Sources Say Goodell Will Suspend Vick for 2007

[Hostile]

Sources: Vick suspension near
By Jason Cole (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/expertsarchive;_ylt=AgNmy6SDMM0JaD8AsJD_4CTsYNAF?a uthor=Jason+Cole), Yahoo! Sports
August 12, 2007

http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/sp/tools/med/2006/10/ipt/1160163485.jpg (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/expertsarchive;_ylt=AjycaYUGJrGcLhribg0F3dHsYNAF?a uthor=Jason+Cole)

Two NFL sources said that commissioner Roger Goodell likely will announce this week or next the suspension of Atlanta Falcons (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/teams/atl/;_ylt=Aj1B3jjUSbG5.BkSvqiwUwjsYNAF) quarterback Michael Vick (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/5448/;_ylt=AnU2IlcHqMOKCM6KK0T64qLsYNAF) for the 2007 season.

"That's the direction it's going and has been from the time this started," one of the sources said this week.

In July, Goodell told Vick not to report to training camp in the aftermath of a federal indictment for his alleged involvement in dogfighting on a property he owned in Virginia. Vick has since been arraigned on the matter and is facing trial in November.

What is unclear is whether Vick will be allowed to return to the Falcons this season if he is acquitted. This offseason, Goodell suspended Tennessee Titans (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/teams/ten/;_ylt=ApxAWqXbMaRhVClTt7XVQ2jsYNAF) cornerback Adam "Pacman" Jones for the entire season but added stipulations that could allow Jones to return earlier if he clears his record.

Said the other source: "The plan was to make sure it was announced before the season. Given what everybody has seen from what (league) security found and what the feds are telling us, there's really no choice."

From a public relations standpoint, the NFL would like the matter dealt with before the opening week of the season. The feeling is that if the league can resolve the matter now, any further news on Vick will not detract from the buildup to the season.

The NFL has examined the indictment against Vick at length and has conducted a quasi-investigation of its own. The league has not interviewed anyone associated with the case, but it has pored over as many public documents as it could find.

The most careful element of the suspension is how it will be worded. Under the league's new personal conduct policy, there is some belief that Vick could escape punishment because this is the first time he has been charged with a crime.

However, Goodell hinted last week that because Vick was charged with multiple counts, including gambling on dogfights, the league may have a way around that. In an interview with USA Today, Goodell said that while he was disturbed by the dogfighting accusations, the gambling aspect is just as meaningful.

"Listen, we're sickened by the allegations and the predicament Michael put himself in," Goodell said. "But there are a lot of things in the indictment that concern the NFL that may not be of a greater concern from a law enforcement standpoint."

The NFL's gambling policy, which was established long before the personal conduct policy, has resulted in the suspension of players in the past. Both Paul Hornung and Alex Karras were suspended for the entire 1963 season after admitting they placed bets on NFL games.

Players can be banned for life for illegal gambling.

Jason Cole is a national NFL writer for Yahoo! Sports. Send Jason a question or comment (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/feedback;_ylt=AvfCcLxczeEjZ4C.HYxaK6PsYNAF?author= Jason+Cole) for potential use in a future column or webcast.

[Murph80]

If he were to get probation for all of this. Which I think he will. This is a stiff penalty. Leonard Little got 4 or 6 games can't remember for Vehicle Manslauter.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Are these the same sources that said he wouldnt get indicted?

[DallasEast]

My money's on 600 replies minimum--with 50% - 55% of the replies made by lawyers.

[dargonking999]

I hate these sources

This week or next week

Please, i'll believe it when i see it. Two weeks? Come on, that sounds like a run around.

[Teague31]

way too excessive IMO- first off he has not been convicted of anything.. second, how many players get slaps on the wrist for domestic assault or as the earlier poster pointed out manslaughter. goddell is bowing to public pressure.

[CM Duck]

second, how many players get slaps on the wrist for domestic assault or as the earlier poster pointed out manslaughter.

but wasn't that when Tags was in charge?

[Jack-Reacher]

way too excessive IMO- first off he has not been convicted of anything.. second, how many players get slaps on the wrist for domestic assault or as the earlier poster pointed out manslaughter. goddell is bowing to public pressure.

While he may not have been convicted of anything, you have to take into consideration how this entire mess has affected the image of the NFL. Vick was one of the poster boys of the NFL, and to have such a media nightmare like this happen, the league must... repeat must, distance itself from Vick as fast as it can. Anything less than a year suspension and everyone outside of the NFL would view the suspension as the NFL trying to protect one of it's golden boys.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the NFL make this a lifetime ban "if" Vick gets convicted.

[notherbob]

Personally. I think they should hang him by his yardarm, and then later if he is found guilty, they should hang him again.

