Michael Vick to Play Again?

We talked at length this morning about Michael Vick's agreement to plead guilty to federal dogfighting conspiracy charges. Under terms of this deal, the Atlanta Falcons quarterback faces up to 18 months in prison.

His attorney told the AP that Vick is paying a high price for allowing old friends to influence his behavior, but that his client takes full responsibility and wants to "get his life back on track."

Get his life back. You know what that means - possibly quarterbacking in the NFL after he gets out of prison.

Do you think Michael Vick should be allowed to return football in the future? Would you support a team that would hire Vick to play?

-- Jessica Doyle

By Amy Hybels |  August 21, 2007; 8:46 AM ET
Previous: Bad Bosses | Next: Fry This

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



You have GOT to be kidding me with this. If Michael Vick gets to play football professionally ever again, or have anything to do with the NFL or endorsements or anything like that, I hope people boycott whoever hires him. I can't believe he's going to end up with a 6-month sentence at the end of the day and a fine. Great example for other pigs who want to get/stay involved in dog fighting.

Posted by: Raleigh, NC | August 21, 2007 09:26 AM

No, he should not be allowed to play professional football ever again and if he is, he should be boycotted.

I would not want the team I follow to sign him as a player.

I would definitely quit following NFL football if he is allowed back. What's the point? If the penalties are so mild that he can come back in 24 months and pick up where he left off, why would I want to be a fan of a sport that has to cater to convicted felons to staff their teams?

Posted by: rb | August 21, 2007 11:21 AM

I am a dog lover, so I am biased. I hope Vick is NEVER allowed to play professional football in the U.S. again. His remorse is only that he got caught. He lied to the Falcons, the NFL commissioner, and to the public. He only owned up AFTER he was presented with HARD EVIDENCE of his involvement. He is only interested in self-preservation at this point.

Posted by: Doug, Berryville, VA | August 21, 2007 01:10 PM

I desparately hope that Vick never plays and is not able to cash in on his former glory. But if (heaven help us) Dan Snyder hires Vick, I will still be a Redskins fan. I love the team. I may question the management, the coaching, and the players, but I love the team.

Posted by: Burke | August 21, 2007 02:43 PM

I hope I can successfully convey my thoughts on this subject. Firstly, I in no way condone the actions of Michael Vick, they are sick. But I am surprised in America how completely outraged people become over the lives/deaths of their animals and in the same breath seem to totally dismiss the taking of human life around them each and everyday. Does it make it more palatable when taking that life by law is legal,abortions in the 3rd and 4th trimesters. The sexual molestations of children where the criminal barely,if any, spend any time behind bars. I think because we as a nation have so much, we fail to realize the things that are really important; Vick and others like him with wealth but lacking maturity tend to abuse those privileges,and others of us that are "middle-class" or higher also tend to forget the importance of human life that we encounter on a day to day basis, just in the way we treat one another. Let the person that is without any fault, throw the first stone.

Posted by: Stan, Manassas, Va | August 21, 2007 04:22 PM

I abhor what he did, but he should not be banned by the league for life. Allow him to be eligilbe after 5 years. If a team wants him and thinks it can stand the heat so be it. I would not support the Redskins ever again if they would sign him.

Vick doesn't seem to get it that rehabilitation should have started weeks ago. A sincere apology will never make up for his conduct, however, it would go a long way towards making a return to professional football possible.

Posted by: Mark, Frederick Maryland | August 27, 2007 08:55 AM

As much as love sports I have found myself avoiding sports talk radio the last few days, because I am Michael Vick'ed out.

But there is something that continues to bother me, and its something I keep hearing from white sports talk show hosts, and reading from newspaper columnists, about 95% of which is white and male.

First, there is this thought that he shouldn't be allowed to play football anymore. Exactly why, after he has served any jail time he may be assessed should he not be able to go back in his professional job of playing football? I was going to call WP Radio this morning when I heard the morning hosts ask this and would have asked them if Vick was a talk show host, should he also be banned from talking on the radio anymore? How about if he was a bus driver? Or a in any other profession.

It seems to me what what many in America feel.....and lets call it like it is.....I'm talking about White people almost exclusively, is that as part of punishment, he should no longer be able to make millions of dollars in the business of professional sports. I've always felt as a long time sports fan that there has always been this resentment by many White folks that these Black guys in sports get paid so much for playing sports that they, the ticket buying public, are addicted to paying to watch, that deep down it bothers them. I have also heard this from many too, that playing sports is a privilege. Well, if that is the case, than EVERY job in America is a privilege because at the end of the day, all pro sports is IS a JOB that a person gets paid to do.

The other thought that troubles me is this thought that one has to show remorse.

Why?

I feel if you do a crime, you should do the time. But after that time is up, and you served it, that is the debt you owed and its paid in full, and other than in a civil lawsuit, you owe nobody anything once you paid that time. Why does anyone have to show remorse. One of the more comical examples of hypocritical logic I have heard on the Vic case is the NFL should throw the book at Vic because he "lied" to NFL Commissioner Goodell. In a world in which the commissioner, with the seemingly impotent NFL players association playing the role of Stepin Fetchit, gives out suspensions without convictions or absence of guilty pleas, why should Vic have told Goodell the truth, before he took a plea bargain? How would it have set to tell Goodell he had done those things, so Goodell could suspend him on the basis of what Vic said BEFORE he told a judge he was guilty? How does that make any sense?

But, hey....maybe that is just me....

Bottom line, Michael Vick was stupid for not having the sense to dump his hoodlum friends and stop participating in bad behavior. But just like this case has exposed things like dogfighting rings, I also think this case also allows people to hear what the real and raw feelings of the public are, and in his case, I do think there is underlying resentment and maybe even some closeted racial expression going on based on some of the comments I have heard from both commentators, callers and writers the last couple of weeks.

Posted by: JC, Washington, DC | August 28, 2007 12:19 AM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




 
 

© 2007 The Washington Post Company