lumm0x

To me, the most relevant discussions surrounding this issue are brought up by Bobaganoosh and others who have commented about the differences between the NFL as a private entity and the process of the criminal justice system. As stated, the NFL is a business. It is not governed by the chain of events required in the courts, nor does it's actions and decisions in any way relate to Vick's innocence or guilt.

I disagree when people say that they need to wait for his conviction in the matter. It's been said before, but if the management of a business decides to restructure their staff because an employee is caught up in personal turmoil surrounding potential criminal charges and convictions then it is their right to terminate employment as long as they provide the legislated compensation as outlined by the union or labor board.

The Falcons and/or the NFL can punt Vick whenever they wish from the team or league whether there is court judgement or not. I realize there will be alot of people behind the innocent until proven guilty concept, and as far as his criminal conviction goes I fully agree with that, but unfortunately those policies are irrelevant to a business management process.

I fully agree that the Falcons should release Vick and not be forced to suffer any penalty as a result. I also agree the league should suspend him from play until judgement is concluded. In my opinion this should be his penalty for even being involved in the matters in any capacity.

Euphoria

I can totally respect your opinion and points but the Falcons should not be let off the hook, they need to assume responsiblity for signing such player and damn right they should be force to obide by the current agreements and take the cap hit for cutting him.

In fact the NFL isn't the one who can let the Falcons off the hook on this, its apart of the labor agreement with the NFL and Union it will take damn near an act of congress to change that.

Euphoria

The real question is...

"how does it affect the power rankings"?

LordOfEntropy

So we cannot incriminate until found guilty. He's never been in trouble before.... but I disagree.

Have we all forgotten Ron Mexico? Spreading genital herpes to a "loved one" under an alias? Living for over a year under a false name? Didn't his ex settle out of court for that? And have we forgotten the hidden compartment at the airport? Have we forgotten Vick giving the finger to his own fans in his home arena on national television.

A pattern exists here, this is not the first time in trouble.

I just don't believe he could have an operation on that scale, running as long as it did, at his own house no less, without knowing or at least suspecting what was going on. I just don't believe that.

can anyone help me id this tune? it goes thwap thwap boom tch boom tch boom tch.

Qui a laissez sortir les chiens!

ScottyRo

Again, all of these are irrelevant to the new player conduct policy as it has been imposed before this Vick incident. A pattern does exist for him, but Goodell has been seeking to suspend those players who are repeatedly involved in CRIMINAL offenses. Only the water bottle comes close to this and nothing came of that criminally.

This does not mean that Goodell wont change the way he imposes penalties under the new policy and I'm not saying he shouldn't. However, the precedent so far is to not suspend him because there is only this single CRIMINAL offense.

Consider this, years ago my parents owned a house in my hometown even though they had moved away. I lived in the house for a while. Now suppose during the time that I lived there I began participating in an illegal endeavor out of the house. If I were to get arrested for that illegal activity, should my parents also be arrested. Should YOUR parents have been arrested when you were a teen for the illegal things YOU did in their house or with their car? I know Vick wasn't the parent of the individual(s) living at the house, but the "he should have known what was going on at his house" theory doesn't really fly with me when you compare it to what goes on in the world already. If the Feds can come up with a credible witness that can put him at the house or at a dogfight then so be it, but even the fact that the Feds have a 95% conviction rate doesn't mean that Vick is not in the 5% that is not convicted.

I'm in favor of the voluntary leave with pay until the outcome of the case is determined one way or the other. That gets the NFL the biggest gain (that is, Vick away from the team and the game) while affording Vick the least penalty (not playing, but still getting paid). Short of that, if he refuses to voluntarily go on leave, I would suspend him with pay until the outcome of the case.

Much has been said about what a normal employer would do to an employee under these same circumstances and I agree that I'd be out on the street. I distinguish this sentiment from Vick's case because Vick is a KEY employee. I believe that in most companies, if someone who is a KEY employee (that is, one who is nearly indispensable or too costly to let go) gets arrested under similarly despicable circumstances, that person would likely also be given some sort of leave with or without pay. Don't compare Vick to yourself and say he should be fired because you'd be fired. I'm betting you're not a key employee either (like me).

Regardless of the charges though, the PR nightmare alone might warrant a suspension, but that is only because this has become such a high profile case.

/end extremely long rant.

btw, Nothing in this post is pointed directly at any single individual on this forum even though I did quote LOE's post above.

ScottyRo

I still have the Falcons ahead of the Bears.