[Yeagermeister]

but wasn't that when Tags was in charge?

That's what people are missing when bringing up old cases. Tags was too soft on players. Goodell is trying to set an example that if you screw up you get punished. If he had been in charge when Little did what he did he would have had a more severe penalty.

[HopeCowboyFan]

This is wrong....

So wrong to suspend a player before legal due process has happened. And if in November he is acquitted what happens to Goddels 1 year suspension? Really charting on MAJOR legal issues and lawsuits at NFL.

[SkinsandTerps]

I wonder if it will be called a suspension, or a leave of absence to clear up his legal issues ?

If he is acquitted he will be alowed to come back. Same option was given to Pacman Jones.

The gambling issue could be tricky to get around though.

[1fisher]

That's what people are missing when bringing up old cases. Tags was too soft on players. Goodell is trying to set an example that if you screw up you get punished. If he had been in charge when Little did what he did he would have had a more severe penalty.

precisely!

[ThreeSportStar80]

How can you suspend a guy for the year for a 1st time possible offense, there's no conviction or even a trial yet... Boy talk about jumping the gun if indeed these "sources" know what they're talking about.:rolleyes:

[lspain1]

This was an obvious move. Something had to happen and Goodell is definitely doing the right thing. I will note for some on this forum that this is the right move regardless of the guilt or innocence of Vick.

[Hostile]

This was an obvious move. Something had to happen and Goodell is definitely doing the right thing. I will note for some on this forum that this is the right move regardless of the guilt or innocence of Vick.I agree.

The NFL's image could take a horrible hit if they didn't.

[dbair1967]

This is wrong....

So wrong to suspend a player before legal due process has happened. And if in November he is acquitted what happens to Goddels 1 year suspension? Really charting on MAJOR legal issues and lawsuits at NFL.

another person that just doesnt understand the whole thing

you DONT HAVE TO BE CONVICTED OR EVEN CHARGED WITH ANYTHING to violate what the NFL says is conduct detrimental

Vick is a thug and a very stupid thug at that...he deserves to be canned

David

[dbair1967]

How can you suspend a guy for the year for a 1st time possible offense, there's no conviction or even a trial yet... Boy talk about jumping the gun if indeed these "sources" know what they're talking about.:rolleyes:

another one that doesnt see the forest for the trees

:rolleyes:

I know this is a hard concept for people like you to get, but EVERYONE KNOWS he did something at this point...the only ones who dont are the Vick apologists who are too blinded by ignorance to admit it

David

[dbair1967]

I hate these sources

This week or next week

Please, i'll believe it when i see it. Two weeks? Come on, that sounds like a run around.

Peter King just reported the same thing at halftime of the Seattle/ San Diego game...Vick is basically gone

this isnt shocking news here people

David

[Bob Sacamano]

do it Goodell

screw the lawyers! and their hanger-ons

[GimmeTheBall!]

For those who think one year would be excessive, think about this:

Innocent dogs were involved. Dogs are icons in our society.
The only thing more heinous would be hurting little kids.
So a year seems really reasonable, if I were Mikey.

[BigDFan5]

Falcons gonna lose their best running back boo hoo see ya loser

[Big Dakota]

My money's on 600 replies minimum--with 50% - 55% of the replies made by lawyers.


Lawyers that have enough time to spend EVERY DAY on a Cowboys site. Must be from Harvard:laugh2:

[DBoys]

This is a good move and the NFL is smart.

This could be what steroids has been to baseball in some small way.

Severe penalty cuts the NFL off from Vick and whatever happens to him.

I bet Vicks pulls a Pacman and gets in more trouble and the NFL never lets him back in. If they have proof of gambling on dogs I can see him getting banned for life once convicted.

[silverbear]

way too excessive IMO- first off he has not been convicted of anything.. second, how many players get slaps on the wrist for domestic assault or as the earlier poster pointed out manslaughter. goddell is bowing to public pressure.

Yup, that's EXACTLY what he's doing... unfortunately for you and Ookie, though, Goodell warned everybody that from this point forward, he was putting some teeth in the player conduct policy, and that would mean more severe punishments...

So it's pretty weak to now whine when the punishment handed down IS more severe... Vick needs to be worrying more about keepin' his ignorant a$$ out of jail, anyway...

[silverbear]

This is wrong....

So wrong to suspend a player before legal due process has happened.

Not when there's gambling involved... ask Hornung and Karras about that...

[silverbear]

How can you suspend a guy for the year for a 1st time possible offense, there's no conviction or even a trial yet... Boy talk about jumping the gun if indeed these "sources" know what they're talking about.:rolleyes:

The Player Conduct Policy does not depend on convictions, or even arrests... any conduct the commissioner deems to be damaging to the interests of the league may be cause for suspension...

