Thursday, May 14, 2009

Debate over Vick reinstatement

PFT is running a blog posing this same question. They seem to think that another year in the pen is what Michael Vick deserves and then he should be considered based on how he handles himself. Now, I know that what he did is horrible and to take advantage of an animal is paramount to doing the same to a child. I get it, but isn't something a bit off here? Does anyone remember not that long ago Ray Lewis was part of a murder investigation? That is until he turned rat on his two buddies in exchance for a obstruction of justice charge. Last I checked he is lounging in Hawaii during Pro Bowls, pimped out on commercials, and is considered a "mentor" to other players around the league. Every other week another meat head abandons his car after driving drunk (Tank) or gets nailed with a DWI (Lynch). Lets not even go PacMan whom was reinstated after a few run-ins. These guys are putting human lives at risk each and every time they leave the club after "making it rain". These are only the incidents we know about. The man did his time so let him be.

3 comments:

  1. Agree. Vick has served his time and PETA needs to focus on why footballs are made from pigskin ;) Anyway, the buzz says the most logical place he will reappear will be in the Bay area with the Black and Silver.

    ReplyDelete
  2. First I must say that I don't believe Vick has served his time until we put boxing glove on him and have him fight each and every one of the dogs that he "trained" to the death (a vast majority of which had to be enthanized).
    That being said, I do believe that the NFL should sanction a suspension of at least one season. The rest of these guys that are charged and found guilty of crimes get suspensions, why not him? He had to go to jail and, by our fucked up legal systems standards, has "served his time." But that is to society, not the NFL. Now he should pay for his actions via the NFL (I might add that having to pay for the Raiders might be punishment enough).

    ReplyDelete
  3. I do agree with Craig, but I am talking in context of how the NFL views things.

    ReplyDelete