How Many Games Should Vick Be Suspended?

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I don't think many Vick supporters would be happy if some jerk at work who made racist remarks or who exercised his right to free speech by bearing a swastika tat on his forehead had to be convicted of a crime before an employer could fire him.

When things like that there is a process the company goes through. The actions of the individual violates standard company harassment and discrimination policy. And I would also wager that a swastika violates company dress code policy. Usually what tends to happen in these types of situations is a) HR puts the individuals on different teams/project, b) HR conducts an investigation into the matter to ascertain the individuals guilt.

If the company thinks you're guilty with reasonable certainty they'll fire you and you can go hit them with a law suite if you're wrongly terminated. This is a clear cut case whilst the Vick case is not. Plus, Vick has money and the NFLPA backing him.

[jgalecpa]

Originally Posted by firstdown

If the leaque suspended him because he was lying wouldn't they be finding him guilty before the trial takes place.

Not neccesarily. Depends on what they say he lied about.

They could catch him in lies that aren't crimes.

For example, if he tol the commish he never went to the house, but now he admits he went there x number of times, well that would be a lie, but not a crime.

In this case, I just don't see how any suspension against pac man can stick if they don't suspend MV.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Not knowning is not a totaly week argument but is really his only argument. People have said that if a person is selling drugs from an apartment or a house they rent that the cops could take the house from the landlord which is not correct. If this was the case about 80% of drug bust are in rental properties and the landlords never loose the property or have legal issues. Now if the landlord allowed crimes to go on then the cops could take the property. I'm not trying to defend Vick with this but only clearing up the issue of the landlords.

The question is: was Vick acting as a landlord? Was there a rental agreement? I highly doubt it. In which case, the argument of ignorance is totally weak.

[Paintrain]

If he takes a paid leave of abscence for the '07 season (as being reportedly discussed by ESPN) after his trial and sentence, should the league consider it time served regarding a suspensionand let him play once he has paid his debt to society or suspend him another year after that?

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by saden1

So in essence the NFL can say we don't know if you're guilty but we're going to suspend you anyways because you're suspected of wrong doing? What's the point of our justice system if employers and take upon themselves the power of judge, jury and executioner?

Do you *think* Vick had several dog carcasses and over 50 dogs chained to car axles in the backyard, or do you *know*? The FBI discovered that evidence and released the information to the public. Although it is quite possible the FBI is lying, it is not likely at all. So, I'm not talking about the NFL suspending him for *suspicion* of wrong doing. I'm talking about the NFL suspending him for what they already know from the FBI reports, and I don't think that is unreasonable at all.

Originally Posted by saden1

Without concrete proof or reason? Without offering a substantial severance package for me to go away? Man, you would make a great employee.

I never said I would do that. I am a very loyal person. I just said that I think it is the employer's right, and I don't see anything wrong with that. I cannot justify criticizing an employer's right to choose who they want to do their work. It's their money and they don't *have* to employ anyone if they don't want to.

[Riggo44]

NFL, Falcons might urge Vick to take paid leave.
ESPN - NFL, Falcons may urge Vick to take paid leave - NFL

I don't think Vick will be playing this year.

[Monksdown]

I only know Virginia. So I have to confess some ignorance as to the state that he is employed in. If he were employed in VA, the employer could dismiss without any reason whatsoever. I believe that the employer would have to be very careful not to give a reason.

That being said, I don't know if Vick is an employee in Georgia, or not. And I also don't know if this argument is apples to oranges or not, because we're talking about suspension, not termination.

Ive always wondered why the player's union supported the commissioner on his conduct policy. I like it, but it seems to infringe heavily on a player's rights. On the other side of the coin, the league should be able to protect itself from an even worse public reaction.

I suppose more players in the league support Tony Dungy's 1% theory, than do not.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

Do you *think* Vick had several dog carcasses and over 50 dogs chained to car axles in the backyard, or do you *know*? The FBI discovered that evidence and released the information to the public. Although it is quite possible the FBI is lying, it is not likely at all. So, I'm not talking about the NFL suspending him for *suspicion* of wrong doing. I'm talking about the NFL suspending him for what they already know from the FBI reports, and I don't think that is unreasonable at all.

I never said I would do that. I am a very loyal person. I just said that I think it is the employer's right, and I don't see anything wrong with that. I cannot justify criticizing an employer's right to choose who they want to do their work. It's their money and they don't *have* to employ anyone if they don't want to.