You might personally think that's wrong, but it's written into the agreement between the league and the players, and as such it's quite legal...

[LowTech]

I understand both sides of the opinion coin here, but does anyone remember the name Richard Jewel. If you do, you know what I mean.

[silverbear]

I understand both sides of the opinion coin here, but does anyone remember the name Richard Jewel. If you do, you know what I mean.

Richard Jewell has absolutely nothing to do with this situation... there are no comparisons to be drawn between Michael Vick and him...

[theogt]

For those who think one year would be excessive, think about this:

Innocent dogs were involved. Dogs are icons in our society.
The only thing more heinous would be hurting little kids.
So a year seems really reasonable, if I were Mikey.What about hurting fat kids?

[LowTech]

I've never cared for Vick the football player. I always thought he was overhyped. And after some of the stunts he has pulled over the last couple of years, I saw that I don't really care for Vick the person.

If he is responsible for the acts that have been revealed, I've got a couple of Dobermans that would love to have a little talk with him.

But am I going to be judge, jury and executioner because he has been accused of something and the media is milking it for everything it's worth? No.

I just don't share that mob mentality like most. But I will be the one with a rope if he is responsible.

[Zaxor]

This was an obvious move. Something had to happen and Goodell is definitely doing the right thing. I will note for some on this forum that this is the right move regardless of the guilt or innocence of Vick.

I personally think Vick is involved. But NO WAY can you take away his pay for a year especially if later he is exonerated...

Think about it..now granted this a bit far fetched but it is still in the realm of reality...

lets say that it happened just like Vick said and later his Defense attorneys can prove that these cooperating witnesses had tried to extort money from Vick and when they didn't get it made up their stories...

So vick not only lost a year of playing time but his salary and his endorsements because someone lied.

How in the world can someone say that the NFL made the right move...Vick violated neither the personal conduct or broke any law...

now you might say he should have never helped out a family member... agreed if he knew he was shady but if he had no idea how can you hold him responsible he is not his brother's keeper...

now again granted... I do not see the above scenario as plausible but it is still possible.

The NFL would be just as guilty as those that tried to extort and use Vick and that would be the bigger blackeye than having waited till due process took place

[lspain1]

How in the world can someone say that the NFL made the right move...Vick violated neither the personal conduct or broke any law...


Your argument seems to miss the forest for the trees. I am not a Vick hater but I simply don't see any other practical alternative:

1. It is my understanding that in a meeting with Goodell, Vick stated that nothing happened on the property he owned. Vick did not say "I don't know".....or "Not to my knowledge".....He said "Nothing happened." This was clearly a lie. Regardless of whether or not Vick was involved....bad things happened on the property. I believe Goodell has all of the ammuntion he needs to make a determination in the best interests of the NFL right now. He does not need to wait.

2. The argument over the money CAN wait until tomorrow. Right now, Michael Vick must not take the field in the NFL until the case is adjudicated. Suspend Vick and keep him off the field. If he is proven innocent....pay him some or all of his money and move on.

This seems the only practical solution and the courts will decide the eventual outcome. I have no idea if this approach is "just," I just don't see any other alternative.

[Zaxor]

Your argument seems to miss the forest for the trees. I am not a Vick hater but I simply don't see any other practical alternative:

1. It is my understanding that in a meeting with Goodell, Vick stated that nothing happened on the property he owned. Vick did not say "I don't know".....or "Not to my knowledge".....He said "Nothing happened." This was clearly a lie. Regardless of whether or not Vick was involved....bad things happened on the property. I believe Goodell has all of the ammuntion he needs to make a determination in the best interests of the NFL right now. He does not need to wait.

2. The argument over the money CAN wait until tomorrow. Right now, Michael Vick must not take the field in the NFL until the case is adjudicated. Suspend Vick and keep him off the field. If he is proven innocent....pay him some or all of his money and move on.

This seems the only practical solution and the courts will decide the eventual outcome. I have no idea if this approach is "just," I just don't see any other alternative.

While I agree with this... it should be with pay as I can see no justifyable way to suspend him without pay

[Hoofbite]

While I agree with this... it should be with pay as I can see no justifyable way to suspend him without pay

Wouln't be a suspensions if it was paid. It would be a vacation.

[Hoofbite]

And its all about image. This guy flipped off the fans and had a little funkity funk in a water bottle, gave out an STI and now is a known dog fighter.

Hes trash and any employer who wouldn't sperate themselves from a person of that low quality is just asking trouble.

[CrazyCowboy]

really the comish has no other choice.

