Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
Michael Vick discussion (more humor than news, but some serious points raised)
Share:
by scotty_ng1 | August 21, 2007 at 02:07 pm
1363 views | 1 Recommendation | 9 comments
Videos
Photos
Falcons disgraced QB VICK fought DOGS in my tiny VA hometown!!
uploaded by HOTROD213
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77aw9dG7tis
Via AOL fanhouse:
"In other Michael Vick news ... he's been sued for $63 billion by a man who claims Vick stole his dogs, sold them on eBay, and then used the money to purchase missiles from the Iranian government. I am making none of this up. The man alleges that Vick is an Al Qaeda operative ... and this is not Michael Vick's chief legal concern at the moment."
Link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293268,00.html#
---------
best news all month! the funniest part is a copy of
the legal claim written by the guy..if u havent seen
it you gotta see it!
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/riches_jonathan_file.pdf
if al-queda is linked to vick i am sure that bin laden
is a dog fighter too...osama is probaby sporting a
mike vick jersey right now!
-------
Sports media knee-jerk reaction - VICK IS DONE! CAREER OVER!!
Come on, he'll serve good behavior and be out in a season or two (and
he'll just be age 29-30 by then, right?). Half the league will be
fighting to pick him up if ATL is stupid enough to cut him (unless Joey
brings them a title next year). Chuck spit on a girl and came back to
become league MVP later. MJ had gambling issues (and who knows what
company he got himself mixed up with) and won 3 more rings. Tyson raped
a woman and came back to be the #1 contender. Kobe may have raped
someone as well (a WHITE WOMAN too!), and is now Nike's poster boy.
Bar-roid lied to the Grand Jury and then broke the HR record.
Talent and marketing go a long way. If there's money to be made on the
guy, corporate America and the NFL will find a way to get him back. Vick
will be back. Of course he is not as great as the other athletes I just
mentioned, so he'll go back to his old ways (50% completions, 800+ yds
rushing, 18 TD 12 INT). But he'll put people in the stands and make the
highlight reel, as well he should. The NFL is cooler with Vick
around. Or would you rather see Manning vs. Manning, Brady (Quinn or
Tom), or Sexy Rexy commit 4 TOs a game? So media: don't give me that
crap like his career is over! Brett Favre - now HIS career is over, or
it should be! Yet they do a Sportscenter drama piece on him every week!
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-vickfuture082007&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
I like this guy...
"If he pays his debt to society, why shouldn't he get another chance?"
asked Wolf, who was the engineer of Green Bay's Super Bowl championship
team in the 1996 season. "Maybe I don't understand something in all of
this, but you're supposed to get a second chance in this country."
"We've had a lot of people in this league do a lot of bad things, and they still got a chance," Wolf said. "Leonard Little killed someone (while drunk driving). Jamal Lewis
went to prison (in connection to) selling drugs. Are you telling me
that killing eight dogs is worse than killing a human being? … Yes,
this is bad, but are you really telling me that he doesn't deserve a
chance to play again when other people have committed crimes and come
back?"
---------
Personally I'm betting against Vick coming back in any serious capacity, for a couple reasons.
First, most of the other sports scandals we've seen have been something
the public could chalk up to a short-term lapse in judgement, crimes of
passion, etc (Barry's steroids is obviously longer-term, but he's
cheating hte game rather than committing violent crime). Vick's
spent the past six years drowning, electrocuting, and beating dogs to
death. That's not a momentary lapse in judgement. He's had a second
chance, an opportunity to rethink his actions, each time he went out to
his dog-raising house and decided to kill yet another animal. This will
make it harder for any apologists to suggest he's really not such a bad
guy.
Second, animal-rights activists are a more focused
special-interest group who I think will be more devoted to harassing
any team that hires him. Obviously things like rape and murder worse,
but they don't have such focused lobbying groups. Sad that that makes a
difference, but a few dozen picketers do.
Third, I think
there are some football realities working against him. The kid doesn't
have a great mind/eye for the game ... he's an amazing athletic freak,
but the gut instincts he has are to pull it down and run, not to see
how a defense is lining up and find the weakness. After two years
outside pro conditioning regimens, two years older, and two years
removed from seeing a defense ... is he even going to be able to play?
He's going to come back slower, both his feet and his mind for the
game. And if he loses a step or two he can't outrun everyone on the
field, and that's basically his game right now.
Compounding
the above is the effect a running quarterback has on your offensive
gameplay. Clearly no one's going to name him their starter right out of
jail. And lets say he comes in as a backup for a traditional
quarterback - either they change up their playbook to fit Vick's style, or they ask him to run their standard playbook. Imagine Vick running plays designed for Tom Brady. el oh el
He'll look great playing arena football :p
--------
Dude Ray Lewis killed a guy and was named Super Bowl MVP!!!
http://www.jibjab.com/view/113910
"I didn't kill no mutha f***** liooooonnnnn"
Nah, I think you're right, the diminished football skills will be the
main factory working against Vick coming back. He's gonna be great in
the AFL for sure. That will be like Beckham coming to MLS. I'm sure
he'll get the richest contract in AFL history.
