of closed door meetings (the league, the team, the prosecutors, Vick and his attorneys, etc.) trying to sort out what to do next and what options are available and what legal ramifications there are.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the PERFECT opportunity for Goodell to put a stamp on what he wants the NFL to be. It's one thing to suspend guys like Pac Man Jones and Jared Allen. Michael Vick is another thing entirely.

Suspending Michael Vick - a bona fide superstar that has been the face of his franchise and poster boy for the NFL- would send a message to every gangsta thug wanna-be in college, high school, and the league itself that NOBODY is exempt in keeping the image of the league as squeaky clean as possible.

Look at how much money the NBA has cost itself by skirting around the issue of thuggery. It's image has lost it's luster and has cost them multi-millions, if not billions. I guarantee you that if David Stern had suspended Ron Artest for going into the stands the NBA would have gained credibility with the fans. As it was, he just confirmed to the casual viewer that his/her time is better spent elswhere.

Goodell, for the good of the NFL, should and MUST suspend Michael Vick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't the NFL suspend him? Henry and Tank Johnson were both suspended with less serious offenses.Pacman was suspended without a conviction

Few things.Not sure Henry's offenses were less serious.Tank...maybe.With Pacman, it was more about the multiple incidents, failure to report, and that each one of his issues involved some act of violence.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't the NFL suspend him?

an excellent question, one that cannot be answered because there IS no good answer to it Vick is an employee of the Falcons, and when employees do stupid things making the employer look bad ? Losing their jobs is almost a gaurantee
Link to post
Share on other sites

We all know how accurate ESPN has been in this case, but I wonder if the first time offfender status is an absolute or if there is wiggle room on this one.

What exactly does first time offender status mean? Vick has at least two offenses that I can think of, the water bottle incident and the finger incident.
Involvement with gambling trumps those restrictions.Vick will be suspended for the year before training camp starts.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the PERFECT opportunity for Goodell to put a stamp on what he wants the NFL to be. It's one thing to suspend guys like Pac Man Jones and Jared Allen. Michael Vick is another thing entirely.Suspending Michael Vick - a bona fide superstar that has been the face of his franchise and poster boy for the NFL- would send a message to every gangsta thug wanna-be in college, high school, and the league itself that NOBODY is exempt in keeping the image of the league as squeaky clean as possible.Look at how much money the NBA has cost itself by skirting around the issue of thuggery. It's image has lost it's luster and has cost them multi-millions, if not billions. I guarantee you that if David Stern had suspended Ron Artest for going into the stands the NBA would have gained credibility with the fans. As it was, he just confirmed to the casual viewer that his/her time is better spent elswhere.Goodell, for the good of the NFL, should and MUST suspend Michael Vick.

Artest was suspended. Didn't play the rest of the year.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This dude got a year in prison for killing 1 dog.

I'm really waiting for a lawyer to step in here, but it sounds like most people don't understand that the worst is yet to come. Local DA's always indict on the worst charge and add as many charges as they can hoping to plea bargain. Fed's tend to only indict on the charge that they know they can win and take advantage of the long delay to trial to indict on more charges. Even if this charge is the only thing that they can get Vick on, it will be applied per dog, so I see a minimum of 20 years in jail, probably closer to 60 years in jail. As far as Goodell goes, he cares more about the league image more than who's guilty and who's not guilty. I don't see him going out of his way to give a break to a self-described team leader that has flipped off the fans, gave a woman an STD under an alias and got his pot-bottle discovered by underpaid airport screeners. When he says he has no idea what happens on his property when he's paying all the bills, I don't think Goodell is going to do the same thing as Atlanta has been doing and say "Gee Mike, we love you anyway, even if it screws the team and league image because even though you cant throw worth a crap you can run really good and we like selling seats on smoke and mirrors and blaming all your problems on a bad supporting cast.."
just wait till they add the tax evasion, money laundering and racketeering charges

I'm sure Mike "forgot" ro report hsi winnings from gambling on the dogs and that excess cash had to go somewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the PERFECT opportunity for Goodell to put a stamp on what he wants the NFL to be. It's one thing to suspend guys like Pac Man Jones and Jared Allen. Michael Vick is another thing entirely.Suspending Michael Vick - a bona fide superstar that has been the face of his franchise and poster boy for the NFL- would send a message to every gangsta thug wanna-be in college, high school, and the league itself that NOBODY is exempt in keeping the image of the league as squeaky clean as possible.Look at how much money the NBA has cost itself by skirting around the issue of thuggery. It's image has lost it's luster and has cost them multi-millions, if not billions. I guarantee you that if David Stern had suspended Ron Artest for going into the stands the NBA would have gained credibility with the fans. As it was, he just confirmed to the casual viewer that his/her time is better spent elswhere.Goodell, for the good of the NFL, should and MUST suspend Michael Vick.

Artest was suspended. Didn't play the rest of the year.
Yeah, I figured that wasn't the best example. I think the NBA's problem goes back to the days of the Jailblazers, but I didn't want to think too hard about it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

wasn't there a rumor about drugs being involved at one point as well?

someone mentioned earlier in the thread about his cousin being arrested, but is there any new info on this? could they be building that case as well?

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.

Heard Mort on Mike and Mike this morning and he was adamant that Vick would not be suspended by the NFl or Falcons for 2007.So look for Vick to be gone by next week.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't the NFL suspend him? Henry and Tank Johnson were both suspended with less serious offenses.Pacman was suspended without a conviction

Because the NFL has an agreement with the NFLPA that details when they can suspended players (The Player Conduct Policy).Henry, Tank and Pacman all violated provisions of that agreement. As of today, Michael Vick has not. If Goodell wants to go around the current policy it we create new issues, just like not acting quickly with create issues. Guess he needs to figure which is the bigger headache.
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.

Heard Mort on Mike and Mike this morning and he was adamant that Vick would not be suspended by the NFl or Falcons for 2007.So look for Vick to be gone by next week.
I don't think Mort or Lenny P have any credibility on this issue now.
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.

Heard Mort on Mike and Mike this morning and he was adamant that Vick would not be suspended by the NFl or Falcons for 2007.

So look for Vick to be gone by next week.

I don't think Mort or Lenny P have any credibility on this issue now.
fixed
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't the NFL suspend him? Henry and Tank Johnson were both suspended with less serious offenses.Pacman was suspended without a conviction

Because the NFL has an agreement with the NFLPA that details when they can suspended players (The Player Conduct Policy).Henry, Tank and Pacman all violated provisions of that agreement. As of today, Michael Vick has not. If Goodell wants to go around the current policy it we create new issues, just like not acting quickly with create issues. Guess he needs to figure which is the bigger headache.
I wonder about Vick being suspended just based on the indictment. What if he is suspended for a year, and is then cleared of all charges? I'm guessing he would have some sort of a lawsuit or greviance, no?It wouldn't surprise me if he plays this season, and the decision on his status isn't addressed until the dog-fighting thing is resolved, one way or the other.
Link to post
Share on other sites

wasn't there a rumor about drugs being involved at one point as well?someone mentioned earlier in the thread about his cousin being arrested, but is there any new info on this? could they be building that case as well?