[burmafrd]

the mouthpieces and wannabe's just never get it. Most people now are smart enough to realize the chances that someone like Vick is innocent of all things is just about ZERO. Does not matter what joke of a verdict the screwed up legal system comes up with-the COURT of PUBLIC OPINION will rule. And THAT is what the NFL has to worry about.

[dbair1967]

For those who think one year would be excessive, think about this:

Innocent dogs were involved. Dogs are icons in our society.
The only thing more heinous would be hurting little kids.
So a year seems really reasonable, if I were Mikey.

on top of that and all the executions were the really really sick disclosure of "warming up" or "training" the pit bulls with golden retrievers

this clown and his cohorts are some of the sickest scum of the earth

David

[dbair1967]

I understand both sides of the opinion coin here, but does anyone remember the name Richard Jewel. If you do, you know what I mean.

yeah I know who he is and no, this has nothing to do with that nor is it similar in anyway

David

[dbair1967]

I personally think Vick is involved. But NO WAY can you take away his pay for a year especially if later he is exonerated...

Think about it..now granted this a bit far fetched but it is still in the realm of reality...

lets say that it happened just like Vick said and later his Defense attorneys can prove that these cooperating witnesses had tried to extort money from Vick and when they didn't get it made up their stories...

So vick not only lost a year of playing time but his salary and his endorsements because someone lied.

How in the world can someone say that the NFL made the right move...Vick violated neither the personal conduct or broke any law...

now you might say he should have never helped out a family member... agreed if he knew he was shady but if he had no idea how can you hold him responsible he is not his brother's keeper...

now again granted... I do not see the above scenario as plausible but it is still possible.

The NFL would be just as guilty as those that tried to extort and use Vick and that would be the bigger blackeye than having waited till due process took place

sure you can take away his pay, just because a potentially ignorant jury would see Vick as a victim and let him off doesnt mean he is innocent of all charges...he's hired (ie PAID) a bigtime defense attorney who has gotten some people out of ridiculous stuff because of an extremely flawed judicial system, but as before, if he gets off it doesnt mean he is innocent

again folks, READ THE INDICTMENT...he is not going to be exonerated...he is going to either be convicted of some very serious stuff or plea bargain out

there is a reason the league, the team and all his endoresement companies have all bailed on him, and it isnt because of public pressure

David

[Zaxor]

Wouln't be a suspensions if it was paid. It would be a vacation.

BUT if he is found not guilty... The league would be in for deep do-do because Vick would have not been in violation of league or legal issues I can't begin to image what kind of sum of money he would be asking for..10's of millions if not more...

now again understand that I am by no means claiming that Vick is guilty or that he is not...I am just thinking of possible consequences for the league should he be aquitted

[Zaxor]

sure you can take away his pay, just because a potentially ignorant jury would see Vick as a victim and let him off doesnt mean he is innocent of all charges...he's hired (ie PAID) a bigtime defense attorney who has gotten some people out of ridiculous stuff because of an extremely flawed judicial system, but as before, if he gets off it doesnt mean he is innocent

again folks, READ THE INDICTMENT...he is not going to be exonerated...he is going to either be convicted of some very serious stuff or plea bargain out

there is a reason the league, the team and all his endoresement companies have all bailed on him, and it isnt because of public pressure

David

Again David I too think he knows more than he has let on and that from the stuff I have seen he looks to be guilty but on the off hand that he would be exonerated that would cost the league far more than it would have to suspend him with pay.

[joseephuss]

way too excessive IMO- first off he has not been convicted of anything.. second, how many players get slaps on the wrist for domestic assault or as the earlier poster pointed out manslaughter. goddell is bowing to public pressure.

Isn't that the whole point? The owners represented by the commissioner and the players represented by the NFLPA have pushed for these higher personal conduct standards in their league. In part due to public pressure to clean up their act.

[DCBoysfan]

Are these the same sources that said he wouldnt get indicted?


Right.... I take what they report now with a grain of salt....

[superpunk]

Isn't that the whole point? The owners represented by the commissioner and the players represented by the NFLPA have pushed for these higher personal conduct standards in their league. In part due to public pressure to clean up their act.

Thus proving definitively that the "public" is largely made up of moronic busy-bodies.

[big dog cowboy]

Sources: Vick suspension near

Let's hope they are right.

[big dog cowboy]

Are these the same sources that said he wouldnt get indicted?
That would be Chris Mortenson. Oops.

[joseephuss]

Thus proving definitively that the "public" is largely made up of moronic busy-bodies.

You needed that as proof? :D

[AtlCB]

Being in Atlanta, this report seems to be on the money. The Falcons appear to be preparing as though they will not have Vick this season.

