Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports

The Library => Haley Center Basement => Topic started by: Godfather on July 20, 2009, 01:01:54 PM

Title: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Godfather on July 20, 2009, 01:01:54 PM
We haven't really talked about this...

Michael Vick has been released from prison for a couple of months now and has been on home arrest.  He has asked to be reinstated by the NFL to allow him to play in 09.  You are the Commisioner of the NFL what is your decision? do you reinstate him? reasons why or why not.

Discuss...
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Saniflush on July 20, 2009, 01:04:56 PM
Yes I reinstate him. 

He served his time let him try to make a living.  Hard to hold him to a different standard than what you hold others.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Thrilla on July 20, 2009, 01:07:46 PM
He's been punished and has served more than enough time for his misdeeds.  I'm no fan of dog abuse, but he's done his penance.  His efficacy at quarterback at this point in time is questionable based on my knowledge of prison meals and workout routines...so he probably has a little ways to go before he's ready for the NFL again.  Just a little ways...since he's a natural athlete.   So I say if a team is ready to pay him to come back, then that is fine....




as long as it ain't the Falcons.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Godfather on July 20, 2009, 01:12:39 PM
I agree with both of you, and I am curious if anyone disagrees and thinks he shouldn't be allowed to play anymore.

I still think he is a POS, but like you said he did his time (and at a fuck me in the ass prison, not some country club tennis prison, that Birdman will end up in after the cops finish his steroids case.)
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Snaggletiger on July 20, 2009, 01:21:30 PM
I agree with both of you, and I am curious if anyone disagrees and thinks he shouldn't be allowed to play anymore.

I still think he is a POS, but like you said he did his time (and at a fuck me in the ass prison, not some country club tennis prison, that Birdman will end up in after the cops finish his steroids case.)

I'll just take huge doses of roids and conduct the ass raping myself.

My opinion on Vick can be summed up in two words.  1. Leonard 2. Little

Okay a few more words.  Let the guy play.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Jumbo on July 20, 2009, 01:26:56 PM
I say let him play if a team wants to sign him. He went to jail for over a year, Donte Stallworth killed a man while driving drunk and gets 2 months?
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: wesfau2 on July 20, 2009, 02:41:01 PM
I'll be the contrarian, but only predicated upon Goodell's prior assertions that he will not tolerate this crap.

IF Goodell is serious about cleaning up the league, then fuck Vick, Pacman and Stallworth.

I think the almighty dollar will win out, as always, and Vick will be back in the league soon (after kissing Roger's ring and performing some act of public contrition).
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Jumbo on July 20, 2009, 03:19:31 PM
I'll be the contrarian, but only predicated upon Goodell's prior assertions that he will not tolerate this crap.

IF Goodell is serious about cleaning up the league, then fuck Vick, Pacman and Stallworth.

I think the almighty dollar will win out, as always, and Vick will be back in the league soon (after kissing Roger's ring and performing some act of public contrition).
He will have to kiss Goodall's ass that's for sure. I think Vick's going to have a hard time adjusting to the pocket style passing of todays NFL since he's a horrible passer.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Tiger Wench on July 20, 2009, 11:31:38 PM
I'll be the contrarian, but only predicated upon Goodell's prior assertions that he will not tolerate this crap.

IF Goodell is serious about cleaning up the league, then fuck Vick, Pacman and Stallworth.

I think the almighty dollar will win out, as always, and Vick will be back in the league soon (after kissing Roger's ring and performing some act of public contrition).
But unlike Stallworth and Pacman, Vick actually served his time, took his punishment, owned up to what he did and SO FAR has tried to demonstrate remorse.  If Goodell is wanting to assert that he will not tolerate this crap, then better he let back in a (hopefully) success story (Vick) than a repeat too-stupid-to-live shithead like Pacman. 

Besides, if PETA is protesting against you, you have my support.  Animal abuse is heinous and should be punished, but those fuckers are nothing more than domestic terrorists and total moonbats. 
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Thrilla on July 21, 2009, 11:14:33 AM
He will have to kiss Goodall's ass that's for sure. I think Vick's going to have a hard time adjusting to the pocket style passing of todays NFL since he's a horrible passer.

The talking heads at Sportscenter yesterday says there's a good chance that his new team will bring him on in a more Athlete type position instead of quarterback.  Since the Wildcat formation has gained popularity in the NFL over the past couple of years, they were saying he would be the perfect fit for a team that runs that formation in games.  I just can't see his ass getting hit repeatedly as a slot receiver or tailback, though, after being a quarterback and being in prison for so long.  Easily breakable, and all that...
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Townhallsavoy on July 21, 2009, 12:15:30 PM
Let him play. 

Was he really in typical prison?  If so, I don't care how much of a "natural athlete" he is.  He won't be football ready for another year. 

