Michael Vick Should Not Play in the NFL

russ autin by Correspondent Written on February 19, 2009
20494_feature

Having read too many stories about the Michael Vick saga, I hate to write one more, but most others have been so bad that I feel it's my duty to pen a more informative one.

The sympathetic articles in support of Vick can almost always be classified into two categories:  There's the denial argument and the, "he's paid his dues" one. 

First, the long stream of denial.  They usually start off like this:

Vick is a poor, innocent victim who trusted his friends, and they let him down.

Here's a list of just a few of the people they think are responsible for Vick's downfall:  The police (bad search warrant), the Government (for bringing the charges) ,the media (for reporting the story), ESPN (for milking the story), and the humane society (for spreading anti-Vick propaganda). 

The list goes on and on, blaming everyone except Vick.

As for the "he's paid his dues" stories, they usually go on and on about how he actually went to prison and how he's seen the light.

Next they'll tell you others have done worst and gone unpunished, therefore it would be wrong to punish Michael. If you follow this logic to it's end, you'll find it has no beginning. They will defend the next scumbag claiming, "you didn't punish Vick, you shouldn't punish him."

That brings us to my favorite: it's just dogs.

Now, before we move on, I think the killing and torturing of man's best friend, on this scale, is enough to merit a lifetime ban. So all you animal lovers please don't think I'm trivializing this aspect of the sad story, but some readers don't think that's enough.

This story is for those people who say "I"m a dog lover, but..."

It reminds me of people who claim it's OK to be racist because some of their best friends are black.  Open up your eyes, hypocrites!

All of this aside, the real reason Michael Vick should be banned for life is the illegal gambling aspect of the charges.  He was guilty of transporting large sums of money across state lines, all for the purpose of dog fighting.

Who are the people he was delivering this money to?

The answer is everyone from your organized criminals to your basic street thug—anyone who can profit from betting on these gruesome fights.

A person with those types of associations should never be allowed to affect the outcome of any sporting event. It's crazy to think otherwise.

Does anyone out there think all of Vick's illegal activities came out during trial? Probably not, which means some very bad people have some very bad dirt on Michael.

The next time—if there is one—he throws a pick, fumbles a snap, or just overthrows a receiver, was the fix in?

This is something we have to consider, like it or not.

With the now infamous gambling referee of the NBA, Tim Donaghy, fresh in our sports psyche, does the National Football League really want to push it's luck?

Is Michael Vick worth the risk?

Vote Now! - Author Poll

do you think the gambling should affect vick's playing

  • yes
  • on
  • the dog fighting was enough
vote to see results
Results - Author Poll

do you think the gambling should affect vick's playing

  • yes

    31.7%
  • on

    31.7%
  • the dog fighting was enough

    36.7%
  • Total votes: 60
(0)
...
Share This  
Crop_45x45
or to post this comment

9 Comments

There are no comments yet. Get the conversation started by leaving the first comment

Loading more comments...
posted just now
  • Loading...
  • Nobody has liked this comment yet
Cancel

This comment and all replies have been deleted This comment has been deleted Undo delete

463
reads

9
comments

written on February 19, 2009 Opinion

The best Saints newsletter on the web

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address


CBS Sports Official Partner
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Getty Images.
Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Getty Images is strictly prohibited.