[BrAinPaiNt]

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b133/BrAinPaiNt/panda.gif

[WoodysGirl]

NFL denies report of Vick season-long suspension
ESPN.com news services

Updated: August 13, 2007, 8:52 AM ET
Comment
Email
Print
The NFL dismissed a report Sunday that said commissioner Roger Goodell was close to announcing a season-long suspension of embattled Falcons quarterback Michael Vick for his alleged involvement in sponsoring a dogfighting operation.

Citing two sources within the league with knowledge of the situation, Yahoo.com reported late Sunday night that Goodell will announce "this week or next" that Vick will be suspended for the 2007 season.

"That's the direction it's going and has been from the time this started," one of the sources said this week, according to Yahoo. "The plan was to make sure it was announced before the season. Given what everybody has seen from what [league] security found and what the feds are telling us, there's really no choice."

"No decision has been made," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told USA Today. Aiello also said the league's independent review into the Vick case is not yet complete and that no action, if any, will be taken until the review has reached a conclusion.

In a Richmond, Va., court in late July, Vick pleaded not guilty to conspiracy to travel in interstate commerce in aid of unlawful activities, and conspiring to sponsor a dog in an animal fighting venture. He said in a written statement that he looked forward to "clearing my good name." He also pleaded with the public to resist a rush to judgment.

One of Vick's co-defendants, 34-year-old Tony Taylor, pleaded guilty to the same charges and pledged to fully cooperate with the government in its prosecution of Vick and two others. The plea deal requires Taylor to testify against Vick and his two remaining co-defendants if called upon to do so.

The gruesome details outlined in the July 17 indictment have fueled public protests against Vick and prompted the suspension of some of his lucrative endorsement deals. The summary of facts signed by Taylor supports the indictment's claims that the dogfighting ring on Vick's property in Surry County, Va., executed underperforming dogs by drowning, hanging and other brutal means. Taylor admitted shooting one dog and electrocuting another when they did not perform well in test fights in the summer of 2002.

Vick has been barred from Falcons training camp by Goodell while the league conducts its investigation.

"While it is for the criminal justice system to determine your guilt or innocence, it is my responsibility as commissioner of the National Football League to determine whether your conduct, even if not criminal, nonetheless violated league policies, including the Personal Conduct Policy," Goodell said in a letter to the quarterback on July 24.

Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2972161

Nos. 1-3. Vick is rumored to have been suspended for the year by commissioner Goodell, who awaits a fact-finding report from former U.S. Attorney Eric Holder as to whether Vick violated the league's Personal Conduct Policy.

Yahoo! reported Sunday night that the commissioner will likely suspend Vick for the season "this week or next.''

Though I don't doubt the suspension will come, I believe strongly this is not a decision the commissioner has made yet. As I said on NBC on Sunday night, when Goodell hired Holder, he committed to waiting for Holder's report -- which, I'm told, is at least a week from being completed. Two things, though, would seem to point to a lengthy suspension eventually. Goodell told me if Vick lied to him when he told the commissioner he had no involvement in dogfighting (which Vick said to Goodell in April), that would be a violation of the policy. And if the co-defendant who rolled over on Vick and the other two defendants tells the feds there was dog-fighting and gambling on Vick's property, that would be another bad strike against the idle quarterback.

Goodell hates dogfighting. Who doesn't? But he might hate the gambling allegations almost as much. Particularly if Vick was gambling with low-lifes and/or organized-crime figures who could someday come back to him and threaten him with any number of scenarios, none of which would be good for Vick or the NFL. I agree that Vick is probably going to be sent away by the league. I just don't think Goodell, in any way, has made a decision on it, and he won't until he reads Holder's report.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/peter_king/08/12/mmqb/index.html

[ThreeSportStar80]

Yeah like I thought... He's not getting supsended now.

[AbeBeta]

Yeah like I thought... He's not getting supsended now.

I'd be shocked if this didn't come down in the next week or so -- what else is the league going to say? All they can say is that they haven't made a decision yet.

Vick will be lucky to play again before the 2009 season.

[Hostile]

I'd be shocked if this didn't come down in the next week or so -- what else is the league going to say? All they can say is that they haven't made a decision yet.

Vick will be lucky to play again before the 2009 season.If ever.

[stasheroo]

If ever.

Again, put me down for never.

[Chocolate Lab]

My money's on 600 replies minimum--with 50% - 55% of the replies made by lawyers.

:laugh2:

[AbeBeta]

If ever.

Not a stretch at all - the gambling angle seems to be what has the league dotting i's and crossing t's. Hell, look what they did to Mr. Papadopolis over 30 years ago for association with gamblers and having bet on games.

