My protest letter made the NY Times.......
 

They didn't print all of it so here it is:

This is an open letter to Mr. Blank and Mr. Goodell:

You guys are unbelievable. Mr. Blank, if Michael was a vice president at Home Depot you would have already cut him. I wonder what your employees think of your leadership skills now. I asked myself what you might be trying to accomplish by not benching him? Nothing came to mind other than the fact that you will fill more seats at the games, so in one other word, GREED!

Mr. Goodell, if Michael Vick were Pacman Jones he would be suspended. That's not a question, that's a damn fact. Pacman Jones probably has 2000 attorney's standing in line waiting to sue you and everyone else he thinks maybe involved in his year long suspension. It didn't take long for you to sell out and for everyone to see your true colors. I guess you may lose a little revenue if Vick isn't playing? There's that word again, GREED! They're on TV a few times this year and that includes Thanksgiving Day. Just what I want on TV, family values. Thanks Mr. Blank and Mr. Goodell.

Here's my protest and I call on all others to join in and make your voice heard:

I WILL NOT WATCH OR BUY TICKETS FOR ANY NFL FOOTBALL GAME INVOLVING THE ATLANTA FALCONS FOOTBALL TEAM UNTIL MICHAEL VICK IS BENCHED PENDING THE OUTCOME OF HIS TRIAL.

I am the second letter on the page.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/22/sp...=1&oref=slogin

CheramieIII

Nice call and gutsy.

You still have morals. BTW I'm on your side (and not because "Nasal Spray" is a dirty bird). Unlike the majority that are sinking under sports and reality show hype.

great job and i agree with u 100%.

Good Job Cher! You have got my respect, Sir.

now you will bug us to find out abot the falcons games.:confused: ;)
hats off to you cher

amen...he should be sitting...in jail.

i am surprised the NY TIMES printed it being it is not about the GIANTS

Why not boycott the entire NFL? :)

I say you have your sets of opinion. I am not a falcon fan nor am I a M.Vick fan,with that said,,I think that is to the extreme to convict a guy on allegations,,he haven't went through due process to be proven guilty. People say that their mounds of evidence against this guy, How in the world do anyone know what kind of evidence they have ,,,the media don't know,,They can only suggest that someone that the feds put a squeeze on can testify against Vick,,,That lead me to ask how reliable that source,,The differ in Pac-man Jones and Vick is this 1st time indicted with an alledge felony offense. Pac Man had his chances and he still tearing down bridges. Before ppl start throwing stones at Vick, Goodell or Blank, we should think,,if it was Bress going thru this same mess we will want him to have his same opportunities in the court system,,,if Vick does not get his,,,God forbid,,we have to go thru it cuz they will be looking at the same guide lines they use toward Vick saying if they were to force him out for a year

If you are a true Saints fan I don't believe for a nano second that you won't be watching the Saints/Falcons two games this season regardless of who the QB is. Anyone who doesn't think the Falcons and the NFL don't want to sack Vick are kidding themselves. They would make many more fans and probably more money in the long run by suspending Vick now. This is a case of setting a dangerous precident of suspending a player with no prior arrests for being CHARGED with a crime. Once you go down that road any player charged with any crime could be suspended. This will most likely be a situation where Vick faces a year of paid leave. It gets him off the field and out of the public eye and it removes the possibility of suspending a player charged with a crime for the fist time.

Well put, Stockman. Godell already pee-ed in the punch by suspensing Pacman, Henry and Tank for 1/2 to a whole season; which is a move that hamstrung him in the Vick case. If he suspends Vick for the season, Vick's got a case against the league; if he doesn't suspend Vick, (that includes paid leave) the trio above will be releasing the legal hounds on the NFL for unfair treatment.

Please realize that I am not defending Vick's (alleged) actions, or the actions of any of the guys above. I'm just pointing out that Goodell made a "rookie mistake" and checkmated himself and the league.

Yeah you can't suspend him until there is conviction or a guilty plea.

