How Many Games Should Vick Be Suspended?

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by saden1

People want him suspended? For what? As far as the NFL goes, the only conduct he has committed that could lead to suspension was the incident where he gave the fans the middle finger and that incident has already been taken care of.

Until he is convicted the mob needs to get off Vick's dick.

Nice link.
Makes me even more convinced he is a horrible person.
In case you haven't noticed, the NFL did start a program which has consequences for actions like these...so you basically answered your own question of "for what". Your link is what for.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Yes, because there is no more reliable source than a shadowed anonymous figure on Sportscenter. :confused:

No...but when 1 person says it you can dismiss it, when 2 people, ahhh, you can still dismiss it, but when all these people come out of the wood works, you need to listen.
Like I said, if he was innocent, that would not have happened.
We don't see people here saying Matty is fighting dogs...why? Cause he's not.
9 times out of 10 the rumors are on to something. When you have someone that says damning evidence like that, you shouldn't ignore it.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by PSUSkinsFan21

Ron Mexico, was it? There's at least one young lady who would disagree with your statement.

LOL, I forgot about Ron Mexico..

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by jsarno

LOL...so your opinion is he did nothing wrong and should go about business as usual?

LOL...No, to paraphrase what I've been saying all along, the punishment should fit the crime. If he hasn't been convicted of a crime yet and he doesn't have a track record of run-ins with the law (not talking about a TSA screener jumping the gun over a suspicious looking water bottle), I don't see the league suspending him. That doesn't mean the team won't make the decision (mutually of course) for him to sit out while this runs it's course in order to limit distractions for the betterment of the team. If he's found guilty whenever this goes to trial, I hope they throw the book at him, and as many others have said on here already, a football suspension will be the least of his worries.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Chief X_Phackter

LOL...No, to paraphrase what I've been saying all along, the punishment should fit the crime. If he hasn't been convicted of a crime yet and he doesn't have a track record of run-ins with the law (not talking about a TSA screener jumping the gun over a suspicious looking water bottle), I don't see the league suspending him. That doesn't mean the team won't make the decision (mutually of course) for him to sit out while this runs it's course in order to limit distractions for the betterment of the team. If he's found guilty whenever this goes to trial, I hope they throw the book at him, and as many others have said on here already, a football suspension will be the least of his worries.

Understandable, and I agree with you.
He will be found guilty. I doubt they would spend this much time and effort going after a dead end.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

"But not even Vick disputes that he owns the property where, the feds say, 54 dogs were found, where equipment for training dogs was seized, where bloody carpeting and buried carcasses paint a clear picture."

Bloomberg.com: Opinion

Can one of the Vick apologists please explain why, if Vick is innocent, his property looks like a dog fighting business? What are the circumstances in which an innocent person would have such items?

Vick is guilty of at least harboring this kind of activity. It doesn't matter if he knew what was going on, or not -- he owns the property. I'm not saying he should go straight to sentencing, I respect due process. However, the NFL doesn't have to grant due process when deciding whether a player can participate in the league. It is clear that he is involved in some unethical, and possibly illegal, business. I don't think the NFL needs any more reason to take action.

[RobH4413]

I knew this was going to happen. Once one guy gets caught, the hammer has to come down on everybody.

Apparently this sort of thing is really popular up in New York. Sources say that they are hours away from indicting the Manning brothers.

Authorities Discover Illegal Frog-Jumping Ring In Eli Manning's Backyard | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

[GusFrerotte]

Vick needs to be suspended the whole season and not just for what he did, but because the trial, etc will cause too much distraction for the Falcons. Vick is a marked man, like Cain, plus with the distraction his gameplay will probably suffer to some degree. He isn't all that in my mind anyway!!!!!

[PSUSkinsFan21]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

"But not even Vick disputes that he owns the property where, the feds say, 54 dogs were found, where equipment for training dogs was seized, where bloody carpeting and buried carcasses paint a clear picture."

Bloomberg.com: Opinion

Can one of the Vick apologists please explain why, if Vick is innocent, his property looks like a dog fighting business? What are the circumstances in which an innocent person would have such items?

Vick is guilty of at least harboring this kind of activity. It doesn't matter if he knew what was going on, or not -- he owns the property. I'm not saying he should go straight to sentencing, I respect due process. However, the NFL doesn't have to grant due process when deciding whether a player can participate in the league. It is clear that he is involved in some unethical, and possibly illegal, business. I don't think the NFL needs any more reason to take action.

Good post. You know, it's actually kind of interesting because I'm starting to see some similarities with Pacman. Pacman hasn't been convicted of anything yet, but the fact that his entourage kept getting into fights and gunplay was enough to get him suspended without a conviction. Now, I understand that the distinction is that Pacman had a much more "interesting" track record, but why isn't it enough to look at what AT THE VERY LEAST Vick's family and friends were involved in on Vick's own property to suspend him? Even if Vick isn't found guilty, he's already at least as culpable in the NFL's eyes for being associated with illegal activity, No? I mean, they are both trying the same defense: "it wasn't me, it was my friends and I can't control them......I didn't know what was going on". It didn't work for Pacman in Goodell's eyes.
You've won me over.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

"But not even Vick disputes that he owns the property where, the feds say, 54 dogs were found, where equipment for training dogs was seized, where bloody carpeting and buried carcasses paint a clear picture."

Bloomberg.com: Opinion

Can one of the Vick apologists please explain why, if Vick is innocent, his property looks like a dog fighting business? What are the circumstances in which an innocent person would have such items?