Marcus was always the better Vick.
---------
I guess I have to ask since no one's brought it up - where does this
blood-lust come from? I don't think anyone can fairly say Vick's
alleged taste for blood & violence is any worse than the public's
consumption of (what I would deem) a "Roman Orgy"... The parallels
between modern professional sport and the sport of ancient Rome are
obvious; what seems less obvious is the parallel between the classic
notion of the forum and what passes for discussion today... I'm
annoyed that the public has already tried and convicted Vick - after
all, that's efficiency in punishment, not justice.
----------
Marcus! Stomp stomp, have sex with under-aged girls, holla!!
For sure the sociopolitical climate of animal abuse and pro sports is working against Vick.
As J said, it's true the other crimes might be much less
premeditated (but we all know those jocks didn't get caught on their
first attempt). Jamal Lewis' drug charges seemed pretty hokey to me (
Georgia justice), but basically he suffered no PR loss for his jail
time whatsoever! Everyone was talking about "when is he coming back,
when is he gonna help my fantasy team!?!" No one said Jamal Lewis was
evil just because he might have helped a friend sell drugs (which could
have went to child customers). And really, how do you define a "bad
man". Is Vick bad because he killed dogs in
somewhat sadistic ways? To me, he's just an ignorant Southern guy who
got drunk on his athletic ability/fame, so might feel like he's a cut
above and make risky decisions because of it (remember weed in the
water bottle at the airport?).
I
am sure he didn't just decide one day, "Hey I'm bored getting VDs from
hookers, why don't I take up dogfighting?" He was raised on that stuff.
I am not saying it's right, and a man isn't defined by his upbringing,
so he should have known better and could have done differently. But in
perspective - Ollie North is a felon who may have put American lives in
danger, and after he was pardoned he became rich selling books to
conservatives and doing segments for Faux News. Really - did Vick's
dogfighting hurt America? Who was the victim besides Fido and Bruiser?
Look, I'm a former dog owner. I loved Misty but I mistreated her
sometimes (accidentally and deliberately). Most dog owners do. Heck
millions of parents, babysitters, and teachers mistreat their own KIDS!
It's impossible to live up to PETA standards (they even believe that
owning pets for entertainment is demeaning to them and we shouldn't, so
free Shamu!). And I bet plenty of PETA donors are hypocrites who might
eat a ribeye or wear wool now and then. Heck, we import POISONED pet
food from shady companies in China just to save a buck. Where is the Vick-like hatred for the people to blame for that scandal?
Thousands
of animals are executed each month in America because of irresponsible
owners who let them loose and of course they copulate with other
strays, or spread diseases in the general public. CA is trying to pass
a bill to mandate spaying/neutering (for non-licensed breeders) because
the problem is so bad and our pounds are overwhelmed/underfunded. Many
Americans are abusing animals besides Vick. What
he did is worse for sure, and yes he made money off it which is even
sicker, but I think it's teapot-kettle-black territory here. Michael Vick
is not Osama just because he ran a dogfighting ring. He's not Mother
Teresa either. He's just a black man who has a certain skill set, so
white corporate America will pay him millions to perform on TV and
exploit his image for their own financial gain. If we do a "character"
check on pro-athletes, maybe the talent pool would thin so badly you'd
see G signal-calling for the Niners and me running point for the
Grizzlies.
I
know I mentioned that stuff before, but yeah the animal rights lobby in
this country is quite a force to be reckoned with. Sure they'd hoot and
holler and tell people to boycott any team who signs Vick.
But there's the catch - how many NFL fans are avid PETA supporters? The
NFL is the most successful American sporting institution in history. I
don't care if you have Saddam, Hitler, Dahmer, and Darth Vader playing
for the Jacksonville Jaguars next season - they will sell out every
home game and make plenty of money in merchandising. People might piss
and moan about it, but that's life. There are a lot more football fans
out there than PETA fans. 8 dead dogs can't stop Vick
and the NFL machine. Yeah he might be a better fit for Arena League or
even WWE from now on. But the NFL will never cave to any special
interest; there's too much money and popularity at stake.
Actually
I'm amazed that the modern NFL has respected the good of the game and
cared about the fans so much, despite their media dominance and
financial success, unlike haughty, out-of-touch baseball and corrupt
NBA. They are the best sports league by far in the Americas. Probably
the fantasy football industry alone dwarfs the entire pet breeding
industry. So when push comes to shove, we know which side America will
pick. We'd rather have an NFL full of criminal degenerates than no NFL
at all, so the boycott threat is really BS. For all the wrong Walmart
might have done in the past, we can't resist because we need their low
prices. The NFL in its current state, as well as players like Vick,
are too necessary to the fabric of America, and they know it. Sure
there are still plenty of "good role models" in football that will keep
it going. Yes a QB assumes a special leadership role and therefore is
held to more account. But does Vick deserve to
come back to the NFL? Absolutely, after he pays his due. Can Dick
Cheney never drive a car again just because he drove drunk as a younger
man? If he proves to society that he is reformed, he deserves a fair 2 nd chance like anyone else, even if he is a rich, cocky, black dogfighter.