Vick's cousin, Davon Boddie, was arrested twice in a very short time period for drug possession. It was after the second arrest that police obtained a search warrant. The search warrant led to the finding of the dog operation. *What I think actually happened. Feds had been hearing about Vick being involved in dog fighting. Used the drug arrest by local police to get a search warrant executed. Found the evidence they needed to further pursue their case. :football:
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't the NFL suspend him? Henry and Tank Johnson were both suspended with less serious offenses.Pacman was suspended without a conviction

Because the NFL has an agreement with the NFLPA that details when they can suspended players (The Player Conduct Policy).Henry, Tank and Pacman all violated provisions of that agreement. As of today, Michael Vick has not. If Goodell wants to go around the current policy it we create new issues, just like not acting quickly with create issues. Guess he needs to figure which is the bigger headache.
I wonder about Vick being suspended just based on the indictment. What if he is suspended for a year, and is then cleared of all charges? I'm guessing he would have some sort of a lawsuit or greviance, no?
Exactly. It is kind of like waiting for your FF draft to happen, everyone would love for it to be tomorrow but realistically it makes sense to wait until everything is established/determined (starters, injuries, etc)
Link to post
Share on other sites

It wouldn't surprise me if he plays this season, and the decision on his status isn't addressed until the dog-fighting thing is resolved, one way or the other.

OK, my 3rd attempt to address this...

Let's assume he's allowed to play this season, how much would he be able to focus on football with a federal indictment hanging over his head? How much of a media circus will the Falcons/NFL tolerate? Not to mention the locker room issues that could possibly become an issue.

Is it reasonable to assume that if he's not suspended that he's a lock to be the Falcons' starting QB for the '07 season? I heard Tom Jackson and Mark Schlereth discuss this and they find it highly unlikely that Ookie could be an effective NFL QB with this hanging over him, his team, and the NFL. Don't you think the Falcons' training camp will be a circus if Vick is present?

And I love how some people think the Falcons won't suspend him...Blank has been out of the country and I haven't seen one quote from the man that matters most with respect to Ookies status with the team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an article on what the new policy on player conduct was going to be (which I pretty much think went through as intended) . . .

NFL Suspends Players, Beefs Up Conduct Policy

Multiple Arrests Spur Strengthened Stance

By Mark Maske

Washington Post Staff Writer

Wednesday, April 11, 2007; A01

The National Football League yesterday delivered the crackdown on criminal conduct by its players that it had promised. Commissioner Roger Goodell suspended Tennessee Titans cornerback Adam "Pacman" Jones for the entire 2007 season and Cincinnati Bengals wide receiver Chris Henry for the first half of it. The league also announced a strengthened conduct policy that empowers Goodell to banish a player permanently for repeated offenses and punish a team for misbehavior by its employees.

"We have long had policies and programs designed to encourage responsible behavior, and this policy is a further step in ensuring that everyone who is part of the NFL meets that standard," Goodell said in a written statement issued by the league. "We will continue to review the policy and modify it as warranted."

The issue became a priority for the NFL after at least 35 players were arrested in the first 11 1/2 months of last year, bringing waves of negative publicity for the country's most popular sport and making the game's leaders wary that sponsors and business partners could look for other places to spend their money. The trend of off-field misconduct has continued since, with approximately 15 more arrests.

Jones, 23, has been arrested or cited by police for assault, vandalism, marijuana possession, obstructing police, disorderly conduct and public intoxication in a series of incidents since he was drafted two years ago. Henry, also 23, has been arrested on gun, drug and drunk driving charges over the same period.

Goodell pledged to act but first sought the input of franchise owners, coaches, players and NFL Players Association chief Gene Upshaw. "We believe that these are steps that the commissioner needs to take and we support the policy," Upshaw said in a written statement yesterday. "It is important that players in violation of the policy will have the opportunity and the support to change their conduct and earn their way back."

Goodell already had the power as commissioner to punish players for off-field misconduct. But no player previously had been suspended for longer than four games; Goodell and Upshaw wanted to craft a new policy that had the players' support and gave Goodell a set of guidelines under which to deal with offenders.

Jones and Henry were suspended without pay, costing Jones his $1.29 million salary for next season and Henry about half of his $435,000 salary. Both must apply for reinstatement, the league said, and Goodell threatened to impose a lifetime ban on either player for further misconduct.

"I must emphasize to you that this is your last opportunity to salvage your NFL career," Goodell wrote in a letter delivered to each player. "I urge you to take full advantage of the resources available to support you in that effort."

Jones and Henry had separate hearings before Goodell eight days ago in New York. The same day, Goodell discussed the issue with Upshaw and a six-player advisory council.

Neither Jones nor Henry was available to comment yesterday. Jones's mother, Deborah Jones, told the Associated Press that her son's suspension was "just not fair."

Titans and Bengals officials expressed support for Goodell's action. Titans owner Bud Adams said in a written statement that the team appreciated and respected Goodell's "thoughtful decision," adding that the club must receive assurances from Jones "on a number of issues" before allowing him to return.

"Until we see a change in behavior through his actions and until he shows the ability to avoid controversy off the field, we will move forward with the possibility that he may not return to this team," Adams said .

Jones has spoken to police in 10 separate incidents since the Titans selected him in the first round of the NFL draft in April 2005. He has not been convicted of charges stemming from any of the incidents. He is facing possible felony and misdemeanor charges stemming from a brawl at a strip club in Las Vegas on Feb. 19 during the National Basketball Association's All-Star Weekend.

Henry was arrested four times in a span of 14 months and was suspended for two games by the league last season under the personal conduct and substance abuse policies. Last September, he was placed on probation after pleading guilty to a concealed weapon charge. In January, he pleaded guilty to providing alcohol to minors and was jailed for two days. He also pleaded guilty to a reduced charge in a drunk driving case.

"We support the commissioner's ruling, and while we regret the circumstances that called for it, it's good for both Chris and the Bengals to have the matter resolved," Bengals Coach Marvin Lewis said in a written statement. "Our team will move forward, and now it is up to Chris to acquire a more mature understanding of his responsibilities as a player for the Bengals and a representative of the NFL."

