Skip to main content

Vick in the clink

Michael Vick was sentenced to 23 months in prison today, and counting time he's already served, he should be released in October 2009.

That gives us a chance to look at the question: will Michael Vick ever play in the NFL again?

Vick will be 29 when he's released, but there's basically no way he's playing in 2009. What team would take the chance? Basically, you'd have to be a team with championship aspirations that desperately needs a quarterback for several weeks. Considering Vick's reputation and the subsequent PR hit, it would have to be a team with absolutely no scruples. So unless Tom Brady gets hurt in week six of the 2009 season, Vick won't play until 2010, when he'll be 30.

Could Vick be a good thirty-year-old quarterback? Well, he obviously relies more on his physical talent than his ability to read coverages. But assuming he can stay in shape, his physical gifts should not vanish before 2010. He'll still be capable of playing in the NFL.

However, all of this is moot, because he'll have to get past the planet's Most Vindictive Bastard, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, if he wants to play again. So it won't happen. Keep in mind that Goodell is the same man who just fined Broncos coach Mike Shanahan $25,000 for some really tame comments supporting running back Travis Henry's suspension appeal. And remember that this was an appeal Henry actually won. Talk about a sore loser. Considering the punishments Goodell loves dishing out (and be grateful he wasn't your dad the time you stayed out three minutes past curfew), I don't see any way he lets Vick play again.

Comments

blaine said…
What a terrible waste of tremendous talent! I read that Vick has lost nearly $140 million in lost salary and endorsements.

I would bet his situation would've been greatly improved had he not been caught smoking weed. Because of that, I bet you're right, I can't see Goodell letting him play again.
Mike said…
Wow, $140 million...wow.

I'm also wondering how Vick'll be received even if he would be allowed to play in 2010...is everyone just going to assume he's over the hill? Because the conventional wisdom said he wasn't going to last very long to begin with, considering his reliance on sheer athleticism and his aggressive style of play.
blaine said…
If Goodell does let him come back and play, I'm sure some desperate GM will pick him up despite the PR nightmare he will bring upon his team. The question is, will he play QB? He wasn't really a great QB to begin with, and after spending 2 years in the slammer (I doubt he will be able to practice throwing routes with the other inmates) I'm sure his skills will have diminished greatly. It will be interesting to see if they make him a slot receiver, or some kind of special teams returner or something. I imagine he'll probably just be used on gimmick QB plays like the Falcons did when he and Schaub were on the team.

On a side note, I do think they are coming down a little hard on Vick. I mean, I like dogs as much as the next guy, but it's not like he killed anyone like our friend Leonard Little did. He killed someone while driving drunk, and only served 90 days in jail. Then he was caught drunk driving again and didn't serve any additional time at all. Last year Little signed a 3 year contract extension with the Rams. When things are put into perspective, how much more valuable is a human life than a dog's? Why is PETA all over Vick when there's players currently playing who have taken the life of another human being.

I certainly don't condone the choices Vick has made, but I think what he has done has been blown way out of proportion.

Popular posts from this blog

National Basketball Association Finals Preview Blowout!

If you're looking for a stereotypical matchup breakdown for the NBA Finals between the Detroit Pistons and San Antonio Spurs, (Game One is tonight, 7 o'clock Mountain, ABC), you've come to the right place! Center: Ben Wallace, Pistons vs. Nazr Mohammed, Spurs Wallace might be the league's top defender, winning his third Defensive Player of the Year award this season and leading the Pistons in both blocks and steals. It's said he's an improved offensive player, but he still scores primarily on tips and wide-open dunks. "Big Ben" is horrific from the foul line, connecting on 42.8% this season. Also, his brother has taken on NBA players and can probably beat up Mohammed's brother. Mohammed has been a good fit for the Spurs since being traded from the Knicks. It appears Isiah Thomas may have finally made his first mistake as general manager in New York, as Mohammed has started every Spurs' playoff game, averaging 8.1 points to go with a solid seven...

Forget Brett Favre (*)

From my 2007 NFL season preview : Favre's not as good as he once was-who is?-but he's not the disgrace people make him out to be...I don't think he "deserves" to go out with another Lombardi or anything, but I hope he gets to leave on a good note. Oops. What a mistake. And I even knew this day was coming. Let me say that Brett Favre deserves to go down in history with whatever records he earns, so long as a giant asterisk is placed by each and every one of them. As you may have heard, Sunday's victory over the New York Giants made Favre the winningest quarterback in NFL history. I don't know what ESPN did on TV, but this record practically went unnoticed in the places I follow sports. But it's of crucial importance to me. Why? "Maybe someday down the road it will mean a lot," a typically humble Favre said after the 149th win of his career, moving past Hall of Famer [and indisputable greatest quarterback of all time] John Elway. Humble...

Did CU ever win the Pac-12?

In 2010, I bet a college buddy of mine (who longtime readers may remember as the only other contributor to Hole Punch Sports) that CU’s football team would not win the Pac-12 in the next 15 years. Guess what? It’s time for me to gloat, because I was right. Why we were doomed Back in the day, a lot of people made the argument that CU should join the Pac-12 because we’d get so much more TV money there. Of course, given college football is the answer to the question, “what if you had a sport where multiple teams were like the Yankees, and you created a whole universe of haves and have-nots?”, then yeah, you want to be aligned with some of the haves. But the question in my mind wasn’t, “will CU be better off with more money?” That’s an obvious yes. The question I asked was, will CU be any more competitive in their own conference if they’re competing against teams who are also getting more money? I couldn’t see why they would be. The mathematical angle Legend has it that Cowboys runn...