[joseephuss]

Not a stretch at all - the gambling angle seems to be what has the league dotting i's and crossing t's. Hell, look what they did to Mr. Papadopolis over 30 years ago for association with gamblers and having bet on games.

Look at what they did to Paul Hornung. Wait, he is in the HoF.

[theogt]

Not a stretch at all - the gambling angle seems to be what has the league dotting i's and crossing t's. Hell, look what they did to Mr. Papadopolis over 30 years ago for association with gamblers and having bet on games.

Look at what they did to Paul Hornung. Wait, he is in the HoF.The real question is, which of these guys has the better surname? I'm going with Papadopolis. It's just fun to say.

[AbeBeta]

Look at what they did to Paul Hornung. Wait, he is in the HoF.

Yeah, hut Hornung was a beloved idol of the fans. Few people like Vick to start.

[AbeBeta]

The real question is, which of these guys has the better surname? I'm going with Papadopolis. It's just fun to say.

Me, I'm glad he quit the game -- I loved Webster.

[joseephuss]

Yeah, hut Hornung was a beloved idol of the fans. Few people like Vick to start.

I wouldn't say few people like Vick to start. He has a big fan base. Well, had a big fan base. They don't like his possible involvement in the dog fighting. That tears him down further than any involvement in gambling. I know. Different era, different people.

[fortdick]

way too excessive IMO- first off he has not been convicted of anything.. second, how many players get slaps on the wrist for domestic assault or as the earlier poster pointed out manslaughter. goddell is bowing to public pressure.

You mean the same public that buys tickets, watches the games, buys the merchandise, and supports the business?

Dang nab it! How could he cave in to what they think!

[theogt]

You mean the same public that buys tickets, watches the games, buys the merchandise, and supports the business?

Dang nab it! How could he cave in to what they think!I bet they'd sell more tickets and jerseys if Vick is the QB rather than Harrington.

In other words, that's not the kind of public pressure he was referring to.

[joseephuss]

I bet they'd sell more tickets and jerseys if Vick is the QB rather than Harrington.

In other words, that's not the kind of public pressure he was referring to.

Of course they would get more out of Vick than out of Harrington. Which team wouldn't? Harrington has shown himself to be a bad QB.

The comparison is between "Vick pre-trouble" and "Vick now in trouble". Ticket sales and merchandise sales would go down if Vick was the QB in Atlanta on opening day compared this year compared to last season.

[fortdick]

I bet they'd sell more tickets and jerseys if Vick is the QB rather than Harrington.

In other words, that's not the kind of public pressure he was referring to.

What oother kind of public pressure was he referring to? Most Americans love their dogs. Vick would be boo'ed everytime he walked on the field. Goodell's credibility would be shot. HE may be popular in Atlanta, but I doubt he would be warmly received anywhere else.

PETA would be out at every game and people would have to cross picket lines to get into the stadium. NEwspapers would print nothing but Vick stories and how he should not be allowed to play. MADD (Mothers against Dead Dogs) would be on every network talk show calling for a ban of Falcons games.

But the bottom line is that Goodell has a responsibility to act and not leave it to the team to do the dirty work. No way Vick could play this year without hurting the game.

Because of fan pressure.

[fortdick]

Of course they would get more out of Vick than out of Harrington. Which team wouldn't? Harrington has shown himself to be a bad QB.

The comparison is between "Vick pre-trouble" and "Vick now in trouble". Ticket sales and merchandise sales would go down if Vick was the QB in Atlanta on opening day compared this year compared to last season.

True, Besides, you can't buy Nike or Reebok anymore. His endorsements are drying up fast. I heard his jersey is no longer available at NFL.com. Haven't checked, though.

[theogt]

What oother kind of public pressure was he referring to? Most Americans love their dogs. Vick would be boo'ed everytime he walked on the field. Goodell's credibility would be shot. HE may be popular in Atlanta, but I doubt he would be warmly received anywhere else.

PETA would be out at every game and people would have to cross picket lines to get into the stadium. NEwspapers would print nothing but Vick stories and how he should not be allowed to play. MADD (Mothers against Dead Dogs) would be on every network talk show calling for a ban of Falcons games.

But the bottom line is that Goodell has a responsibility to act and not leave it to the team to do the dirty work. No way Vick could play this year without hurting the game.

Because of fan pressure.You're seeing the distinction, but ignoring it. My point was that this wasn't about dollars. There's no doubt in my mind that even a tainted Michael Vick makes more money than a Joey Harrington, regardless of how much protesting goes on.

Edit: Nevermind, I see in your last post that you acknowledge the distinction.

[theogt]

Of course they would get more out of Vick than out of Harrington. Which team wouldn't? Harrington has shown himself to be a bad QB.