Jones's playing status is to be reviewed after the Titans' 10th game next season and his suspension could be adjusted at that point, the league said. He is barred from the Titans' headquarters through the end of May, and can visit once per week after that to meet with the team's player development director and participate in conditioning and film study. To be reinstated, the league said, he must have "no further adverse involvement with law enforcement" and must cooperate with all required counseling and education programs.

Henry was given similar conditions for reinstatement, but he can participate in offseason practices, training camp and preseason games. He cannot participate in regular season practices while suspended.

The four-page conduct policy says that any employee of the league or a team can be disciplined without being convicted of a crime. Employees, the policy says, are subject to being disciplined for criminal offenses; any violent or threatening behavior toward another employee; possession of a gun or other weapon in any workplace setting; or any conduct that puts another person in danger or tarnishes the league's reputation. A first-time offender must undergo a formal clinical evaluation and perhaps counseling but generally will not face discipline, the policy says. A repeat offender is subject to a fine, suspension, or banishment from the league by the commissioner and might have to apply for reinstatement. A player can appeal a punishment to the commissioner.

The league announced that teams also can be disciplined. It did not specify how, but Goodell said at last month's annual league meeting that punishment could come in the form of a fine or the loss of draft picks. The new policy also contains provisions bolstering education and support programs for players.

I don't have the exact verbage of the revised policy available as it is not posted on the NFLPA website. The last part is why the LEAGUE seemingly may opt not to suspend Vick. Again, this pertains to the rules the league must follow and I believe the team has its own set of rules to follow.
Link to post
Share on other sites

It wouldn't surprise me if he plays this season, and the decision on his status isn't addressed until the dog-fighting thing is resolved, one way or the other.

OK, my 3rd attempt to address this...

Let's assume he's allowed to play this season, how much would he be able to focus on football with a federal indictment hanging over his head? How much of a media circus will the Falcons/NFL tolerate? Not to mention the locker room issues that could possibly become an issue.

Is it reasonable to assume that if he's not suspended that he's a lock to be the Falcons' starting QB for the '07 season? I heard Tom Jackson and Mark Schlereth discuss this and they find it highly unlikely that Ookie could be an effective NFL QB with this hanging over him, his team, and the NFL. Don't you think the Falcons' training camp will be a circus if Vick is present?

And I love how some people think the Falcons won't suspend him...Blank has been out of the country and I haven't seen one quote from the man that matters most with respect to Ookies status with the team.

Vick playing and Vick playing effectively are two different things. I was just suggesting that I don't think it's a lock for Vick to miss any time this season.

I have no idea if Vick can focus on football with all this going on. And really, neither does Tom Jackson.

Personally, I wonder how much Vick prepares each week anyway, so I'm not so sure an indictment hanging over his head is going to bother him that much. He doesn't seem like a very nice person, and I wonder how much he'll care about the media that I am sure he will largely ignore.

As for him being the starting QB, yeah, I think if he's OK to play, he's their starter.

As for the Falcons suspending him, I don't know, but unless he damages the team internally in some way, I bet Blank and the organization will be more than happy to place the onus on the NFL.

Just wondering out loud, I don't have any conviction in the idea that he'll play at all this year, but I don't think it's a lock that he misses serious games this year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It wouldn't surprise me if he plays this season, and the decision on his status isn't addressed until the dog-fighting thing is resolved, one way or the other.

OK, my 3rd attempt to address this...

Let's assume he's allowed to play this season, how much would he be able to focus on football with a federal indictment hanging over his head? How much of a media circus will the Falcons/NFL tolerate? Not to mention the locker room issues that could possibly become an issue.

Is it reasonable to assume that if he's not suspended that he's a lock to be the Falcons' starting QB for the '07 season? I heard Tom Jackson and Mark Schlereth discuss this and they find it highly unlikely that Ookie could be an effective NFL QB with this hanging over him, his team, and the NFL. Don't you think the Falcons' training camp will be a circus if Vick is present?

And I love how some people think the Falcons won't suspend him...Blank has been out of the country and I haven't seen one quote from the man that matters most with respect to Ookies status with the team.

It would be very tough for a team to go into camp and through practice each week with a leader who may or may not be there the next week. He's going to have court appearances, depositions, lawyer meetings and a ton of other prerequisites for his time that may interfere with practice or even games. And that's just practical side. The mental side has to be exhausting. Say he;s innocent and he has serious worries about being wrongfully convicted. Ulcers (in addition to herpes), sleepless nights, mental distractions all can erode his and his team;s confidence in his ability to lead the team. Is it fair to the rest of the Falcons for them to go through all that? And if he's guilty, then the very real specter of jail time and punishment will cause the same exact distractions to him. Regardless of whether or not the league or the team suspends him, I have serious doubts as to hsi effectiveness.
Link to post
Share on other sites

And for anyone thinking I have man-love for MV and that I think he is clean as a whistle that is far from the case. If he did what was alleged he should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

I am only interested in the timeline of events, the process, and the outcome. It would take divine intervention and a minor miracle for Vick to walk away unscathed from this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just posted this in the other Vick thread but figured it belonged here too:

I had the following email forwarded to me through a mutual friend from a guy I know who clerked for the late Justice Rehnquist and who worked in the D.C. area for the U.S. Attorney's office (yeah, he's pretty much a law stud) before going into private practice:

I know the US Attorney in Virginia overseeing the case. He is one of the best in the country and would not have proceeded unless he has the goods. Vick is in big trouble.

Obviously, I don't know the prosecutor in this case, but I can vouch for my friend's bona fides and assert unequivocally that he would be in a position to know of which he speaks.
Perhaps the single most important post in this thread.
Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be very tough for a team to go into camp and through practice each week with a leader who may or may not be there the next week.

I concur that this whole ordeal will be very distracting to the team, but I don't fully agree with the "may or may not be there the next week" part.I would guess we will know pretty quickly what the league and the team intend to do. Either they will act or they will wait for the court to do its thing. If they elect to wait, Vick will likely be there from week to week until the trial gets going.I read somewhere today that once the initial grand jury session is over it would likely be 4-6 months until a trial started. That could easily put things into the next calender year.so the team and the league will either have acted or not acted by then and I doubt they will revisit their decision from week to week.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope he has the most horrific outcome available to him happen, I can't get the images of what those dogs must have suffered out of mind. Maybe he can have daily firehose/ shock treatment along with waterboarding, sick bastard, he's no better than OJ IMO, maybe worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be very tough for a team to go into camp and through practice each week with a leader who may or may not be there the next week.