If Vick
still has the skills to get the job done (or at least sell
tickets/jerseys) in 2009, there's no reason why a team shouldn't pick
him up. His numbers have gotten better each of the last 4 years.
There's no way he could be a financial drain on a team, especially now
that he can't command $8M a year salary plus huge bonuses. Maybe a
humbled Vick would be a real boon to a
struggling franchise (he has a lot of knowledge to teach rookies), and
we all know half the league is in constant QB crisis, even Super Bowl
runners-up. I know Goddell has worked hard to try to clean up the
league's image and increase penalties for lawbreakers ( i.e. all the
Bengals except Palmer). But really, is it better for America and better
for the NFL that Pacman, Chris Henry, and Tank Johnson are not around?
It doesn't matter either way, so we might as well let them play if they
contribute to the US economy, make an honest livelihood for themselves,
and entertain people. As long as they pay their debts to the US legal
system, why should we discriminate against them in their private
professions?
---------
The NFL is dominant in large part *because* they keep their image (relatively) clean.
It's certainly true that the league could take Vick
back, tell PETA to fuck off, and just keep on trucking. I think it's
unlikely, though. The NFL has seen how smashed MLB has gotten by the
tainting of the game, the NBA by the "they're all criminals"
perception, and the NHL by its labor crises. Those are all huge warning
signs for the NFL as a business - they know that they stand to lose
billions of dollars if the reputation of the league gets messed up by
tainting the game or having players perceived as criminals. At the
individual team level, of course, they're willing to sign any old
criminal in an attempt to win, but at the league level they're going to
push hard to preserve the integrity of the game - not out of any
charitable feeling, but because they know there are billions of dollars
at stake if they screw it up.
Is Mike Vick
worth risking that? Not in a direct confrontation. The only way he's
getting back in is the strategy Boomer Esaison (how the hell do you
spell that guy's name?) described: after he gets out of jail he makes a
big deal of his rehabilitation, signs over a 7-figure check to PETA or
the humane society, and becomes an animal-rights activist - think
nation-wide public speaking tours about the horrors of animal abuse and
the like. If he plays to the rehabilitation thing, he's got a chance.
But if he goes the Pacman route, talks a bunch of shit and tries to
just bull his way back in on raw skill? Not a chance in hell. The
gambling interactions give the league enough excuse that they can ban
him for life if they want to ... unless he does some serious weaseling,
they'll just ban him and be done with it.
But I do think
it'll boil down to football reasons that keep him from having a
meaningful impact on the game again. He's gotten better the last 4
years in part because their coach increasingly designed the offense
around how Vick plays. It's a similar deal to
how Cowher designed Pitt's offense around sheltering Big Ben's
weaknesses his first year, so he looked so good. If Vick
comes back as a backup, he won't have that same sheltering, and if you
ask him to runs plays designed for a west-coast pocket passer, he's
going to be abysmal.
------------
so a few years ago Lenard Little (now a pro-bowler) of
the Rams gets drunk off his ass and runs a stop
sign...his SUV strikes another car and kills the
driver instantly...he gets off with a slap on the
wrist. the following year he gets busted for a DUI
again and gets another slap on the wrist. he got not
one day of jail time for killing someone.
now mike vick is going to jail for killing and
fighting some dogs. whats wrong with this picture? you
can DUI and kill a PERSON and NOT go to jail but kill
and fight a bunch of DOGS and GO to jail. thats one
fucked up judical system we have!
----------
On the football side of things first: well, you never know what Vick's
capabilities are in another offense because he has never received the
opportunity yet. I guess at VT they played the option, like any college
program with a fast QB? Actually ATL does play the W Coast offense as
far as I know. Every sports team designs its strategy to maximize the
talents of the stars and minimize the weaknesses; that is just being
smart, not kowtowing to the franchise player. You think Nash would look
good in the Knicks' sorry offense? The Suns are built around him
pick-n-rolling, hitting open Js, penetrating, and dishing to the big
dunkers and sharpshooters. The Chargers are built around LT doing what
LT does, which is why Rivers basically had such an easy transition to
the starting role (like 15 pass attempts per game last Sept while LT
carved up D's with 3 TDs a game). Baltimore is ok with its sorry
offense because they know their D will make easy opportunities.
So it's clear Vick
is not Brady or Montana, but he's not a chump either. Actually I am not
really a Falcons fan. The guys just penciled me into that role since I
used to live in the Derrty and pretend to be Southern ghetto sometimes.