The comparison is between "Vick pre-trouble" and "Vick now in trouble". Ticket sales and merchandise sales would go down if Vick was the QB in Atlanta on opening day compared this year compared to last season.So what if the ticket sales went down from '06 to '07 (which I doubt to be true, but we'll never know). That's not the decision. The decisions is Vick vs. Harrington. Not Vick '06 vs. Vick '07.

[5Stars]

I bet they'd sell more tickets and jerseys if Vick is the QB rather than Harrington.

In other words, that's not the kind of public pressure he was referring to.


Too late for that, theogt...they already pulled all the Vick jerseys our of the stores.

You can buy two of them on ebay...one to crap on and the other to cover it up with.

[theogt]

Too late for that, theogt...they already pulled all the Vick jerseys our of the stores.

You can buy two of them on ebay...one to crap on and the other to cover it up with.Yeah, I figured they'd pull it. They wouldn't want something embarrassing to happen like actually selling more Vick jerseys post-incident.

[5Stars]

Yeah, I figured they'd pull it. They wouldn't want something embarrassing to happen like actually selling more Vick jerseys post-incident.


The NFL wants to disassociate themselves from Vick until all this pans out...that would be my guess as to why they pulled the jerseys.

[REDVOLUTION]

Innocent until proven guilty.
Due process.

Those things are all fine and dandy.. but...

the sad there here about the justice system is.... even if guilty.... you can get away with alot of things or atleast minimize his involvement regardless if it was more... just not provable.

The fact that he was associated with this in some capacity makes it easy for Goodell to make this decision and I believe he made the right one. People are not stupid. They know that is Vick beats this they will know how he beat it. Dirtbad defense lawyers, money changing hands, smoke and mirrors etc...

If the noose doesnt fit you must aquit

[joseephuss]

So what if the ticket sales went down from '06 to '07 (which I doubt to be true, but we'll never know). That's not the decision. The decisions is Vick vs. Harrington. Not Vick '06 vs. Vick '07.

Harrington has nothing to do with it. He just happens to be the back up. The Falcons aren't making decisions based on the fact that Harrington becomes the starter. It is about playing Vick and not playing Vick. If they played Vick, there would be a lot of distractions to deal with. There would be a back lash that would cost the Falcons money. If Vick didn't run into all this trouble, then 2007 would not be too different from 2006 for him and the Falcons. Sure the Falcons are probably going to lose some fans and money this year because Vick is not playing, but they would lose more if they allowed him to be the starter with this whole mess to deal with.

[Kangaroo]

I am no lose for Vick remember you reap what you sew.
You are who your friends are ? Not saying that is totally fair but last I looked life has never ever fair and it never will be.

If he suspend tough cookie he used bad judgment and he will pay for that. Guess what due process is only via the criminal system. Heck in Texas we are a right to work state they can come tomorrow and fire me with out even having a reason.

[theogt]

Harrington has nothing to do with it.Sure he does.

The Falcons aren't making decisions based on the fact that Harrington becomes the starter. I have no idea what you're talking about. We're not even talking about the Falcons' decisions. I think you're confused.

It is about playing Vick and not playing Vick. If they played Vick, there would be a lot of distractions to deal with. There would be a back lash that would cost the Falcons money. If Vick didn't run into all this trouble, then 2007 would not be too different from 2006 for him and the Falcons. Sure the Falcons are probably going to lose some fans and money this year because Vick is not playing, but they would lose more if they allowed him to be the starter with this whole mess to deal with.That's my point. I don't think this is true at all. I think the opposite is true.

[zeromaster]

10-pager, easily.
:popcorn:

[fortdick]

Yeah, I figured they'd pull it. They wouldn't want something embarrassing to happen like actually selling more Vick jerseys post-incident.

And exactly what kind of person would be buying them? Gansta's! Not many self respecting working men would would want to own one.

BTW, you got yours on right now?

[03EBZ06]

The ESPN is reporting that Vick's co-defendents are expect to cut a deal with the prosecutor soon, if so, it is looking even worse for Vick, all of them pointing finger at Vick.

I think if both of Vick's co-defendents plead a deal, then he'll most likely suspend Vick.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

And exactly what kind of person would be buying them? Gansta's! Not many self respecting working men would would want to own one.

BTW, you got yours on right now?

Oh dear lord. Im not going to get into this debate I have already stated my stance but come on man. I would hope to think that you could move past stereotyping people like that.

[BouncingCheese]

Besides the hypocracy here compared to Pacman being suspended so fast compared to Vick and all of this hoopla, This isn't really suprising. Vick and the Falcons owner were imploring Vick to take the season off but Vick doesn't seem to understand the magnitude of the situation. He is forcing their hands. Screw Goodell and Vick.