I concur that this whole ordeal will be very distracting to the team, but I don't fully agree with the "may or may not be there the next week" part.I would guess we will know pretty quickly what the league and the team intend to do. Either they will act or they will wait for the court to do its thing. If they elect to wait, Vick will likely be there from week to week until the trial gets going.I read somewhere today that once the initial grand jury session is over it would likely be 4-6 months until a trial started. That could easily put things into the next calender year.so the team and the league will either have acted or not acted by then and I doubt they will revisit their decision from week to week.
I'm thinking more of court appearances, depositions, and a variety of meetings and conferences with his legal team, etc... Not just his possible team or league suspension. And a trial set for 4-6 monhts down the stretch could be right smack dab in the middle of a playoff run or playoffs themselves. All I am saying is that there will be a ton possible distractions that the rest of the team will have to deal with, not just Vick. I thik it will have a negative effect on the team as a whole, unless it's a known fact that the will not be there, in which case sooner is better. I believe the smartest move is an immediate team suspension with pay until the NFL rules on it and the charges sort themselves out. That way the team is protected from the insecurity of it all, the public perception will be that the team is disatanciing themselves from him until the truth is known, and should Vick be found innocent there is no legal recourse for unlawful suspension.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an article on what the new policy on player conduct was going to be (which I pretty much think went through as intended) . . .

NFL Suspends Players, Beefs Up Conduct Policy

Multiple Arrests Spur Strengthened Stance

By Mark Maske

Washington Post Staff Writer

Wednesday, April 11, 2007; A01

The National Football League yesterday delivered the crackdown on criminal conduct by its players that it had promised. Commissioner Roger Goodell suspended Tennessee Titans cornerback Adam "Pacman" Jones for the entire 2007 season and Cincinnati Bengals wide receiver Chris Henry for the first half of it. The league also announced a strengthened conduct policy that empowers Goodell to banish a player permanently for repeated offenses and punish a team for misbehavior by its employees.

"We have long had policies and programs designed to encourage responsible behavior, and this policy is a further step in ensuring that everyone who is part of the NFL meets that standard," Goodell said in a written statement issued by the league. "We will continue to review the policy and modify it as warranted."

The issue became a priority for the NFL after at least 35 players were arrested in the first 11 1/2 months of last year, bringing waves of negative publicity for the country's most popular sport and making the game's leaders wary that sponsors and business partners could look for other places to spend their money. The trend of off-field misconduct has continued since, with approximately 15 more arrests.

Jones, 23, has been arrested or cited by police for assault, vandalism, marijuana possession, obstructing police, disorderly conduct and public intoxication in a series of incidents since he was drafted two years ago. Henry, also 23, has been arrested on gun, drug and drunk driving charges over the same period.

Goodell pledged to act but first sought the input of franchise owners, coaches, players and NFL Players Association chief Gene Upshaw. "We believe that these are steps that the commissioner needs to take and we support the policy," Upshaw said in a written statement yesterday. "It is important that players in violation of the policy will have the opportunity and the support to change their conduct and earn their way back."

Goodell already had the power as commissioner to punish players for off-field misconduct. But no player previously had been suspended for longer than four games; Goodell and Upshaw wanted to craft a new policy that had the players' support and gave Goodell a set of guidelines under which to deal with offenders.

Jones and Henry were suspended without pay, costing Jones his $1.29 million salary for next season and Henry about half of his $435,000 salary. Both must apply for reinstatement, the league said, and Goodell threatened to impose a lifetime ban on either player for further misconduct.

"I must emphasize to you that this is your last opportunity to salvage your NFL career," Goodell wrote in a letter delivered to each player. "I urge you to take full advantage of the resources available to support you in that effort."

Jones and Henry had separate hearings before Goodell eight days ago in New York. The same day, Goodell discussed the issue with Upshaw and a six-player advisory council.

Neither Jones nor Henry was available to comment yesterday. Jones's mother, Deborah Jones, told the Associated Press that her son's suspension was "just not fair."

Titans and Bengals officials expressed support for Goodell's action. Titans owner Bud Adams said in a written statement that the team appreciated and respected Goodell's "thoughtful decision," adding that the club must receive assurances from Jones "on a number of issues" before allowing him to return.

"Until we see a change in behavior through his actions and until he shows the ability to avoid controversy off the field, we will move forward with the possibility that he may not return to this team," Adams said .

Jones has spoken to police in 10 separate incidents since the Titans selected him in the first round of the NFL draft in April 2005. He has not been convicted of charges stemming from any of the incidents. He is facing possible felony and misdemeanor charges stemming from a brawl at a strip club in Las Vegas on Feb. 19 during the National Basketball Association's All-Star Weekend.

Henry was arrested four times in a span of 14 months and was suspended for two games by the league last season under the personal conduct and substance abuse policies. Last September, he was placed on probation after pleading guilty to a concealed weapon charge. In January, he pleaded guilty to providing alcohol to minors and was jailed for two days. He also pleaded guilty to a reduced charge in a drunk driving case.

"We support the commissioner's ruling, and while we regret the circumstances that called for it, it's good for both Chris and the Bengals to have the matter resolved," Bengals Coach Marvin Lewis said in a written statement. "Our team will move forward, and now it is up to Chris to acquire a more mature understanding of his responsibilities as a player for the Bengals and a representative of the NFL."

Jones's playing status is to be reviewed after the Titans' 10th game next season and his suspension could be adjusted at that point, the league said. He is barred from the Titans' headquarters through the end of May, and can visit once per week after that to meet with the team's player development director and participate in conditioning and film study. To be reinstated, the league said, he must have "no further adverse involvement with law enforcement" and must cooperate with all required counseling and education programs.

Henry was given similar conditions for reinstatement, but he can participate in offseason practices, training camp and preseason games. He cannot participate in regular season practices while suspended.

The four-page conduct policy says that any employee of the league or a team can be disciplined without being convicted of a crime. Employees, the policy says, are subject to being disciplined for criminal offenses; any violent or threatening behavior toward another employee; possession of a gun or other weapon in any workplace setting; or any conduct that puts another person in danger or tarnishes the league's reputation. A first-time offender must undergo a formal clinical evaluation and perhaps counseling but generally will not face discipline, the policy says. A repeat offender is subject to a fine, suspension, or banishment from the league by the commissioner and might have to apply for reinstatement. A player can appeal a punishment to the commissioner.

The league announced that teams also can be disciplined. It did not specify how, but Goodell said at last month's annual league meeting that punishment could come in the form of a fine or the loss of draft picks. The new policy also contains provisions bolstering education and support programs for players.

I don't have the exact verbage of the revised policy available as it is not posted on the NFLPA website. The last part is why the LEAGUE seemingly may opt not to suspend Vick. Again, this pertains to the rules the league must follow and I believe the team has its own set of rules to follow.
DY,

I think the bolded text may carry some weight too, the NFL has not experienced such an emotion inducing crime such as this; a star in MV is accused of a heinous crime. I think this may be one of the times where the League has to review its policy and see if it works, if anything, the League may have to make the tough decision and play it off as for the personal safety of the player(s).

