To Vick's credit, (and perhaps the Eagles staff) he has kept himself under the radar and out of trouble. The question is, after the success (or should we say, non-failure) of Michael Vick could and should the Philadelphia Eagles take a chance on another star with a questionable history?
Adam "Pacman" Jones was considered a star prospect after 2 season in the NFL but a bad attitude saw him get traded to the Cowboys, then later dropped by the Cowboys, and now attempting make a comeback in 2010. Supposedly, Jones has added 13 pounds but can still run the 40 in under 4.5 seconds and perhaps some time away from the NFL will have given him time to reflect.
After the 'successful' intergration of Vick onto the Eagles roster, Philadelphia would seem like an ideal place to land, whilst also being a stronger team than those he is currently linked with.
But why would Philadelphia want him?
Both the Eagles starting cornerbacks are nearing the age where Andy Reid starts looking for replacements, like he did with Vincent and Taylor. Perhaps more importantly they both have large contract bonuses in 2012. A likely scenario would be that they are both off the team at the end of next year. Now the Philadelphia Eagles have taken a chance on injury prone Merlin Jackson, who could eventually replace one of them. Is there any reason why they should not (like they did with Vick) take a chance on Pacman to replace the other?
Both Vick and Jackson were low risk and high reward (financially), so a move for Pacman could make sense.