[5Stars]

Besides the hypocracy here compared to Pacman being suspended so fast compared to Vick and all of this hoopla, This isn't really suprising. Vick and the Falcons owner were imploring Vick to take the season off but Vick doesn't seem to understand the magnitude of the situation. He is forcing their hands. Screw Goodell and Vick.


Pay-Per View? :confused: I'm always looking for ideas? My guess is that it will all turn out cool...

:jackpot:
:falcons:


:pc:



Pay-per View!


All this mess will work out for the best...in the end.


;)

[fortdick]

Oh dear lord. Im not going to get into this debate I have already stated my stance but come on man. I would hope to think that you could move past stereotyping people like that.

Quite trying to be so holy. I wasn't even replying to you. You gotta troll now to get up on your soap box? And if you don't believe the gansta image is the problem, then you need to get your head out of ......the sand.

[LenS]

I believe that Little agreed to pay a big chunk of his salary to his victim's family. So a longer suspension would have punished them with less compensation.

[RomoIsBack]

i wish vick aint do nothin stupid cuz he fun to watch but o well

[dbair1967]

I believe that Little agreed to pay a big chunk of his salary to his victim's family. So a longer suspension would have punished them with less compensation.

I dont recall that at all, in fact I remember the members family being extremely distraught over how poorly the Rams officials reacted to this...I may be wrong, but I think they were even season ticket holders if I recall correctly

Little should probably be on death row for what he did, not making millions playing in the NFL

David

[wileedog]

[/B]

You mean the same public that buys tickets, watches the games, buys the merchandise, and supports the business?

Dang nab it! How could he cave in to what they think!

Bingo. Someone gets it.

This has nothing to do with courts of law, innocence until proven guilty, blah blah blah.

Ron Mexico was not particularly well liked before being indicted for brutally murdering cute furry dogs - which as someone mentioned is a small step above molesting children in this country. He is a pariah to the league now, a magnet for hatred and a PR nightmare.

Whatever money Vick might be able to bring in with his running around the field like an idiot, er I mean, playing quarterback, will easily be lost by those who simply will not buy Falcon season tickets because he is the RB, er QB.

Keep in mind, if Schaub was still in Atlanta there would probably be some Falcon fans cheering his suspension.

At the end of the day this is an entertainment industry. Not many folks, regardless of a players 'talent', are willing to be entertained by a guy who even allegedly murders cute little pooches in his spare time. And the NFL, being an entertainment industry, is under no obligation to not cut out a liability just because there is a very, very slim chance he might not be totally guilty.

Sorry, thems the breaks.

[Bob Sacamano]

You're seeing the distinction, but ignoring it. My point was that this wasn't about dollars. There's no doubt in my mind that even a tainted Michael Vick makes more money than a Joey Harrington, regardless of how much protesting goes on.

Edit: Nevermind, I see in your last post that you acknowledge the distinction.

what's the point of this argument? right now, Vick can't leave VA, and last time I checked, VA doesn't have an NFL team!

Vick aint playing regardless of what Goodell decides

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Quite trying to be so holy. I wasn't even replying to you. You gotta troll now to get up on your soap box? And if you don't believe the gansta image is the problem, then you need to get your head out of ......the sand.

You pigeonhole anyone who might support Vick by buying his gear and then you attack me. Whatever man, if you don't want people to respond to what you say then you shouldn't say it.

Here is another idea: gangs do not = dogfighting. Dogfighting is an entirely seperate issue seeing that it is predominant in pretty much in southern culture only.

Look up what 'cultural naivety' means because it fits you to a T.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

And another thing you cannot tell me that Goodell is leaking this to test wha tthe public opinion is just like politicians do. I hate reactive policy.

[burmafrd]

Actually there have been reports of gangs getting more interested in dog fighting- which is NOT just a southern problem as some of the more ill informed seem to think. Its increasingly an URBAN problem.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Actually there have been reports of gangs getting more interested in dog fighting- which is NOT just a southern problem as some of the more ill informed seem to think. Its increasingly an URBAN problem.

Dog fighting culture originated in the south. If others are adopting the custom the so be it.

[silverbear]

Dog fighting culture originated in the south. If others are adopting the custom the so be it.

You're both right here-- dog fighting has its origins in the rural South, but in recent years, it has been "adopted" by some in the hip-hop/"street" culture...

It wasn't until this Vick mess that I fully appreciated just how much the latter have gotten into this disgusting hobby...

[HopeCowboyFan]

You can kill hundreds of dogs, wager on it and get less than 1 year

NBA ref has a gambling problem, fixes a few games and gets 25 years. Go figure