I am not sure how they go about it, but I am in the camp that he will not see the field this year, and they work out the details later.

A different take:

You can't plead ignorance to the Law in MV's case, but the League or Owner are protected in their decision(s), if based on sound reason (Reasonable Person Standard) will not be held culpable, if their decision to suspend ends up being incorrect. So everyone arguing that Vick can't be suspended due to he is "innocent until proven guilty" and in turn will sue them, are off base; what is he going to sue them for if they base it off reasonable information, the indictment too is based off reasonable information.

I think the League and ownership will do their due diligence and make a decision in the best interest of all parties involved including themselves and the NFL; but the thought of possibly being sued for falsely suspending someone is not even going to enter their minds. What would Vick sue for, lost wages? He would be entitled if they were wrong, but they cannot give back the year of playing time and the public perception that is already not in his favor, so he will collect his either way. Suspending him will not make his name any worse so it's not slander/lible, but could improve the leagues public standing at least in some minds.

I believe as fans we are the only ones who can take a "wait and see" approach.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an article on what the new policy on player conduct was going to be (which I pretty much think went through as intended) . . .

NFL Suspends Players, Beefs Up Conduct Policy

Multiple Arrests Spur Strengthened Stance

By Mark Maske

Washington Post Staff Writer

Wednesday, April 11, 2007; A01

The National Football League yesterday delivered the crackdown on criminal conduct by its players that it had promised. Commissioner Roger Goodell suspended Tennessee Titans cornerback Adam "Pacman" Jones for the entire 2007 season and Cincinnati Bengals wide receiver Chris Henry for the first half of it. The league also announced a strengthened conduct policy that empowers Goodell to banish a player permanently for repeated offenses and punish a team for misbehavior by its employees.

"We have long had policies and programs designed to encourage responsible behavior, and this policy is a further step in ensuring that everyone who is part of the NFL meets that standard," Goodell said in a written statement issued by the league. "We will continue to review the policy and modify it as warranted."

The issue became a priority for the NFL after at least 35 players were arrested in the first 11 1/2 months of last year, bringing waves of negative publicity for the country's most popular sport and making the game's leaders wary that sponsors and business partners could look for other places to spend their money. The trend of off-field misconduct has continued since, with approximately 15 more arrests.

Jones, 23, has been arrested or cited by police for assault, vandalism, marijuana possession, obstructing police, disorderly conduct and public intoxication in a series of incidents since he was drafted two years ago. Henry, also 23, has been arrested on gun, drug and drunk driving charges over the same period.

Goodell pledged to act but first sought the input of franchise owners, coaches, players and NFL Players Association chief Gene Upshaw. "We believe that these are steps that the commissioner needs to take and we support the policy," Upshaw said in a written statement yesterday. "It is important that players in violation of the policy will have the opportunity and the support to change their conduct and earn their way back."

Goodell already had the power as commissioner to punish players for off-field misconduct. But no player previously had been suspended for longer than four games; Goodell and Upshaw wanted to craft a new policy that had the players' support and gave Goodell a set of guidelines under which to deal with offenders.

Jones and Henry were suspended without pay, costing Jones his $1.29 million salary for next season and Henry about half of his $435,000 salary. Both must apply for reinstatement, the league said, and Goodell threatened to impose a lifetime ban on either player for further misconduct.

"I must emphasize to you that this is your last opportunity to salvage your NFL career," Goodell wrote in a letter delivered to each player. "I urge you to take full advantage of the resources available to support you in that effort."

Jones and Henry had separate hearings before Goodell eight days ago in New York. The same day, Goodell discussed the issue with Upshaw and a six-player advisory council.

Neither Jones nor Henry was available to comment yesterday. Jones's mother, Deborah Jones, told the Associated Press that her son's suspension was "just not fair."

Titans and Bengals officials expressed support for Goodell's action. Titans owner Bud Adams said in a written statement that the team appreciated and respected Goodell's "thoughtful decision," adding that the club must receive assurances from Jones "on a number of issues" before allowing him to return.

"Until we see a change in behavior through his actions and until he shows the ability to avoid controversy off the field, we will move forward with the possibility that he may not return to this team," Adams said .

Jones has spoken to police in 10 separate incidents since the Titans selected him in the first round of the NFL draft in April 2005. He has not been convicted of charges stemming from any of the incidents. He is facing possible felony and misdemeanor charges stemming from a brawl at a strip club in Las Vegas on Feb. 19 during the National Basketball Association's All-Star Weekend.

Henry was arrested four times in a span of 14 months and was suspended for two games by the league last season under the personal conduct and substance abuse policies. Last September, he was placed on probation after pleading guilty to a concealed weapon charge. In January, he pleaded guilty to providing alcohol to minors and was jailed for two days. He also pleaded guilty to a reduced charge in a drunk driving case.

"We support the commissioner's ruling, and while we regret the circumstances that called for it, it's good for both Chris and the Bengals to have the matter resolved," Bengals Coach Marvin Lewis said in a written statement. "Our team will move forward, and now it is up to Chris to acquire a more mature understanding of his responsibilities as a player for the Bengals and a representative of the NFL."

Jones's playing status is to be reviewed after the Titans' 10th game next season and his suspension could be adjusted at that point, the league said. He is barred from the Titans' headquarters through the end of May, and can visit once per week after that to meet with the team's player development director and participate in conditioning and film study. To be reinstated, the league said, he must have "no further adverse involvement with law enforcement" and must cooperate with all required counseling and education programs.

Henry was given similar conditions for reinstatement, but he can participate in offseason practices, training camp and preseason games. He cannot participate in regular season practices while suspended.

The four-page conduct policy says that any employee of the league or a team can be disciplined without being convicted of a crime. Employees, the policy says, are subject to being disciplined for criminal offenses; any violent or threatening behavior toward another employee; possession of a gun or other weapon in any workplace setting; or any conduct that puts another person in danger or tarnishes the league's reputation. A first-time offender must undergo a formal clinical evaluation and perhaps counseling but generally will not face discipline, the policy says. A repeat offender is subject to a fine, suspension, or banishment from the league by the commissioner and might have to apply for reinstatement. A player can appeal a punishment to the commissioner.

The league announced that teams also can be disciplined. It did not specify how, but Goodell said at last month's annual league meeting that punishment could come in the form of a fine or the loss of draft picks. The new policy also contains provisions bolstering education and support programs for players.

