Reports are coming out that Vick may be suspended for the upcoming season.
What say you?
------
: Vick suspension near
By Jason Cole, Yahoo! Sports
August 12, 2007
Two NFL sources said that commissioner Roger Goodell likely will announce this week or next the suspension of Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick 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 cornerback Adam "Pacman" Jones for the entire season but added stipulations that could allow Jones to return earlier if he clears his record.
ADVERTISEMENT
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.
If he is banned for illegal gambling then I would say it is fair. Howevere if he is banned for the dogfighting incident then you have a problem, I belive that you are innocent until proven guilty and just like here in the UK the US justice system is built around innocent until proven guilty. So I belive Vick should keep his job until the verdict is passed but I can see where the NFL is coming from they have an image, sponsors and of course fans and a man susoected of dogfighting is hardly going to draw cash or people to the game. I think it would have been better to susoend him pending an investigation and make sure the investigation kind of dragged on for as long as possible.
This might seem a little crazy but if Vick was to play could his safety be guaranteed? there are a lot of extreme animal rights activists out there and I wonder if having this guy in an open space with thousands of folk around him is the safest place to be.
From my understanding the legal punishment for dogfighting is 5 years in jail and a $250,000 fine. Now Vick probably won't get that because he has pleaded guilty, I suppose it depends on the judge but personally I think half that sentence should be the minimum he should get.
Professionally it's a different story most of his sponsors want nothing to do with him, the same goes for the team and the NFL and I think thats appropriate he broke the rules and broke them while being involved in an evil crime he should have had the book thrown at him.
I know some fans are behind Vick but consider this if the Falcons were having a bad season and Vick was having an especially bad season would all those fans be so supportive? I would have my doubts. Alll I hope is that the NFL and the Falcons find a replacement as talented or even better than Vick and that this player can set a good example to youngsters on and off the pitch.
It seems that the Falcons want around $30 million from Vick, apparently the money was bonus payments Vick got and he was in violation of the terms in his $130 million contract this is because he was dogfighting when he signed they also said he used the money he was paid to fund the dogfighting.
What I cannot understand is if he was in violation of his contract why just go after the bonus money and not every penny he was paid?
I should also point out that an official arbitrator has upheld the falcons complaint and has said they can retake the $20 million but the players union is set to appeal and the case will be heard in a US district court soon.
lodgebo01 said this in post #8 : It seems that the Falcons want around $30 million from Vick, apparently the money was bonus payments Vick got and he was in violation of the terms in his $130 million contract this is because he was dogfighting when he signed they also said he used the money he was paid to fund the dogfighting.
What I cannot understand is if he was in violation of his contract why just go after the bonus money and not every penny he was paid?
I should also point out that an official arbitrator has upheld the falcons complaint and has said they can retake the $20 million but the players union is set to appeal and the case will be heard in a US district court soon.
I'm pretty lost when it comes to contract and tax law, but I guarantee you that if they legally could they would have gone for the whole paycheck. I suspect there are some more restrictions on the bonus than his income. The tougher the NFL looks on him, the better from their perspective.
08-14-2007 12:09 AM
