Would Jerry take a chance with Vick?

[jackrussell]

Ya think Goodell will make the distinction between Michael Jordan and Wayne Gretzky gambling in Vegas and Vick in the dog pit with Pookey and Ray Ray?

Like you said. Sorry about that, didn't mean to make the identical point.:

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Ya think Goodell will make the distinction between Michael Jordan and Wayne Gretzky gambling in Vegas and Vick in the dog pit with Pookey and Ray Ray?

Dogfighting charges does not mean he gambled. If his lawyes arent morons that would be a stipulation on the plea. Now the NFL is doing its own investigation but they are not going to have the right nor leverage to get the salient people to talk.

The feds can subpoena and lean on guys to get them to reveal information on Vick gambling. Ex FBI guy doesnt.

Everyone makes the assumption that the NFL has some sort of smoking gun concerning Vick gambling at all and that is not necessarily the case here.

And I think we also need to get something clear here: Goodell can do whatever the hell he wants without justification. This whole media nonsense about how he can invoke gambling and just ban him really dont seem to know what theyre talking about.

Goodell of course can ban anyone for any reason but this is the actual verbage in the CBA concerning gambling.

15. INTEGRITY OF GAME. Player recognizes the detriment to the League and professional football that would result from impairment of public confidence in the honest and orderly conduct of NFL games or the integrity and good character of NFL players. Player therefore acknowledges his awareness that if he accepts a bribe or agrees to throw or fix an NFL game; fails to promptly report a bribe offer or an attempt to throw or fix an NFL game; bets on an NFL game; knowingly associates with gamblers or gambling activity; uses or provides other players with stimulants or other drugs for the purpose of attempting to enhance on-field performance; or is guilty of any other form of conduct reasonably judged by the League Commissioner to be detrimental to the League or professional football, the Commissioner will have the right, but only after giving Player the opportunity for a hearing at which he may be represented by counsel of his choice, to fine Player in a reasonable amount; to suspend Player for a period certain or indefinitely; and/or to terminate this contract.

Its the same verbage that is used for regular criminal activity and doesnt anywhere say gamble = ban. One thing i have definitely learned over this offseason is that the media as a whole has no idea what the commisioners powers are or waht they were and they just babble as if they do.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Are we missing the clear distinction between legally gambling in legal casinos as opposed to illegally gambling on an illegal activity?

i think you dont understand that it doesnt matter in terms of the CBA.

 

[Big Dakota]

In all fairness generally speaking what owners have shown a chance on troubled players.

Cincinnati: obviously.

Oakland: obviously.

Dallas: we have not only brought in Owens which brings in his particular brand of baggage but there is also Elam in recent history. You go a little bit farther back and you have Underwood and Spellman who were far from model citizens. Alos you go back a bit farther than that and you have Lett and Irvin.

Does this mean we are going to bring in Vick in two years? Probably not. At the same time its not as if this speculation is coming out from left field.

Its very apparent that the majority of the posters on this sight are from a very conservative demographic and I think that you are substituting what you would do or want done without really thinking about what type of player Jones has brought in in the past.

I, myself, am VERY liberal and i also happen to be a minority.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I, myself, am VERY liberal and i also happen to be a minority.

Do you think that given the players that Jones has brough in in the past including the very recent past it is completely impossible for Jones to consider bringing in Vick if he thought Vick was contrite and could help the team?

 

[Hostile]

Do you think that given the players that Jones has brough in in the past including the very recent past it is completely impossible for Jones to consider bringing in Vick if he thought Vick was contrite and could help the team?

I think it's completely impossible.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I think it's completely impossible.

why?

we have a rapist, weve had drug users, weve had seriously mentally disturbed gun toting freaks but you think Jones would think Vick is that much worse than them and beyond redemption?

Or is it just because of the publicity?

 

[Crown Royal]

My opinion - assuming that Goodell doesn't outright suspend him for life or in 2009, and he is relatively good shape, I don't think it unlikely that a team would sign him to at least look at him in training camp.

There seems to be something that hasn't been addressed in this hypothetical - there are two possibilities. 1 - Vick would be allowed to reenter the NFL in 2009 or 2 - Vick wouldn't.

If vick IS allowed, which is what I think the spirit of the original question was, then I don't think it impossible that a club would take a look at him to see if he can still do something.

 

[Hostile]

why?

we have a rapist, weve had drug users, weve had seriously mentally disturbed gun toting freaks but you think Jones would think Vick is that much worse than them and beyond redemption?

Or is it just because of the publicity?

Several reasons.