I don't have the exact verbage of the revised policy available as it is not posted on the NFLPA website. The last part is why the LEAGUE seemingly may opt not to suspend Vick. Again, this pertains to the rules the league must follow and I believe the team has its own set of rules to follow.
DY,

I think the bolded text may carry some weight too, the NFL has not experienced such an emotion inducing crime such as this, a star in MV is accused of a heinous and very serious crime. I think this may be one of the times where the League has to review its policy and if it works, and if anything, the League may have to make the tough decision and play it off as for the personal safety of the player(s).

I am not sure how they go about it, but I am in the camp that he will not see the field this year, and they work out the details later.

A different take:

You can't plead ignorance to the Law in MV's case, but the League or Owner is protected in that their decision(s), if based on sound reason (Reasonable Person Standard) will not be held culpable if their decision to suspend ends up being incorrect. So everyone arguing that Vick can't be suspended due to he is "innocent until proven guilty" and would in turn file grievance or sue the perpetrators of his suspension, I think are off base.

I think the League and ownership will do their due diligence and make a decision in the best interest of all parties involved including themselves and the NFL; but the thought of possibly being sued for falsely suspending someone is not even going to enter their minds. What would Vick sue for lost wages, in which he would be entitled if they are wrong, but they cannot give back the year of playing time and the public perception that is already not in his favor. Suspending him will not make his name any worse so it's not slander/lible, but could improve the leagues public standing at least in some minds.

I believe as fans we are the only ones who can take a "wait and see" approach.

I am pretty sure that the league cannot change the rules of governance ex post facto. I suspect that the section bolded in the article meant that the league MOVING FORWARD will revisit the stipulations and policies applicable for all events IN THE FUTURE.

Maybe they can manipulate the rules whenever they want, but the regular court system does not operate that way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are probably correct about that. I think this will be deliberated in several courts (criminal, public, commissioner, appeals) before we see the end. It is a nice topic of discussion though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope he has the most horrific outcome available to him happen, I can't get the images of what those dogs must have suffered out of mind. Maybe he can have daily firehose/ shock treatment along with waterboarding, sick bastard, he's no better than OJ IMO, maybe worse.

I am really surprised that Nike hasn't dropped him yet. Even if he's cleared I would think they wouldn't want him representing their brand.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope he has the most horrific outcome available to him happen, I can't get the images of what those dogs must have suffered out of mind. Maybe he can have daily firehose/ shock treatment along with waterboarding, sick bastard, he's no better than OJ IMO, maybe worse.

I am really surprised that Nike hasn't dropped him yet. Even if he's cleared I would think they wouldn't want him representing their brand.
I'm sure there are a lot of meetings being held on this exact topic as we speak....
Link to post
Share on other sites

Goodall has to suspend Vick.

If I were a Peta officer I would be leading the Falcon ticket drive already.

This is my vision, Opening day and the falcons take the field and a shower of beanie baby dogs and pound puppies start to rain onto the field and people start yelling, then the non peta people will get in on throwing whatever, at first it is difficult to see because there will be a dump button and the NFL will try to minimize the action, much like a naked guy running onto the field. Then their will be a inexplicable 40 minute game delay as the toy dogs and beer bottles are removed from the field and security escorts approximately 30 peta protesters out of the stadium. That will be the official report, but there will be photos of the nonsense and Peta will claim there were thousands of protesters there but only a handful were arrested. The truth will be somewhere in between more like a hundred protesters.

It will calm down somewhat and then the stories and video will start coming out. The local news will interview every yokel that comes out of the Stadium and they will over dramatize the action referring to it as "a riot and a hail of puppies" Before you know it everyone who did not see it or looks into it will assume there was a Mike Vick riot and a game had to be stopped.

It will go down in football history PERMANENTLY, in the vein of booing Santa and whipping batteries onto the field. However this will be by far the worst, as the NFL brought it on itself by backing a person who ultimately will turn out to be a putrid human.

This will forever be Goodalls legacy the "Mike Vick pound puppy pelting" the very thought of this must make Goodall want to wretch.

There is a %0 chance Vick plays this year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From a fantasy perspective it would be nice if people just did not draft him. I am under no delusions that he'll ever know, or that this will change the world, or anything of that nature. It is funny, however, how many of us will blast the NFL or teams for looking past character issues in their billion dollar industry, and then ignore all of that to try and win our $75 fantasy league.

He won't upset your team chemistry, he won't be a distraction to your fantasy team, you won't have protests. The truth is passing on Vick won't make a difference at all to the world. It may, however, put you a step closer to knowing that if the stakes ever REALLY mattered, you'd make the right choice about the kind of people you'd support.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From a fantasy perspective it would be nice if people just did not draft him. I am under no delusions that he'll ever know, or that this will change the world, or anything of that nature. It is funny, however, how many of us will blast the NFL or teams for looking past character issues in their billion dollar industry, and then ignore all of that to try and win our $75 fantasy league.He won't upset your team chemistry, he won't be a distraction to your fantasy team, you won't have protests. The truth is passing on Vick won't make a difference at all to the world. It may, however, put you a step closer to knowing that if the stakes ever REALLY mattered, you'd make the right choice about the kind of people you'd support.

True, some may have not learned that lesson, I learned it a long time ago with my totally sweet tight end Eric Green. Drafting a punk rarely works out well and it just isn't worth the headache and roster spot as you don't know if he is going to be able to play every week.
Link to post
Share on other sites

From a fantasy perspective it would be nice if people just did not draft him. I am under no delusions that he'll ever know, or that this will change the world, or anything of that nature. It is funny, however, how many of us will blast the NFL or teams for looking past character issues in their billion dollar industry, and then ignore all of that to try and win our $75 fantasy league.He won't upset your team chemistry, he won't be a distraction to your fantasy team, you won't have protests. The truth is passing on Vick won't make a difference at all to the world. It may, however, put you a step closer to knowing that if the stakes ever REALLY mattered, you'd make the right choice about the kind of people you'd support.

:tinfoilhat: I've already stated in another thread that it wouldn't matter how far he drops. I'm not drafting him. I've even tossed around the idea of making him unavailable in my league, but I'll only do that if everyone else in the league agrees.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Forget the commish suspending him, what happens with the Falcon fanbase? I would think the Falcons will have a backlash from the fans if he is allowed to play. Obviously you will have some street thugs who are somewhat supportive of Vick no matter what, but what happens with the ticket paying public? I can not see any high profile supporter whether it be Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, or whoever wanting to even remotely be associated with this mess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He won't upset your team chemistry, he won't be a distraction to your fantasy team, you won't have protests. The truth is passing on Vick won't make a difference at all to the world. It may, however, put you a step closer to knowing that if the stakes ever REALLY mattered, you'd make the right choice about the kind of people you'd support.