You, me, and the rest of the world not withstanding Vick's claim is that he had no knowledge (total BS IMO) and he has a right to due process. He has a right to have is case heard before any harmful action is taken against him by the league.

This whole matter is pretty self explanatory to me. I don't get why people want him to be suspended ASAP without first getting to the heart of the claim and his defense.


p.s. Even when cops are accused of wrong doing they are first suspended with pay. The same rules that apply to everyone else should apply to Vick as well is all I'm saying.

[PSUSkinsFan21]

Originally Posted by saden1

You, me, and the rest of the world not withstanding Vick's claim is that he had no knowledge (total BS IMO) and he has a right to due process. He has a right to have is case heard before any harmful action is taken against him by the league.

Honest question, Saden: were you against the Pacman suspension too?

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by saden1

You, me, and the rest of the world not withstanding Vick's claim is that he had no knowledge (total BS IMO) and he has a right to due process. He has a right to have is case heard before any harmful action is taken against him by the league.

This whole matter is pretty self explanatory to me. I don't get why people want him to be suspended ASAP without first getting to the heart of the claim and his defense.


p.s. Even when cops are accused of wrong doing they are first suspended with pay. The same rules that apply to everyone else should apply to Vick as well is all I'm saying.

You are right. I don't see much harm in waiting. However, he has already done damage to the league, and that is enough justification to suspend him, IMO. I know you might want to say, "we can't conclude that he has personally done damage, until he is proven guilty. The damage came from the accusations." However, it is very rare that innocent and upstanding citizens have false accusations made about them -- by the FBI -- especially when there is physical evidence.

[ArtMonkDrillz]

Originally Posted by saden1

You, me, and the rest of the world not withstanding Vick's claim is that he had no knowledge (total BS IMO) and he has a right to due process. He has a right to have is case heard before any harmful action is taken against him by the league.

This whole matter is pretty self explanatory to me. I don't get why people want him to be suspended ASAP without first getting to the heart of the claim and his defense.


p.s. Even when cops are accused of wrong doing they are first suspended with pay. The same rules that apply to everyone else should apply to Vick as well is all I'm saying.

So if Vick was to show up on the next episode of To Catch A Predator do you think the NFL should have to await until after his trail to suspend him?

There was enough evidence against him that he was indited and he's brought so much negative attention to himself, the Falcons, and the entire league that I can't believe neither his team nor the league has suspended him yet.

[DEVIL'S OWN]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Knowing what you know so far of the Vick case, and considering recent conduct decisions made on the likes of Pacman, Tank, and Chris Henry, if a decision had to be made today what would you do?

We dont know anything, can yall at least wait until the trial over with, before you convict him. If he did do it, well, he's buried his career and life, but if he hasn't then, let the case play out......... I've seen people on here say they hate Vick, thats a strong word, I can't see anyone hating a man that much unless its for reason, not concerning, football.

[DEVIL'S OWN]

Originally Posted by ArtMonkDrillz

So if Vick was to show up on the next episode of To Catch A Predator do you think the NFL should have to await until after his trail to suspend him?

There was enough evidence against him that he was indited and he's brought so much negative attention to himself, the Falcons, and the entire league that I can't believe neither his team nor the league has suspended him yet.

The Inditement means that some has said of can confirm that he had knowledge of this, but who's to say, that someone is crediable witness, and If Vick showed up on to catch a predator, we wouldn't be having this discussion.........Would we?

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by DEVIL'S OWN

We dont know anything, can yall at least wait until the trial over with, before you convict him. If he did do it, well, he's buried his career and life, but if he hasn't then, let the case play out......... I've seen people on here say they hate Vick, thats a strong word, I can't see anyone hating a man that much unless its for reason, not concerning, football.

While I would like to agree with you, the evidence is just too overwhelming for an educated person to dismiss.
I understand he's "innocent until proven guilty", but that only applies to a court of law. From all the evidence that has been presented, he's guilty.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by PSUSkinsFan21

Honest question, Saden: were you against the Pacman suspension too?

Vick is no Pacman. Pacman was a habitual offender and was constantly in trouble with the law. The league rightly suspended him because he was warned numerous times regarding his conduct. I wholeheartedly supported Pacman's suspension and from the way things turned out the NFL had legal rights to do what they did.