Vick to Re-Enter NFL, But Will Teams Welcome Him?

According to various sources, including ESPN.com, Roger Goodell has decided to conditionally reinstate former Atlanta Falcons quarterback, Michael Vick.

What this means is that Vick, who was just released from house arrest for his involvement with a dog-fighting ring, can be signed by any NFL team, but will also be suspended for the first four games of the upcoming year.

There is not much question over the fact that Goodell has been one of the better Commissioners of the major sports since replacing Paul Tagliabue in 2006. Granted, he also took the reins of a business that was already firmly placed at the top of the American sports ladder.

Nevertheless, the level to which the NFL holds its players accountable for their actions—on and off the field—has been second-to-none over the past few seasons.

See Bud Selig’s handling of the steroid era up until 2003. But I digress…

Aside from whether Vick should be allowed to sign a new contract, there is one pressing question in the wake of Thursday’s news, asked by Bob Cunningham on BleacherReport: "Is there an NFL team willing to take a chance on him?"

My initial feeling is that at least one of the thirty-two franchises would be willing to extend an offer to the former Pro-Bowler. There will be inevitable concerns regarding negative public reaction from local fans and media, along with protests at the team’s training camp and regular season games.

These are all legitimate things to consider, especially in a league that is generally so image conscious like the NFL.

It should be stated that, while signing him is not a smart business decision for any team, I can see a few franchises having an interest in Vick in the next few days and weeks.

As in any group, there are a select number of teams that go against the grain and continually make poor personnel decisions, including the Oakland Raiders and Cincinnati Bengals. Other teams that were mentioned on sports radio Thursday were the St. Louis Rams and San Francisco 49ers.

Now, for the reasons why four teams that have been implicated should not sign Vick:

• San Francisco 49ers: a popular opinion in favor of the 49ers will be that Vick would fit well here due to the coaching style of Mike Singletary. I understand that Singletary is a disciplinarian and demands respect from his players.
  
  That works in some organizations, like Pittsburgh (under Bill Cowher), but not so much in San Francisco. Note that I am not comparing the coaching ability of Singletary and Cowher, but rather contrasting their coaching success.
  
  Also, as far as I know, Cowher never dropped his pants at halftime to try to motivate the team, as Singletary did a while back.
  
  Yes, San Francisco could use a reliable quarterback (Alex Smith isn’t anything near what was expected), but who’s to say that after two-plus years away from NFL competition, Vick would fare all that much better?
  
  
• Oakland Raiders: as long as Al Davis is running the ship at the Oakland Coliseum, the Raiders won’t be winning again anytime soon.
  
  Yes, they have won three Super Bowls and had great success in earlier decades, but for the past few years, the organization has been at the bottom of the AFC West and out of contention in the minds of many from the opening of training camp.
  
  Again, forget the fact that Vick is extremely talented physically; that is undisputable in part because he might be the most mobile signal caller in NFL history.
  
  The concerns, should No. 7 be signed by Oakland, are twofold: first, Vick would not have an adequate group of talent around him for at least a few year; and second, the Bay Area is so notorious for its history of protesting and that any attempt to bring him in to the organization would be met with a heightened level of opposition from the public.
  
  This last point is true for both Oakland and San Francisco.
  
  
• St. Louis Rams: the Rams make sense for Vick only because he would be in a backup role to Marc Bulger to start the season. Given his mandatory four-game benching by the league, this would give Steve Spagnuolo enough time to evaluate Bulger under center.
  
  Still, while it might be a good fit for the organization, something tells me that Vick will not want to sign with a team for which he cannot be the starting quarterback.
  
  He can’t afford to be picky under the circumstances, but I think he will want to prove himself both as a player and as a person, which means being guaranteed that QB spot on Sundays starting in week five.
  
  
• Miami Dolphins: Vick is a mobile quarterback, as we have established, and a lot of people think he would thrive in a system like Tony Sparano’s wildcat offense. This could be the best place for Vick, but there are still question marks.
  
  Will he want to play in an offensive style in which he is not necessarily the centerpiece? What about the new system that Sparano is rumored to be working on for 2009? How would Bill Parcells react to signing a player with Vick’s legal history?
  
  Of course, there will be questions no matter where Vick signs. In the case of the Dolphins though, I would be worried about disrupting any chemistry created last year—especially in a division with the New England Patriots.
  

To be clear, Goodell’s decision to conditionally reinstate Michael Vick only gives him the right to negotiate a contract with teams. While there are some teams that seem like good matches, it might be best for Vick to play in the UFL for at least next year.

If that happens, it might be the best-case scenario for Goodell and the NFL. On the other hand, if Vick does reenter the league, that signing will bring with it justifiable questions about the social, moral and professional standards of the NFL.

The case of Michael Vick might prove to be one large blemish on Roger Goodell’s otherwise commendable track record thus far.