One...We could have drafted Quinn and didn't. One reason is because of the trust in Tony Romo. Jerry isn't going to bring a QB controversy in here.

Two...The recent trend of the team is to go after character guys. I see that trend continuing.

Three...Jerry is all about marketing his team. Vick is a marketing nightmare now.

Four...PETA is not done. If he is released they will bring pressure not to have him reinstated. If he is, they will protest. If a team signs him they will protest.

I don't think any team is going to take that risk. If MADD was as passionate as PETA maybe Leonard Little is not employed by the NFL.

 

[peplaw06]

All those are good points. However, one small bit of info is missing from your argument, which is "ILLEGAL" gambling, which Vick may have been involved...oh what the hell, Vick was into illegal gambling.

Legal gambling outside of their respective sport isn't frawn upon but any illegal gambling not so much.

The poster I quoted didn't say anything about illegal gambling. Just said gambling. He used the instance of gambling to say that the NFL wouldn't touch him. I argued that. And I don't think the illegal gambling part of it changes it as far as the sport is concerned. If you don't gamble on your own sport, all you have is a crime, and criminals still play in sports.

Are you telling me that illegal gambling, even if not on your own sport/games, would be worse than drug dealing, vehicular manslaughter, rape, etc...?? all things pro athletes have been convicted of who continued to participate in their sports afterwards.

I think that were Vick gambling on football, then the analogy with Shoeless Joe and the Black Sox, Pete Rose and Tim Donaghy would fit. As it stands, I don't think it does.

Ya think Goodell will make the distinction between Michael Jordan and Wayne Gretzky gambling in Vegas and Vick in the dog pit with Pookey and Ray Ray?

Gretzky wasn't just gambling in Vegas... (allegedly). he was involved (allegedly) in an illegal gambling ring.

Are we missing the clear distinction between legally gambling in legal casinos as opposed to illegally gambling on an illegal activity?

Oh and... there is all kinds of gambling that is illegal that is most assuredly done by athletes. Have you heard of the Wire Act? It's illegal to bet on sports online, and there's some concern that it's illegal to play online poker for money. I don't think that a professional athlete who is convicted of playing online poker is going to be banned from his league for life.

When you start gambling on your sport is where it becomes a death sentence.

 

[Crown Royal]

Several reasons.

One...We could have drafted Quinn and didn't. One reason is because of the trust in Tony Romo. Jerry isn't going to bring a QB controversy in here.

Two...The recent trend of the team is to go after character guys. I see that trend continuing.

Three...Jerry is all about marketing his team. Vick is a marketing nightmare now.

Four...PETA is not done. If he is released they will bring pressure not to have him reinstated. If he is, they will protest. If a team signs him they will protest.

I don't think any team is going to take that risk. If MADD was as passionate as PETA maybe Leonard Little is not employed by the NFL.

I find it asinine when people break down posts, so I am just going to respond to yours with numbers:

1) There is no telling what our QB/PR/KR/WR/RB situation will look like in 2 years. The question was whether Jerry would do this, not will he do it. It was asking for an opinion on what Jerry might do if the situation were right, not a prediction.

2) Maybe, but that doesn't mean that we wouldn't take a chance just to see if it could work out.

3) He is now. No telling whether that nightmare will exist then or not. Like CoCo says - America loves to hate the villain, but they also love for the villain to become a redemption story.

4) I really think this is the weakest point. I doubt a small PETA picket, in Texas, no less - I really don't think that you would have a lot of texans there protesting, would deter the team or any teams one way or another. I'm veg and I don't take PETA seriously.

Now, I doubt that Jerry WILL look at it, because I don't see a need 2 years from now. But I won't discount the possibility - you can always use a speedy return man.

 

[HopeCowboyFan]

All those are good points. However, one small bit of info is missing from your argument, which is "ILLEGAL" gambling, which Vick may have been involved...oh what the hell, Vick was into illegal gambling.

Legal gambling outside of their respective sport isn't frawn upon but any illegal gambling not so much.

Football has it built into it's conduct code. His gambling could bury Vick but likely Goodell does not go there. In Hockey Tochett and Gretzky family bet in illegal gambling ring and are free to coach again after conviction (Tochett).

NBA ref fixed a bunch of games with a gambling problem and faces 25 years in jail. He'd have been better off killing dogs.

At end of Day Vick throwing $ at dog fights is heinous but really no different than players playing cards for money or gambling on a golf course like thousands of pro athletes do probably daily in offseason.

I don't see Vicks gambling here being a life suspension. Tie him to sports bookmakers and illegal gambling on games - I change my tune.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Several reasons.