Vick is guilty of at least harboring this kind of activity. It doesn't matter if he knew what was going on, or not -- he owns the property. I'm not saying he should go straight to sentencing, I respect due process. However, the NFL doesn't have to grant due process when deciding whether a player can participate in the league. It is clear that he is involved in some unethical, and possibly illegal, business. I don't think the NFL needs any more reason to take action.

I'm not a Vick apologist, but I think that penalties levied by the team or the league need to be commensurate with the outcome of the charges. What if the league suspends him for a season or, as some have suggested, bans him for life and it turns out that the 'corrobrating witnesses' have fabricated or exaggerated their claims? Then what do you say, oops-sorry?

What if he truly owns the house but never visits and has no knowledge of what goes on there? Do I think that's the case? No, but I don't know for sure either way so I am not ready to exonerate or convict him until I hear the facts.

'Experts' have said that some of the items found on the property are items commonly owned by legitimate dog breeders. Without the bloody carpet, there probably would have been no reason to pursue the case, remember they went initially on a drug warrant and found no drugs but found the bloody carpet. Investigation of that led to the search that found the carcasses in the yard.

As I said, I'm not a Vick apologist and if guilty or plea I expect him to get prison time but the rush to punish without letting things run their course seems drastic.

Why the rush to suspend or ban him immediately before he has even set foot in a courtroom?

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by PSUSkinsFan21

Good post. You know, it's actually kind of interesting because I'm starting to see some similarities with Pacman. Pacman hasn't been convicted of anything yet, but the fact that his entourage kept getting into fights and gunplay was enough to get him suspended without a conviction. Now, I understand that the distinction is that Pacman had a much more "interesting" track record, but why isn't it enough to look at what AT THE VERY LEAST Vick's family and friends were involved in on Vick's own property to suspend him? Even if Vick isn't found guilty, he's already at least as culpable in the NFL's eyes for being associated with illegal activity, No? I mean, they are both trying the same defense: "it wasn't me, it was my friends and I can't control them......I didn't know what was going on". It didn't work for Pacman in Goodell's eyes.
You've won me over.

Pacman is a completely different situation. He had arrests in college and has been charged for assault & battery, weapons charges, traffic charges and obstruction of justice. Until now Vick has never been CHARGED with anything. So now people should be suspended because of what other people do? Is that where we are going societally?

[PSUSkinsFan21]

Another question I have for those who want call Pacman's situation different from Vick's: In Pacman's case, he has gotten into trouble for multiple separate incidents over time. Right? Now, he still hasn't been convicted of any of them, but there are eye witnesses placing him at the various scenes and his repeated alleged offenses led to a suspension. So, what's the difference here? Vick isn't being accused of one isolated incident. Rather, he is being accused of breaking the law on multiple separate occasions. And there are eyewitnesses placing him at each of the various scenes where illegal activities were being conducted.

So, should the NFL somehow reward the person who gets charged all at once because the Feds do the responsible thing by building a case before charging him over the guy who is just unlucky enough to get caught each time he allegedly breaks the law by the local authorities? I mean, both men are being accused of repeated instances of illegal activity. It's not like Vick is being indicted for one instance of dog fighting. Why are are willing to go easier on the guy whose repeated behavior over the course of 6 six years just happens to get lumped into one indictment?

[PSUSkinsFan21]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Pacman is a completely different situation. He had arrests in college and has been charged for assault & battery, weapons charges, traffic charges and obstruction of justice. Until now Vick has never been CHARGED with anything. So now people should be suspended because of what other people do? Is that where we are going societally?

See post 87. And isn't that what Pacman got suspended for? He hasn't been found guilty of his latest crimes yet.

[SCRedskinsFan]

With Goodell's track record there's no way he can ignore an indictment from a federal grand jury. Vick's past behavior obviously becomes a factor as well. The way this is snowballing, there seems to be no way that MV will be on the field for the Falcons in the near future.

I assume that there are some trilateral (Goddell-Blank-Vick's Agent) discussions going on right now that will create an acceptable (financially) path toward an indefinite leave of absence for Vick.

That gives this drama some time to play itself out in the courts. IMHO Vick is toast -- the Fed's tend to not lose these cases, and a conviction will result in ample reason for a long term suspension (which may be the least of MV's problems at that point)

[BigSKINBauer]

Originally Posted by PSUSkinsFan21

Another question I have for those who want call Pacman's situation different from Vick's: In Pacman's case, he has gotten into trouble for multiple separate incidents over time. Right? Now, he still hasn't been convicted of any of them, but there are eye witnesses placing him at the various scenes and his repeated alleged offenses led to a suspension. So, what's the difference here? Vick isn't being accused of one isolated incident. Rather, he is being accused of breaking the law on multiple separate occasions. And there are eyewitnesses placing him at each of the various scenes where illegal activities were being conducted.

So, should the NFL somehow reward the person who gets charged all at once because the Feds do the responsible thing by building a case before charging him over the guy who is just unlucky enough to get caught each time he allegedly breaks the law by the local authorities? I mean, both men are being accused of repeated instances of illegal activity. It's not like Vick is being indicted for one instance of dog fighting. Why are are willing to go easier on the guy whose repeated behavior over the course of 6 six years just happens to get lumped into one indictment?

Diffenence is that pacman was given times not to be out yet he still was out. He got introuble and was told not to do things but still did them and got introuble doing them. I would be fine if vick wasn't allowed to do things. NO being out past midnight. No more getting arrested. No going to the pet shop, whatever.