Ok maybe I like Ludacris and Outkast a little, but I'm trying to be an
unbiased football analyst here. Look at the crap Vick's
had to work with the last few years. Warrick Dunn has been good (like
an older, weaker version of Reggie Bush) but he's not a marquee back.
His best WRs were Roddy White, M Jenkins, and Ashley Lelie? TE Crumpler
was his best target, and still the guy threw 20 TDs and 13 picks. But
the biggest impact, he rushed for over 1,000 yards, which is a record
for QB right? ATL would have made the playoffs in 06 if their
undersized D didn't choke so many times. ATL has made the playoffs
several times under Vick (once to the NFC Championship), only to lose to a very good McNabb-led Eagles team. Vick
draws so much attention to himself that he loosens up the coverage on
his teammates – if only they could catch the ball. Plus everyone on the
other side of the ball wants to kill Vick, so he draws a lot of penalties to help move the sticks too.
But
I think that's BS that a reforming athlete needs to prove his
contrition to the public. He served his time and our legal system let
him free, so why can't that be the end of it? Presumption of innocence.
Just because he committed a crime in the past doesn't mean he is still
a criminal in 2009. And what defines a criminal anyway? Are we
criminals since we've gotten speeding tickets once or twice, maybe
shoplifted when we were kids? I don't think he should grovel at the
feet of PETA and beg for forgiveness. Did Bush beg for forgiveness to
the families for sending 3,000 plus Americans to their deaths (some
might say unnecessarily), not to mention 50,000 or more Arabs? Did
Clinton beg for forgiveness for lying under oath about his affair? And
trust me, those mistakes cost America a lot more than Vick's
mistake. When normal people like us apply for new jobs, we might have
to explain to the employers if we had a previous criminal past. They
may choose to reject us for it, or may accept our explanation. But we
don't have to grovel before them and convince them that we are
reformed. That is what the interview is for. If they think we're the
right guy for the job despite our checkered past, we get hired. If not,
we try somewhere else. I think Vick deserves the
same; it's a job, not the confession booth. No NFL team should be
"forced" to take him back, but he doesn't have to jump through any
extra hoops just because his case got so much press. Either he's hired
or he's not, no big deal.
Vick
shouldn't have to be what he isn't just to please America. He shouldn't
be forced to lobby for animal rights or give his hard-earned money to
charities he doesn't endorse, especially under coercion/duress.
Seriously, I wonder if a white, middle-America-background athlete who
made similar mistakes would get such harsh treatment. Michael Richards
said he would go into anger management and racial sensitivity class
after his outburst. Good for him, but again I hope it was
self-motivated and not an ultimatum from his publicist. Maybe that's
why so many celeb druggies fail when they are "forced" to go to rehab.
If their heart's not in it, they won't reform. If Vick
becomes an animal champion grudgingly just to clean up his image, it
would be a phony gesture unless his heart is in it. So has-been Boomer
has no right to tell Vick what to do with his future. If Vick
takes the suggestion and wants to atone for his mistakes with
generosity, then more power too him. But he shouldn't have to go
through the motions to "earn" our approval. How demeaning.
Vick is not Michael Jordan, so the league's survival doesn't hinge on his career. The NFL will be fine with or without Vick
coming back, and maybe at worst profits would swing a few million plus
or minus. But if people keep coming to baseball games where they know
30% of players are current or former juicers, and come to NBA games
where they know at least one ref is an addicted gambler, the NFL will
be fine with Vick back – whose crime had NOTHING
to do with his on-field conduct and the greater game of football. Fans
are fans, and hopefully the front office will see past all the
political BS.
-------------
I
definitely don't think there's anything wrong with building an offense
that plays to the skills and natural talents of one of the most
athletically-gifted players in the game - it's a shame it took as long
as it did, and I'm glad Mora created a bit of a blueprint on how to do
it for Vick. Might help out the Titans >.> All I meant was that
Vick's skill set is radically different from that of almost every other
Q in the game, and since when he gets out of jail he's not going to be
a team's starter, he's not going to have that same advantage, and his
production will suffer as a result. (He did have Peerless Price, who
everyone thought was amazing until he went to Atlanta. Though I suspect
that has more to do with the lack of Eric Moulds than the addition of
Vick)
As for having to prove himself ... well, athletes are
public figures, role models, and all that business. Vick's reaped the
reward of that for many years: if football stars weren't public
figures, he would be getting 6 figure annual checks instead of 7
figures, no endorsements, and the like. They go hand in hand: massively
higher compensation in exchange for loss of privacy, a higher moral
standard, and so forth. And as mentioned before, if he just wants to go
earn a living playing football professionally but without all the
public-figure nonsense, I'm sure any number of arena-league owners
would gleefully smash their (not-nfl-sized) piggy banks to land him.