One...We could have drafted Quinn and didn't. One reason is because of the trust in Tony Romo. Jerry isn't going to bring a QB controversy in here.

Two...The recent trend of the team is to go after character guys. I see that trend continuing.

Three...Jerry is all about marketing his team. Vick is a marketing nightmare now.

Four...PETA is not done. If he is released they will bring pressure not to have him reinstated. If he is, they will protest. If a team signs him they will protest.

I don't think any team is going to take that risk. If MADD was as passionate as PETA maybe Leonard Little is not employed by the NFL.

They signed Elam and Owens which kind of flies in the face of your whole were looking for character guys. Owens has been good but good chrarcter is not what i would use to describe their character especially previous to us signing them.

Now with Romo you do have a point but im kind of going under the assumption that if he were to come here it would be as a slash type and not a QB.

And bringing in Vick would bring a whhole pooton of publicity for the Cowboys.

Now i dont necessarily think its probable but i dont think you can just reject it out of hand.

And PETA? Give me a break.

 

[peplaw06]

I don't think any team is going to take that risk. If MADD was as passionate as PETA maybe Leonard Little is not employed by the NFL.

If by passionate, you mean fanatical and extreme, then you're right.

 

[Crown Royal]

The poster I quoted didn't say anything about illegal gambling. Just said gambling. He used the instance of gambling to say that the NFL wouldn't touch him. I argued that. And I don't think the illegal gambling part of it changes it as far as the sport is concerned. If you don't gamble on your own sport, all you have is a crime, and criminals still play in sports.

Are you telling me that illegal gambling, even if not on your own sport/games, would be worse than drug dealing, vehicular manslaughter, rape, etc...?? all things pro athletes have been convicted of who continued to participate in their sports afterwards.

I think that were Vick gambling on football, then the analogy with Shoeless Joe and the Black Sox, Pete Rose and Tim Donaghy would fit. As it stands, I don't think it does.

Gretzky wasn't just gambling in Vegas... (allegedly). he was involved (allegedly) in an illegal gambling ring.

Oh and... there is all kinds of gambling that is illegal that is most assuredly done by athletes. Have you heard of the Wire Act? It's illegal to bet on sports online, and there's some concern that it's illegal to play online poker for money. I don't think that a professional athlete who is convicted of playing online poker is going to be banned from his league for life.

When you start gambling on your sport is where it becomes a death sentence.

I agree with all these points, except that I think that it is all 'in theory' only. I have little doubt that if gambling is in the plea deal, that Goodell, using the by-laws of the NFL, would be able to use that alone to make a lifetime ban. And I think that with the public opinion on Vick very low, there wouldn't exactly be an outcry of defense.

 

[HopeCowboyFan]

jj not signing Vick.....

that said he might be best brought back by some team as a RB or WR......

 

[peplaw06]

I agree with all these points, except that I think that it is all 'in theory' only. I have little doubt that if gambling is in the plea deal, that Goodell, using the by-laws of the NFL, would be able to use that alone to make a lifetime ban. And I think that with the public opinion on Vick very low, there wouldn't exactly be an outcry of defense.

I absolutely think that Goodell will use whatever he can to give Vick the stiffest punishment he feels he can get away with. I think that the Vick team probably is fighting tooth and nail to get the gambling out of the charges, if they haven't already.

And I'm sure the public opinion (read majority) will back Goodell. They have so far.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I absolutely think that Goodell will use whatever he can to give Vick the stiffest punishment he feels he can get away with. I think that the Vick team probably is fighting tooth and nail to get the gambling out of the charges, if they haven't already.

And I'm sure the public opinion (read majority) will back Goodell. They have so far.

i dont see anyway on Earth that Vick would accept a deal if it didnt not include gambling.

if it did then at that point he might as well take it to court because then he has a chance at salvaging something. If it says that he led a gambling ring in addition to just dogfighting then I would just see him taking it to court because the possible outcome there would be better.

 

[03EBZ06]

Dogfighting charges does not mean he gambled. If his lawyes arent morons that would be a stipulation on the plea.

Why should Feds accept any stipulations by Vick's lawyer? It isn't like Vick have any leverage.

Feds clearly outlined that Vick illegally betted on dogfighting and they should not accept any stipulation.

I guess we'll find out next Monday.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Why should Feds accept any stipulations by Vick's lawyer? It isn't like Vick have any leverage.

Feds clearly outlined that Vick illegally betted on dogfighting and they should not accept any stipulation.

I guess we'll find out next Monday.

Im saying Vick wouldnt probably accept a deal unless it didnt included that and you have no idea who had what leverage in all of this.