I understand where you are coming from, but I think we should not be mixing fantasy and reality. Aside from the issue of whether Vick would actually be on the field, I would not have an issue with drafting Vick. He is not benefiting in any way from my selection -- as you said, he'll have no idea he is on my team. Having him on my team does noy mean I support him. I understand tyhat some people can't stand the thought of having him on their team and I get that and respect that. But to suggest that it in anyway influences your real life choices, makes you a better person,etc - that I don't subscribe to personally.
Link to post
Share on other sites

If I'm not mistaken, Rae Carruth was cut from the Panthers well before his trial so even under the old commish, it seems teams could at least cut a player under the 'morals' clause of their contract without a conviction. It seems a suspension would probably also be possible.

Personally I am expecting the League or Falcons will convince him that he "needs some time off to devote his energies to his legal issues" and he will have some sort of leave of absence that will extend until his trial is complete. The distractions and negative publicity would be too damaging for the NFL and the falcons, not to mention vick himself. My question is whether it would be leave with or without pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From a fantasy perspective it would be nice if people just did not draft him. I am under no delusions that he'll ever know, or that this will change the world, or anything of that nature. It is funny, however, how many of us will blast the NFL or teams for looking past character issues in their billion dollar industry, and then ignore all of that to try and win our $75 fantasy league.He won't upset your team chemistry, he won't be a distraction to your fantasy team, you won't have protests. The truth is passing on Vick won't make a difference at all to the world. It may, however, put you a step closer to knowing that if the stakes ever REALLY mattered, you'd make the right choice about the kind of people you'd support.

From a post I made in another thread a little bit ago:

I have him in one of my 11 leagues, a dynasty league I took over before last year began. Vick was already on the team.In our scoring system, he was the #2 QB to Manning last year and helped me to a division title.I was taking a wait-and-see approach to the whole dog fighting thing until yesterday. I had actually hoped he really was just an innocent provider of the home and was unaware of what was going on there, and ESPN had fooled me into believing he would be unaffected. Foolishly, I had even made a couple of 'buy low' offers in other leagues for him based on this thinking. Luckily for me, both offers were rejected.I read the entire indictment yesterday and was sickened. I concluded I want nothing to do with this guy, and sent an email out to the league I own him in, telling them I'd have Vick on the trading block for 2 days and the best offer gets him. So far, not a peep.My leaguemates may be reading this, but I don't care. If I get no offers, I cut him. It has nothing to do with whether I think he'll play 16 games this year or never play again. Even if I were certain he'd play all year, I'd still cut him. I want no association with him and don't want to see his name on my roster, period.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He won't upset your team chemistry, he won't be a distraction to your fantasy team, you won't have protests. The truth is passing on Vick won't make a difference at all to the world. It may, however, put you a step closer to knowing that if the stakes ever REALLY mattered, you'd make the right choice about the kind of people you'd support.

I understand where you are coming from, but I think we should not be mixing fantasy and reality. Aside from the issue of whether Vick would actually be on the field, I would not have an issue with drafting Vick. He is not benefiting in any way from my selection -- as you said, he'll have no idea he is on my team. Having him on my team does noy mean I support him. I understand tyhat some people can't stand the thought of having him on their team and I get that and respect that. But to suggest that it in anyway influences your real life choices, makes you a better person,etc - that I don't subscribe to personally.
Totally a matter of opinion. I personally try to keep away from NFLers I dislike. But to me, the ganes are more important than FF, as much as I love FF. i can live without FF, but not without my Sunday games. So it is actually important to me, to a point, that I not abhor a player I am cheering for when they score. So I never have TO, Moss, Vick, or a few others on my team, but that's just me. However I have had pretty good success while still keeping my innards happy so I feel like I am justified in that.
Link to post
Share on other sites

If I'm not mistaken, Rae Carruth was cut from the Panthers well before his trial.

In the NFL any team can cut any player at any time, no questions asked and for any reason.With Carruth, no one cared because his salary cap numbers and bonus monies were negligible.ATL could cut Vick (even without cause) whenever they want. If they elect to do that, however, per the terms of the CBA, they would have to incur a $22 million salary cap hit (incurred over two seasons) and they'ver already paid out $37 million in signing bonus money that on the surface they may not get back.(A case could be made that Vick did not fulfill his contractual obligation of proper conduct, and this would likely end up in arbitration and/or in court as to whether Vick would have to return any of the guaranteed money.)
Link to post
Share on other sites

So it is actually important to me, to a point, that I not abhor a player I am cheering for when they score. So I never have TO, Moss, Vick, or a few others on my team, but that's just me. However I have had pretty good success while still keeping my innards happy so I feel like I am justified in that.

The cheering thing is an interesting point :thumbup: That requies more "distance" than simply drafting; gotta think about that one.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an article on what the new policy on player conduct was going to be (which I pretty much think went through as intended) . . .

NFL Suspends Players, Beefs Up Conduct Policy

Multiple Arrests Spur Strengthened Stance

By Mark Maske

Washington Post Staff Writer

Wednesday, April 11, 2007; A01

The National Football League yesterday delivered the crackdown on criminal conduct by its players that it had promised. Commissioner Roger Goodell suspended Tennessee Titans cornerback Adam "Pacman" Jones for the entire 2007 season and Cincinnati Bengals wide receiver Chris Henry for the first half of it. The league also announced a strengthened conduct policy that empowers Goodell to banish a player permanently for repeated offenses and punish a team for misbehavior by its employees.

"We have long had policies and programs designed to encourage responsible behavior, and this policy is a further step in ensuring that everyone who is part of the NFL meets that standard," Goodell said in a written statement issued by the league. "We will continue to review the policy and modify it as warranted."

The issue became a priority for the NFL after at least 35 players were arrested in the first 11 1/2 months of last year, bringing waves of negative publicity for the country's most popular sport and making the game's leaders wary that sponsors and business partners could look for other places to spend their money. The trend of off-field misconduct has continued since, with approximately 15 more arrests.

Jones, 23, has been arrested or cited by police for assault, vandalism, marijuana possession, obstructing police, disorderly conduct and public intoxication in a series of incidents since he was drafted two years ago. Henry, also 23, has been arrested on gun, drug and drunk driving charges over the same period.

Goodell pledged to act but first sought the input of franchise owners, coaches, players and NFL Players Association chief Gene Upshaw. "We believe that these are steps that the commissioner needs to take and we support the policy," Upshaw said in a written statement yesterday. "It is important that players in violation of the policy will have the opportunity and the support to change their conduct and earn their way back."