But he's not going to get all the good things that come from being a
public figure without having to pay the price of a higher moral
standard. The NBA got lax on that, tried to let their players play on
the biggest stage but ignore the very real fact that they are role
models ... as a result, the NBA's got a terrible reputation as a league
of hoodlums, and their product has lost ground to the NFL. The NFL's
presumably learned from that lesson.
-----------
Yeah
I feel you on those points. Well, the joke on P Price is that he's got
#2 WR skills but was thrust into the #1 spot in ATL cuz they had no one
else. But yeah, with a name like Peerless he better be good! You're
right, any Q learning a new offense will take time to adjust. But a
great coach/GM will find ways to get the most out of his players. They
will design plays for Vick, but being a backup would take a lot of
pressure off while he gets his NFL legs back. Heck, they might turn him
into a WR or KR! But Vick is too good at certain things for teams to
pass him by on "character concerns". From the previous article, it's
clear that some in GB's front office would take him to replace Favre!
If he was 32, definitely he's done. But he's in his prime and barring
any more horse-collar-Madden-Curse tackles, he's got a lot of life in
him. He deserves big time bucks playing alongside top talent, and the
Arena League is beneath him. He's not washed up like Becks yet. QBs are
works in progress. Peyton had worst stats than REX GROSSMAN their first
2 years as a starter. Big Ben had his reality check after the Super
Bowl, and Brady choked on that critical drive against Indy last
January. Montana lost to the Giants a few times, and Young couldn't get
past Dallas or GB for a while. Vick is too talented to not get a second
chance to lead a team to success in the NFL.
The
things is, who said athletes MUST be role models held to a higher
standard? Marketeers and guys in suits make that shit up to sell more
product. They are just athletes, they're not brand names with
reputations to uphold like Mercedes or Vuitton. They are people, not
commodities. Many athletes don't want to be role models, and even
Michael Jordan needed his privacy away from the spotlight at times.
It's a sick, exploitative system that many pro athletes find themselves
in. They aren't prepared to handle this pressure, and no amount of NFL
rookie seminars or college workshops can fix it. Yes they get paid
obscene sums of money relative to what they contribute to society, but
no one FORCED the franchises to cut those checks! No one forced
Gatorade or Nike to sign those guys up. The companies do it because
overall they will MAKE a ton of money off people like Vick, despite the
huge compensations their agents negotiate. So the corporate sports
machine turns these ordinary ignorant guys into larger-than-life
figures, and expects them to handle the pressure no sweat while they
reap the dough? It's like giving your teen the keys to a Porsche and
expecting them to drive defensively. It might happen, but you're
setting them up for failure.
If
our national POLITICIANS can't keep on the straight and narrow (and
they are also paid obscene amounts, not necessarily in salary but in
taxpayer-funded benefits and contributions from lobbyists), how do we
expect our athletes to? I totally admit that many pro athletes are
egocentric, spoiled, degenerate, immature pricks who need a good
humbling now and then. I think it's rare to see a team like the Spurs
or Pats who behave well and think "team first". But it's not all the
athletes' fault. There's no contract that says: hey jock, you get $10M
a year to play a ballgame, and in return you lose your privacy and have
to adhere to stricter moral standards than the general population. Yes
there is an expectation of lawful behavior between teams and players.
Yes there are penalties for violations. But jocks shouldn't be "forced"
to become public figures and role models just because they can dunk a
ball or throw a TD. The media attention and scrutiny around them are
intense, especially in this modern age of 24-hour sports news. Imagine
if Congressmen or CEOs got 24-7 scrutiny on all their daily activities
and decisions! Athletes literally have to talk to the press naked and
stinking after a game. They don't even get the courtesy to catch their
breath, shower, and change first! I know a lot of people have voiced
these concerns, but the sports media is totally out of control. And are
they even necessary? It's the athletes doing the work; the media just
report on them and hope they screw up so they can go gaga over a new
controversy.
Mike Tyson
had the intellect of a twelve year old and came from a very, VERY
troubled upbringing. When you thrust millions into his face and give
him a rock star lifestyle, of course he will relish in it, but he will
also make mistakes. It is actually sick and immoral for our society to
put someone like Tyson in such a compromising position, and we know
damn well he won't be able to handle it responsibly. But white
corporate America makes a ton of cash off blacks like Tyson and Vick,
and we don't give a crap if their lives get ruined in the process. Just
because some people decide to pay these athletes huge sums of money
doesn't mean they are better than the rest of us, and it doesn't mean
that it's 100% their fault when things go bad. The system is not kind
to them. And remember the NFL reports of veterans suing the league for
improper medical care? The NFL and other leagues just use up these boys
and spit them out when they're no longer able to play top ball. So what
if they have arthritic knees and chronic blackouts at age 40? If they
aren't moneymakers anymore, they're trash. Only the top stars save up
enough money to retire comfortably. Who wants to see Kurt Rambis or
Herschel Walker in commercials? And only the best sports minds or the
ones with connections get coaching or broadcasting jobs. The rest are
expendable. So no wonder these guys live it up when they're young and
rich – maybe they don't expect to live beyond 50, especially if they
were raised in the hood! It's tragic, and it didn't start with Vick.