He'll get his ass rocked this year, sit the bench, and get cut by whatever team takes the chance on him.  There's no way Michael Vick can be Michael Vick after sitting out two seasons. 
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: AUTiger1 on July 21, 2009, 12:29:14 PM
I say let him play if a team wants to sign him. He went to jail for over a year, Donte Stallworth killed a man while driving drunk and gets 2 months?

Agreed.  As TW said, "Animal abuse is heinous and should be punished" and I think that Vick has served his time and been punished enough.

I still don't understand how Stallworth kills a man for DUI but only gets 2 months!
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: AWK on July 21, 2009, 12:49:52 PM
Agreed.  As TW said, "Animal abuse is heinous and should be punished" and I think that Vick has served his time and been punished enough.

I still don't understand how Stallworth kills a man for DUI but only gets 2 months!

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Jumbo on July 21, 2009, 01:55:59 PM
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
I would get 10 yrs in prison, unless I had a great lawyer!
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Townhallsavoy on July 21, 2009, 02:05:30 PM
Agreed.  As TW said, "Animal abuse is heinous and should be punished" and I think that Vick has served his time and been punished enough.

I still don't understand how Stallworth kills a man for DUI but only gets 2 months!

The guy was jaywalkin' like a motherfucker. 
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Jumbo on July 21, 2009, 02:47:19 PM
The guy was jaywalkin' like a motherfucker. 
He moonwalked right into the Bentley on dubs.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: boartitz on July 21, 2009, 05:25:38 PM
He wouldn't be on my team if I owned one. Really, just how great was he a few years back, anyways? Run of the puppy mill.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Tiger Wench on July 21, 2009, 06:25:30 PM
He moonwalked right into the Bentley on dubs.
One of the shysters can correct me if I am wrong, but if Stallworth hadn't been drunk, he might not have even been prosecuted.  If someone steps out in front of you outside the bounds of the pedestrian crossing, the risk is theirs, no?.  That is, unless you are committing some sort of traffic violation that would impair a person's ability to react - ie, speeding, DUI, etc.

Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Tiger Wench on July 21, 2009, 06:26:41 PM
He wouldn't be on my team if I owned one. Really, just how great was he a few years back, anyways? Run of the puppy mill.
:rimshot:

That is bad.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Jumbo on July 21, 2009, 06:39:36 PM
One of the shysters can correct me if I am wrong, but if Stallworth hadn't been drunk, he might not have even been prosecuted.  If someone steps out in front of you outside the bounds of the pedestrian crossing, the risk is theirs, no?.  That is, unless you are committing some sort of traffic violation that would impair a person's ability to react - ie, speeding, DUI, etc.


If your driving drunk and kill someone you should go to jail.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: War Eagle!!! on July 21, 2009, 07:06:51 PM
He did go to jail...
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Townhallsavoy on July 21, 2009, 07:42:49 PM
If your driving drunk and kill someone you should go to jail.

If I'm driving drunk and someone commits suicide by jumping in front of my car, should I go to jail for 1st degree murder? 

This is what people do in law school.  They come up with countless "what if's" and they decide what the consequences should be.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Jumbo on July 21, 2009, 10:25:24 PM
If I'm driving drunk and someone commits suicide by jumping in front of my car, should I go to jail for 1st degree murder? 

This is what people do in law school.  They come up with countless "what if's" and they decide what the consequences should be.
I thought judges decided consequences?
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Jumbo on July 21, 2009, 10:31:46 PM
He did go to jail...
Should still be in jail.....
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: AWK on July 21, 2009, 10:45:17 PM
I thought judges decided consequences?
Judges are the gatekeepers, Juries are the triers of fact.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: War Eagle!!! on July 21, 2009, 10:58:22 PM
If the sentence was good for the prosecuter, good for the judge, and good for the family...why isn't the sentence good for you jumbo?
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Jumbo on July 22, 2009, 02:01:49 AM
If the sentence was good for the prosecuter, good for the judge, and good for the family...why isn't the sentence good for you jumbo?
My family has had dealings with Stallworth and I told him to get out of my yard.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Jumbo on July 22, 2009, 02:02:23 AM
Judges are the gatekeepers, Juries are the triers of fact.
I am the keymaster.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: wesfau2 on July 22, 2009, 08:50:36 AM
Judges are the gatekeepers, Juries are the triers of fact.

Except when the judge is the finder of fact.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Saniflush on July 22, 2009, 08:57:37 AM
Judges are the gatekeepers, Juries are the triers of fact.

A child's trusting innocence is so refreshing.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: AWK on July 22, 2009, 12:43:56 PM
Except when the judge is the finder of fact.
We ain't talking about no bench trial, or family court, or probate court...
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: wesfau2 on July 22, 2009, 12:48:44 PM
We ain't talking about no bench trial, or family court, or probate court...