Pacman and Vick are 2 different situations... one where he has been in trouble and continued to get in trouble and NFL took action. Vick's situation is that he is facing charges and he shouldn't be convited or punished before anyone just claims he did something wrong. If that was the case you better call the FBI and have them do the same thing to Manning before we play the Colts so we can beat them.

gambling is involved in this mess which could be lifetime ban.pac-man has no convictions and if found guilty of anything he's charged with,he doesn't match vick's charges.vick has already had the " RON MEXICO " herpes delivery, his home fan finger job and his wacky-backy smelling jewelry carrying waterbottle( if you beleive that,he wants you to try to get on his jury ) he more than qualifies for the season suspension on damage to nfl reputation.i agree i wouldn't miss saints game to protest but fans skipping his preseason games would do trick.then again,we'd miss fun of barking at him

People wondering why Vick has not been suspended yet by looking at Pacman's suspension are missing the point of Pacman's suspension ENTIRELY.

First of all, the keyword is CRIMINAL. For all the PR nightmares he has created, this is Vick's first CRIMINAL problem. The closest thing that comes into play under this other than the indictment for dog fighting is the funny water bottle, but he was only detained for a few moments in that situation.

Pacman on the other hand, entered the league on probation, has been arrested twice and has been interviewed as a person of interest in criminal investigations up to 10 other times. It is that he has gotten himself into criminal trouble multiple times which brought about his suspension.

Vick's situation is different in that there is only one criminal incident on his sheet. The commissioner has already established that his new policy is aimed at repeat CRIMINAL offenders while first time CRIMINAL offenders will be afforded the luxury of letting due process play out in the courts.

For its actions, PETA is WAAAAY out of line in calling for his suspension based on this indictment. You have to remember that an indictment is one side of the story: the prosecution's side. The defense does not get a chance to rebut any of the testimony or evidence. Prosecutors regularly use very shaky evidence in combination with whatever solid evidence they have to secure these indictments. PETA and many others are acting as if Vick has already been found guilty and are asking for things with total disregard for how it could affect somebody who could be innocent. Don't tell me you KNOW he's guilty. You weren't there. You didn't see anything. If you think he is guilty, you are relying on only one side of the story which includes the testimony of some individuals that you probably wouldn't let in your house.

The thing is, I can't stand Vick. I think he is way overrated and I get sick of hearing about him like he is some great QB or something. Plus, he plays for the Falcons who I hate. However, I am not going to let my disdain for him cloud my judgment on how this situation needs to be treated. I think many of you who are in favor of suspending Vick now would, if being completely honest, admit that your disdain for him as a player and probably as a person (even without the dog fighting allegations) is influencing your decision making when calling for his suspension.

ScottyRo, that was the most well composed, rational, logical and well thought out position I've heard on this board to date.

Well played...

Scotty Ro...

Great Job.

ScottyRo, I agree that's how our country was founded. However, have you actually read the indictment? There are 4 "cooperating witnesses" (granted they are all admitted dogfighter criminals and trying to cop a plea) producing a lot of very, very damning details, and a ton of hard evidence collected on Michael Vick's property. The business (Bad Newz Kennels) was in Vick's name. Some of the bets Vick allegedly paid directly were $tens of thousands, and you know that before the feds handed down the indictment they rationalized the alleged payoffs with transfers from his accounts. So you're right, he hasn't been found guilty, and the defense could still possibly pull off a miracle save. But I would NOT want those charges and that evidence facing me in federal court. This isn't the LA police and prosecutors, this is the FBI. This won't be an OJ circus, this is all business. I'm not ready to hang him, but anybody want to take a bet on the outcome?

I give him a less than 5% chance. He is most likely off to the pen. You still can't suspend him for a first time offense. If he is found guilty his life as he has known it is over and it should be. But this is not China or the Middle East. Our legal system as messed up as it is sometimes is what seperates us from the animals living in other countries without an "innocent until proven guilty" system.
However, if I were Mike Vick and I was given the opportunity to take a paid leave of absense I would jump on it. There is no way I would subject myself, my organization, and my teamates to the amount of media frenzy and public outcry that is about to descend on Flowery Mound, GA. If he has any selflessness left he should take his paycheck each week and focus on defending himself if he is innocent or making a plea bargain if he is guilty.