Athlete exploitation/injustice has been researched and documented for
decades, though all we care about is winning the championship. But no
one cares to reform it or fix the problems, because heck – they are
paid $5M a year to play a game, so screw them if they can't take the
pressure. But even rich people are victims sometimes.
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Most Recommended Stories in Sports
Recommendations (1)
Anonymous user
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (9)
at 16:37 on August 21st, 2007
More follow-up points:
I don't think there are many prospective athletes who don't understand
that in exchange for the ridiculous salary they will become
highly-visible public figures, with a different set of expectations
than folks with less visibility. People may not understand how
they personally will react to that, but I can't imagine anyone's ever
reacted with surprise when discovering that, as a QB making 10M a year,
your dates get reported in the local paper and similar stuff.
Clearly it's a trade-off, and I suspect most athletes would, on
balance, prefer to make 5M a year as a highly-visible public figure
than make 500K a year as a far less visible figure. So I don't
have much sympathy for Vick's "plight" ... he's chosen the
lifestyle. Nor do I have a lot of sympathy for the other various
athletes who discover they have relatively limited privacy, since
that's part and parcel of the deal. They weren't forced to go
into that line of work, and they didn't go into it unaware.
The ones I worry about in the athlete-exploitation stuff are all the
kids who don't make it. There's a huge cultural element,
particularly in inner-cities, where people think their best ticket out
is sports. The 1-2 top ones get out, get their big checks and
stuff, but the rest? Well, they should have been studying.
In some respects it's like the lottery, which my late uncle referred to
as the only form of regressive taxation in the US (poor people buy more
lottery tickets, in both absolute and percentage-of-income numbers,
than richer folks do). Some kids make it, but the rest end up
having spent their high school years focused entirely on a set of
athletic skills which will be of no use to them 6 months after they
graduate.
Clearly the answer is to replace physical sports like football with
video game competitions. You may waste your high school years
playing Starcraft and still not know how to execute a hydross rush, but
at least you'll be good with a mouse and keyboard! >.>
----------
Proportional response is what's in
order I think. The proper punishment/reaction to the crime, and the proper attention
paid to the importance of the event/person. I don't care what salary you're
making – I don't need to know who you're dating, what club you were at last
night, and if you got arrested. It doesn't affect my life at all, yet there is
a billion-dollar tabloid industry (and I include sports media in it) that
revolves around catching rich people doing silly things that may cause a buzz.
We consumers are mostly to blame, because really there should not be a market
for such crap. It's like dogfighting – Vick only set up a ring at his property
because there was demand for such "entertainment". But really in a perfect
world both animal fighting and tabloidism should never exist.
The thing is, some people were born
to be athletes. Einstein needed physics, Picasso needed a paintbrush, and
Montana needed a football. It would be a "crime" to deprive such virtuosos of
their niches in society. The best professors want to teach at the best schools.
The best soldiers want to join the Special Forces. The best athletes want to
compete at the top levels, and we have no right to make their lives harder just
because they "make a lot of money". Or is that our jealous revenge on them for
being better than we at a game that lucratively rewards "talent"? Are people
hounding the Saudi royals or Fortune 500 chairmen just because they are rich?
Of course not, and even so they would hire bodyguards to beat down anyone
getting in their face or digging around where they don't belong. What if
Einstein or Picasso had camera crews, sycophantic agents/entourages, and crazy
fans (both haters and supporters) hounding them 24-7? Would they be able to do
their best work without lashing out at their pesky tormenters? Heck, I bet pro
athletes are contractually obligated to attend more press conferences and
answer more challenging questions than the PRESIDENT. That is ok because it
relates to their profession. Getting mobbed at airports and restaurants does
not relate to their profession, and they didn't "sign up" for that. Nowhere in
their contracts does it say they have to sign X number of autographs on their Wednesday
night at Chili's, or smile for the cameras when they're out on a date, on their
OFF DUTY time. Everyone deserves a private life. Even the Pope goes to his
retreat to meditate, and Bush has his ranch. But somehow pro athletes don't get
the same respect? If they break the law, definitely they must answer for it.
But they answer to the JUSTICE SYSTEM, not the irrational, emotional, and
fickle media and public. The public/media can take outside interest in the investigations,
but they are not the judicators.