I guess I missed where you excluded those instances in your blanket statement as to the roles of judge and jury.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Thrilla on July 22, 2009, 05:15:42 PM
 :box:

LAWYER FIGHT!

Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: AWK on July 22, 2009, 05:21:29 PM
I guess I missed where you excluded those instances in your blanket statement as to the roles of judge and jury.
It was broad, but not overly broad or vague. 
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Jumbo on July 23, 2009, 04:53:09 AM
If the sentence was good for the prosecuter, good for the judge, and good for the family...why isn't the sentence good for you jumbo?
The family accepted the judgement(settlement) does that mean there happy uncle Joe walked into the Bentley?
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: War Eagle!!! on July 23, 2009, 10:34:47 AM
The family accepted the judgement(settlement) does that mean there happy uncle Joe walked into the Bentley?

From my understanding, the family spoke on Stallworth's behalf at the trial...
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: boartitz on July 23, 2009, 11:57:28 AM
From my understanding, the family spoke on Stallworth's behalf at the trial...
For a nominal fee, I'm sure.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: CCTAU on July 27, 2009, 04:14:28 PM
PLAY!

Quote
NEW YORK – Michael Vick was reinstated by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell on Monday and could play in regular-season games as early as October.

Vick can immediately participate in preseason practices, workouts and meetings and can play in the final two preseason games — if he can find a team that will sign him. A number of teams have already said they would not.

"Needless to say, your margin for error is extremely limited," Goodell said in a letter to Vick. "I urge you to take full advantage of the resources available to support you and to dedicate yourself to rebuilding your life and your career. If you do this, the NFL will support you."

Goodell suspended Vick indefinitely in August 2007 after the former Atlanta Falcons quarterback admitted bankrolling the "Bad Newz Kennels" dogfighting operation. Goodell said then that Vick must show remorse and signs that he has changed before he would consider reinstating him.

"I accept that you are sincere when you say that you want to, and will, turn your life around, and that you intend to be a positive role model for others," Goodell added. "I am prepared to offer you that opportunity. Whether you succeed is entirely in your hands."

Once the season begins, Vick may participate in all team activities except games, and Goodell said he would consider Vick for full reinstatement by Week 6 (Oct. 18-19).

Goodell called a news conference for late Monday afternoon.

"I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to commissioner Goodell for allowing me to be readmitted to the National Football League," Vick said through agent Joel Segal. "I fully understand that playing football in the NFL is a privilege, not a right, and I am truly thankful for the opportunity I have been given.

"As you can imagine, the last two years have given me time to re-evaluate my life, mature as an individual and fully understand the terrible mistakes I have made in the past and what type of life I must lead moving forward.

"Again, I want to thank the commissioner for the chance to return to the game I love and the opportunity to become an example of positive change."

The announcement came after a busy first week of freedom for Vick, who met with union leaders and Goodell on consecutive days last week. His 23-month federal sentence ended when an electronic monitor was removed from his ankle early on July 20 at his home in Hampton, Va.

He met with DeMaurice Smith, executive director of the NFL Players Association, last Tuesday and, on Wednesday, he sat down with Goodell at a security firm in Allendale, N.J.

But his issues are far from over. Already, the owners of the New York Giants and New York Jets said they have no interest in the 29-year-old quarterback, who once was the league's highest-paid player.

Vick needs to find a team so he can get himself out of financial ruin. He filed for bankruptcy protection last July, listing assets of about $16 million and debts of more than $20 million, and has a hearing about his plan to repay his creditors on Friday in Norfolk, Va. That plan is built around his ability to make NFL-type money again.

He's unlikely to command anything close to the 10-year, $130 million contract he once had with the Falcons, or to get endorsement deals after the grisly details of his involvement in the dogfighting ring.

Vick finally pleaded guilty after his three co-defendants had already done so. They told of how Vick participated in the killing of dogs that didn't perform well in test fights by shooting, hanging, drowning or slamming them to the ground.

Vick's appearances at federal court in Richmond, Va., all came with large groups of protestors outside. Many were with PETA and held signs depicting photographs of Pit Bulls ravaged in dogfights and decrying the brutality in the gruesome details that emerged in the case.

A smaller group came to show support for Vick wearing jerseys with his No. 7.

Vick has already taken some steps to begin rebuilding his image and showing remorse.

He met with the president of the Humane Society of the United States while serving the first 18 months of his federal sentence in the prison at Leavenworth, Kan. He plans to work with HSUS in a program designed to steer inner city youth away from dogfighting. He was not permitted to work with the program while in custody.

"It's been a long process," Segal said. "He's thrilled for the opportunity to resume his playing career. He understands he has a lot to prove."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090727/ap_on_sp_fo_ne/fbn_vick_reinstated (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090727/ap_on_sp_fo_ne/fbn_vick_reinstated)

Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Snaggletiger on July 27, 2009, 04:43:54 PM
Good decision.  It's up to him if he can make it back or not.  If the Commish reinstated him that quickly, someone will be willing to pick him up and give him a try. 