Damn, I didn't think I would get any response out of this but glad to see it. I am not convicting Michael Vick before he goes to trial. I am only calling for fairness for everyone.

If I was charged with any felony my senior management team at best would suspend me without pay, but more than likely would fire me, period!

Now why should Michael Vick be treated any differently. The team belongs to Mr. Blank and I am sure there is something in Mr. Vicks contract that allows Mr. Blank to release Michael Vick for his conduct. Bird at fans, water bottle at the airport, slamming dogs to the ground and killing them. Yes, I understand the 3rd item is not proven yet, but isn't it Vicks responsibility to keep himself out of those situations, yes it is!

Believe me Vick at best will be suspended pending the outcome by tonight and worse cases scenario will be released by Thursday.

If you were any owner would you pick him up? As for me, NO!

Here's something I don't understand. At the very least Vick is a liar. I can't see any way in hell he didn't know what was going on on his property unless he's totally brain dead (which is very possible). So if he knew, then what? Lieing isn't a felony I don't think but it sure makes him look guilty. I think Vick has worked himself into this situation and I for one hope he never gets out of it. Yes I am judging him before he officially charged but I don't like him and I don't like anyrhing associated with him.

P.S. Whats bad is, I liked him when he was in school. My how things change.I hope he frys!

The NFL does not have anything to do with due process. My company does not have anything to do with due process. The fact of the matter is that he has been indicted by the federal government...the same government who holds a 95% conviction rate on all indictments. The fact of the matter is this is a felony, and if he would have been indicted on murder charges, or rape, or kidnapping...would you want him to play football while going through the trial for that? No, of course you wouldnt. Vick will take his leave of absence, get paid for this year, so what is he really losing? not much. he isnt known as the type of player to have a love for the game...so i dont think he will miss it at all as long as he is still getting paid.

I must applaud all posters here for the well thought, civilly stated responses to this subject. Cheramie, III you argument is correct. There are certain issues that deserve us taking a stand. ScottyR, you too make excellent points for us to be less judgemental in this issue because Vick has not yet been convicted. All points in between are valid.

Now, with that said, one factor comes to mind. Goodell is trying to rid the NFL of the criminal IMAGE that has surfaced in the past couple of months. The heat is on bigtime to create a better image of who plays in the NFL. Remember that these guys are heros to kids and should be role models both on and off the field. We've seen, Billy Cannon, Lawrence Phillips, Cecil Collins, Rae Curruth, Harvey Williams, O.J. Simpson, Pac Man Jones, Ricky Williams, Tank Johnson, Chris Henry, Ray Lewis, Randy Moss, and other hi profile players in altercations with the legal system. THIS HAS TO STOP! Goodell knows this and is making an effort to curtail this behavior.

My take on Vick is that he comes from a family of criminals, his brother is still embroiled in legal problems on gun charges and other criminal behavior. Is Michael Vick guilty of dogfighting? I truly don't know, and neither do the rest of us. We may have strong suspicions, but we don't know all of the facts. What I do know is that Michael Vick has been indicted for a vicious, brutal crime against animals. Guilty or not, Vick has, at best, lied to his boss and the commissioner of the League. That alone, calls for some sort of disciplinary action. Suspension with or without pay is warranted just on the basis that he lied. That has nothing to do with his legal status. Secondly, I believe that it makes sense to enact a League policy that goes something like this: Any player who is arrested for a misdemeanor or felony is automatically suspended from play until either cleared or convicted. If cleared, salary and benefits are refunded. If guilty, approprite refunds to the team apply. That keeps the lid on who does and doesn't get into the media.

This whole thing has become a media circus. To me, Vick is both naive and stupid to believe that he can get away with a slap on the wrist. He's in deep deep trouble, even if he doesn't get found guilty.

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.

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.

The real question is...

"how does it affect the power rankings"?

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.

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.

I still have the Falcons ahead of the Bears.