You are right; I forget where I
heard this but the sports media and athletes were much more collegial when
their salaries were comparable (maybe in the '70s or earlier). They had drinks
together after games. In the TV era when athletes got the big raises and the
reporters didn't (because the former obviously impacts society more than the
latter), the media became adversarial (probably jealous), and preyed on the
athletes to get under their skin and provoke a response (the famous Ryan Leaf
blowup at the media, Bobby Bonilla, Kenny Rogers, Big Unit, Dennis Green, Jim
Mora Sr., and Iverson too, etc.). At least the baseball managers blow up and
make asses of themselves to the umps, which actually has some relevance to the
game. Yes, if I was a pro I would prefer another digit on my salary and less
personal privacy, but I don't know why the two MUST go hand-in-hand. I don't
care what Michael Vick does off the field, though I do admit I was suckered
into following this story as much as the rest of us (just because it's on TV as
much as the Bonds chase). I just want to see entertaining, quality sports. End
of story.
I absolutely agree with your next
point about the kids who don't make it. It's self-imposed slavery. If they
don't get a big scholarship to a big school (and even then there's no guarantee
they will stay healthy, mature, and advance to the pros), they end up on the
street with few skills and even fewer prospects. And there is definitely a
racial-socioeconomic element to the phenomenon. As C alluded to, it's like
Roman days when the gladiators had to fight each other to maybe have a chance
at freedom, but of course only the top few ever got that high. In "Any Given
Sunday", crazy-ass Ollie Stone kept making references to antiquity and slavery
in relation to modern football. And if you haven't seen "Hoop Dreams", I highly
recommend it along the lines of our current discussion point. Yeah agreed – now
they have a professional video gaming league right? I wonder how much cash the
top players make! Do they get groupies and photo-ops too?
at 15:12 on August 22nd, 2007
scotty_ng1, this needs significant work for a news site. First, anything like this should be filed under opinion. Also, comments like "Shit I bet Peyton rapes little children and Brady sells nuclear secrets to China, but no complaints for those golden boys:" don't provide verifiable facts, but instead are simply insulting if not libelous. The use of references to email and replies to un-named people, referred to only by initials, makes this read like a cut and paste from something not presented herein. And finally, opinion writing, or op eds, requires a look at issues, in context, and, hopefully, with over-usage of foul language. The individual portions of this seem like only vaguely-connected rants vs. an integrated op ed piece.
at 22:41 on August 22nd, 2007
PEP, maybe if you bypassed the initial potty humor comments and dove into the meat of the discussion about Vick's accusations, injustices in pro sports, and "role model worship", you might be more satisfied.
at 13:55 on August 23rd, 2007
Hi Scotty_ng1, thanks for taking the time to reply to my concerns. Here's where I am: if you had written an opinion piece, say, comparing the reaction to Vick's dogfighting scandal to say, some other sports person who had gotten in trouble for say, greyhound racing, or ...etc....with facts and links (joe smith only got a misdeamor, etc.) then I would see it as an opinion article on the news.
However, simply posting in basically rants from some other website I think doesn't meet the j-tips ANG wrote for us, or our purposes. Imagine this: we all go to google groups. We sign on to some group. Then we post in just entire threads from this groups and say: here, this is news. I see it not only not news, but also setting a potentially dangerous precedent in which other posters will follow your lead--especially with all the "good stuff" flags you've gotten--and we'll wind up with NP sprouting into a quasi google groups.
at 16:45 on August 25th, 2007
Thank you for your feedback and I agree. In the future I
will take that into consideration when writing op-eds. But I am but one of
130,000 NP users; and I doubt I am so influential to spread my habits to
others. Also you can see from my other articles, I mostly concern myself with
"serious" issues like heath care and Middle East affairs
(newsworthy/original content, researched, and referenced), not pop news like
Vick. I publish some discussions with my friends because I have always felt
that point-counterpoint debates are more interesting that a single perspective.
It might resemble a “Google chat thread”, but it’s basically the same as the
comment-reply exchange that we are currently practicing. So please lighten up;
when I allege that Tom Brady “sells nuclear secrets to China”, I don’t think
anyone is expecting a footnote or preparing to sue me for libel. Some of the
greatest writers like Voltaire and Clemens loved to engage in satire and
sarcasm.
at 17:43 on August 22nd, 2007
Hence the disclaimer "more humor than news". If you look at my other pieces you can see I can tell the difference between facetious ranting and serious op-eds. Don't we need a little bit of both in life? It's a BS overhyped story to begin with, so please don't expect a formal dissertation.
at 08:57 on August 23rd, 2007
More comments from my friends:
On Mike Vick...of course I agree that the media is blowing it way
out of proportion, but I have to say the more and more I read about
this stuff, the less sympathy I have for Vick.
first off, it seems that he didn't just watch dogfighting, he ran
the damn operation. there is a difference between drinking
moonshine and operating a speakeasy. so...this isn't about "killing
8 dogs." it's about running an illegal gambling ring around and
activity that is deemed to be illegal in part because of its
brutality towards dogs.
also...wtf? didn't he realize that if u r a really high profile
athlete, u don't want a whole bunch of dogs caged and fighting on a
property that has your name on it?
trust me...if ur next door neighbor was running a dogfighting ring
on his property, he'd be in really big fucking trouble. this isn't
a 1 yr. in jail kind of offense, but that's all that vick will get
anyways.
oh...and a lot of things are "sports"...crocodile hunting, death
matches, duels, whaling, etc. that's not a defense for anything.