Also, don't think for a second that the buzz generated by his return and the attention (Good or bad) given to the league wasn't taken into account.  If he makes a team and plays, even preseason games will be hard sell outs just so fans can show up to boo him or just take in the specatcle.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Tiger Wench on July 27, 2009, 10:47:12 PM
Good decision.  It's up to him if he can make it back or not.  If the Commish reinstated him that quickly, someone will be willing to pick him up and give him a try. 

Also, don't think for a second that the buzz generated by his return and the attention (Good or bad) given to the league wasn't taken into account.  If he makes a team and plays, even preseason games will be hard sell outs just so fans can show up to boo him or just take in the specatcle.

At least the PETA hippies can't afford football tickets, so their domestic terrorist selves will have to stay outside.  I hope MV goes to Minnesota or Green Bay so they will freeze their asses off protesting in their non-fur coats.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Snaggletiger on July 27, 2009, 11:02:26 PM
Heard a report today about the UFL, another start up football league.  Like most before it, probably won't fly but the commissioner sounds like he's got his stuff together and they're really working hand in hand with the NFL.  Kind of a feeder system for the league.  Anyway, they said Vick playing there is a good possibility to get his feet back under him.  They start in October.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Ranger12 on July 27, 2009, 11:53:16 PM
First of all, playing in the NFL, just like any other job, is a privilege and not a right. There are many companies that will not hire certain types of felons for various reasons, with perception usually being one of them especially when a public figure is involved. So, I don't feel I have the right to tell any company they must hire anybody. Vick might have served his time for his legal transgressions, but the societal repercussions may be felt for much longer. When you are committing an illegal act, you know the stigma it can leave you with if caught, so if you can't deal with that, then that is your problem, not mine. Should have thought about that before you committed the act. We all make bad choices and sometimes the bad ones hang around much longer then we would like.

For those that says he has a right to make a living, I don't disagree. However that does not mean he has some inalienable right to play in the NFL and make millions. I am pretty sure he can find a job outside the NFL if nobody wants to sign him. If Goodell would have decided to ban him, I would not have disagreed, and if nobody wants to sign him, I can't disagree with that either. I think Vick needs to be very thankful that Goodell did not ban him for life, but if Vick says or performs some action that shows shows disagreement with Goodell's decision, then that just shows me he has not learned anything, because instead of being thankful he is being selfish once again.

With all of that said, I do find the NFL hypocritical of the way it handles these players that get caught in illegal activities. It seems that if you harm a human, you don't get punished as severely as if you harmed an animal. Don't get me wrong, I don't support animal abuse and my two dogs and cat are very spoiled. I just don't understand the discrepancies in the levels of punishment the NFL seems to hand out.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: boartitz on August 01, 2009, 07:48:53 AM
 Fuck him

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/18920 (http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/18920)
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: CCTAU on August 03, 2009, 10:54:25 AM
The treatment of the dog and the pic is an ugly thing. But what I find uglier is the same people care nothing about the families of the rape, murder, or any other issue concerning humans and sports athletes. Sure they got the receiver at Carolina, but that was obvious. When these same people become just as outraged about a human befalling the same misfortune, then I will have cause to listen to them. Until then, Vick was involved in treating an animal with malice, not a human. There are tons of folks arrested for dog fighting every year, hardly any receive the same punishment as Vick. I can't stand Vick, but I will not condone him being punished worse than some of the other criminals allowed to play in the NFL. Animal lovers need to be just as passionate about humans. The two are not the same.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: ssgaufan on August 03, 2009, 11:52:15 AM
Fuck Vick.  If he could hit the broad side of a barn with the football I might think otherwise.  I don't understand all of this shit over a qb that sucks at throwing the damn ball.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Townhallsavoy on August 03, 2009, 12:18:33 PM
Fuck Vick.  If he could hit the broad side of a barn with the football I might think otherwise.  I don't understand all of this shit over a qb that sucks at throwing the damn ball.

He made an incredible amount of money.  He also helped other people make an incredible amount of money. 

Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Thrilla on August 03, 2009, 05:36:09 PM
Fuck Vick.  If he could hit the broad side of a barn with the football I might think otherwise.  I don't understand all of this shit over a qb that sucks at throwing the damn ball.

Great reply.

That mutha fucka sure can run, tho.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: boartitz on August 03, 2009, 05:55:25 PM
Great reply.

That mutha fucka sure can run, tho.
His dogs bite.
Title: Re: Dog Killer...play or no play?
Post by: Jumbo on August 04, 2009, 04:21:07 AM
His dogs bite.
like a hungry dog with a Alpo covered kitten!