Goodell already had the power as commissioner to punish players for off-field misconduct. But no player previously had been suspended for longer than four games; Goodell and Upshaw wanted to craft a new policy that had the players' support and gave Goodell a set of guidelines under which to deal with offenders.

Jones and Henry were suspended without pay, costing Jones his $1.29 million salary for next season and Henry about half of his $435,000 salary. Both must apply for reinstatement, the league said, and Goodell threatened to impose a lifetime ban on either player for further misconduct.

"I must emphasize to you that this is your last opportunity to salvage your NFL career," Goodell wrote in a letter delivered to each player. "I urge you to take full advantage of the resources available to support you in that effort."

Jones and Henry had separate hearings before Goodell eight days ago in New York. The same day, Goodell discussed the issue with Upshaw and a six-player advisory council.

Neither Jones nor Henry was available to comment yesterday. Jones's mother, Deborah Jones, told the Associated Press that her son's suspension was "just not fair."

Titans and Bengals officials expressed support for Goodell's action. Titans owner Bud Adams said in a written statement that the team appreciated and respected Goodell's "thoughtful decision," adding that the club must receive assurances from Jones "on a number of issues" before allowing him to return.

"Until we see a change in behavior through his actions and until he shows the ability to avoid controversy off the field, we will move forward with the possibility that he may not return to this team," Adams said .

Jones has spoken to police in 10 separate incidents since the Titans selected him in the first round of the NFL draft in April 2005. He has not been convicted of charges stemming from any of the incidents. He is facing possible felony and misdemeanor charges stemming from a brawl at a strip club in Las Vegas on Feb. 19 during the National Basketball Association's All-Star Weekend.

Henry was arrested four times in a span of 14 months and was suspended for two games by the league last season under the personal conduct and substance abuse policies. Last September, he was placed on probation after pleading guilty to a concealed weapon charge. In January, he pleaded guilty to providing alcohol to minors and was jailed for two days. He also pleaded guilty to a reduced charge in a drunk driving case.

"We support the commissioner's ruling, and while we regret the circumstances that called for it, it's good for both Chris and the Bengals to have the matter resolved," Bengals Coach Marvin Lewis said in a written statement. "Our team will move forward, and now it is up to Chris to acquire a more mature understanding of his responsibilities as a player for the Bengals and a representative of the NFL."

Jones's playing status is to be reviewed after the Titans' 10th game next season and his suspension could be adjusted at that point, the league said. He is barred from the Titans' headquarters through the end of May, and can visit once per week after that to meet with the team's player development director and participate in conditioning and film study. To be reinstated, the league said, he must have "no further adverse involvement with law enforcement" and must cooperate with all required counseling and education programs.

Henry was given similar conditions for reinstatement, but he can participate in offseason practices, training camp and preseason games. He cannot participate in regular season practices while suspended.

The four-page conduct policy says that any employee of the league or a team can be disciplined without being convicted of a crime. Employees, the policy says, are subject to being disciplined for criminal offenses; any violent or threatening behavior toward another employee; possession of a gun or other weapon in any workplace setting; or any conduct that puts another person in danger or tarnishes the league's reputation. A first-time offender must undergo a formal clinical evaluation and perhaps counseling but generally will not face discipline, the policy says. A repeat offender is subject to a fine, suspension, or banishment from the league by the commissioner and might have to apply for reinstatement. A player can appeal a punishment to the commissioner.

The league announced that teams also can be disciplined. It did not specify how, but Goodell said at last month's annual league meeting that punishment could come in the form of a fine or the loss of draft picks. The new policy also contains provisions bolstering education and support programs for players.

I don't have the exact verbage of the revised policy available as it is not posted on the NFLPA website. The last part is why the LEAGUE seemingly may opt not to suspend Vick. Again, this pertains to the rules the league must follow and I believe the team has its own set of rules to follow.
DY,

I think the bolded text may carry some weight too, the NFL has not experienced such an emotion inducing crime such as this, a star in MV is accused of a heinous and very serious crime. I think this may be one of the times where the League has to review its policy and if it works, and if anything, the League may have to make the tough decision and play it off as for the personal safety of the player(s).

I am not sure how they go about it, but I am in the camp that he will not see the field this year, and they work out the details later.

A different take:

You can't plead ignorance to the Law in MV's case, but the League or Owner is protected in that their decision(s), if based on sound reason (Reasonable Person Standard) will not be held culpable if their decision to suspend ends up being incorrect. So everyone arguing that Vick can't be suspended due to he is "innocent until proven guilty" and would in turn file grievance or sue the perpetrators of his suspension, I think are off base.

I think the League and ownership will do their due diligence and make a decision in the best interest of all parties involved including themselves and the NFL; but the thought of possibly being sued for falsely suspending someone is not even going to enter their minds. What would Vick sue for lost wages, in which he would be entitled if they are wrong, but they cannot give back the year of playing time and the public perception that is already not in his favor. Suspending him will not make his name any worse so it's not slander/lible, but could improve the leagues public standing at least in some minds.

I believe as fans we are the only ones who can take a "wait and see" approach.

I am pretty sure that the league cannot change the rules of governance ex post facto. I suspect that the section bolded in the article meant that the league MOVING FORWARD will revisit the stipulations and policies applicable for all events IN THE FUTURE.

Maybe they can manipulate the rules whenever they want, but the regular court system does not operate that way.

I disagree there. IIRC, Tank and Pacman's charges were based on incidents that took place PRIOR to the shift in league policy, and they were suspended based on the new rules, not grandfathered in under the old conduct policy.
Link to post
Share on other sites

He won't upset your team chemistry, he won't be a distraction to your fantasy team, you won't have protests. The truth is passing on Vick won't make a difference at all to the world. It may, however, put you a step closer to knowing that if the stakes ever REALLY mattered, you'd make the right choice about the kind of people you'd support.

I understand where you are coming from, but I think we should not be mixing fantasy and reality. Aside from the issue of whether Vick would actually be on the field, I would not have an issue with drafting Vick. He is not benefiting in any way from my selection -- as you said, he'll have no idea he is on my team. Having him on my team does noy mean I support him. I understand tyhat some people can't stand the thought of having him on their team and I get that and respect that. But to suggest that it in anyway influences your real life choices, makes you a better person,etc - that I don't subscribe to personally.
I agree, but no matter what a player does, some people will forgive them based on their on-the-field performance. Example is the way that most Cowboys fans have embraced that ^%$@* TO and forgiven him the crap that he'd pulled in the past. There will be those fans who stick up for Vick, not because he's innocent until proven guilty, but because he runs the ball really, really well. And that's a sad commentary on our society.

There's no way I'd take a chance with him on my FF team. I doubt he'll produce this year even if he does play.

-Dave

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...