------------
guess the defense I was referring to is one of hypocrisy in law. If dog
fighting is illegal for cruelty, and hunting is allowed, it don't make
sense. Like alcohol being legal, weed illegal. Consistency is all I'm
looking for. Not really an entirely meaningful argument, but the reality is
that if dogs weren't cute, people wouldn't care. I think some other black
athlete from the NFL should start and run a Beta fish fighting league. Then
see who gives a damn about that.
----------
Good points M, yeah our legal system is fraught with inconsistencies. At least we're better than Shari'a or China I guess!
S: sure I have no sympathy for the crimes Vick perpetrated. I don't know what the typical sentencing paradigm is for Federal dog fighting charges, but even normal Joe Blows rarely serve max sentences if they cooperate with authorities and behave in prison. So Vick getting off easy is not as bad as Paris serving 2 days in the tank for multiple DUIs.
Vick ran a dog fighting operation, so he facilitated crimes being committed by others (as well as himself). But Rupert Murdoch is not primarily to blame if sex offenders log onto MySpace to seduce minors. Vick participated in a criminal activity and should be punished, but whether he simply bet on fights or ran an entire training facility is an ancillary factor in my mind. It doesn't make him any more "evil". He got mixed up in an illegal activity, and happened to take a more sophisticated role in it.
Sirc, Vick clearly made many STYOOPID decisions at times in his life, which is why he is the butt of so many of our jokes. His brother was worse. I don't know what compelled him to risk his career over a silly dog fighting operation. HBO Real Sports had a small report on the dog fighting industry, and they interviewed some insiders who said it was a real "rush" to watch the fights, which is why they love it. As C said, it's the same primal urge that drove Roman Senators to cheer for gladiators, or us modern-day "civilized" people to watch Klitschko vs. Lewis. The dog fighters also claim to love dogs too. The "purpose" of dog fighting is not to revel in suffering or kill the animals. It's a betting sport like horse racing. It's basically MMA for dogs, except the animals have no free will and are trained very harshly at times by their masters. But trainers do feed and care for their animals well (could Ali fight on an empty stomach?), because the dogs are a financial investment to them (top pedigree pups cost $1k or more). There are referees who stop the bouts when they go too far. There are controls in place. Of course the industry is dominated by deranged ignorants and Southern hicks, so aberrant behavior abounds. But as Portis said in the YouTube clip, I am sure policemen, judges, and politicians have participated in dog fights here and there. I am not apologizing for their cruelty and I am completely against the "sport" in general, but just saying that the industry is not as insanely vile as PETA might insinuate.
But M is right, if we fought some less domesticated, pettable animals like cockroaches or bullfrogs, no one would give a crap (but PETA maybe). And yes, a lot of drunk or unskilled hunters probably kill their prey very cruelly too. I know PETA and much of the general public is against sport hunting as well, but we haven't made it illegal. Sure we can't hunt endangered species, require licenses, and can only hunt in specific areas/times. The NRA lobby would probably fight hunting regulations tooth and nail. But imagine all the people accidentally wounded or killed on hunting excursions (including Cheney's buddy), not to mention the animals. Dog fighting doesn't hurt any people as far as I know, except for draining public resources for law enforcement and disposing of seized fight animals (they are too dangerous to be adopted by the general public, so they are all put down). Drunk driving and smoking hurt many more innocent people than dog fighting, but those industries have strong lobbies that block reforms.
I do have sympathy for some of the shit athletes have to deal with from the rest of society. I believe that athlete pay and perks more than adequately compensate for the loss of privacy and public scrutiny they must endure as facets of their profession/lifestyle. However, I still don't think it's right that athletes get harassed, pressured, and overwhelmed by reporters, fans, etc. almost nonstop. Even Bar-roid deserves a break sometimes. They are under such pressure to perform, and even the smallest mistake gets second-guessed in the media for days. How would you feel if you made a small calculation error in Excel, then your work group and university newspaper commented on it and ridiculed you for days? It's amazing that top athletes can even do their jobs without going insane having to deal with so much nonsense that has nothing to do with the sports they play.
at 11:10 on August 14th, 2009
Why do black people have to adopt Pitt Bulls into their culture? They can not take care of their fucking kids! These dogs are not watermeleon and chicken
at 10:59 on August 14th, 2009
I want to file down Michael Vick's teeth and throw him in an alligator pitt. If he is not able to fight his way out I will electrically shock him or drown him! Hello? WTF is wrong with people! He killed and tortured thousands of dogs in addition to the dog fighting! What kind of role model is this for our young boys? Sick! I do not feel his remorse! He just wants to work in the NFL again.