"You need to apologize to the millions of young people who looked up to you."

Michael Vick gets 23 months.

And now, we need hear his name no more, until he gets out and until he can prove he's changed.

Absolutely the last comment on Michael Vick for a while

So after making his plea, Michael Vick apologized. A writer at ESPN thinks Vick spoke from "the heart" and that he's taken the first step towards redeeming himself.

I dunno. I read the apology; I'm glad he made it, but it read a bit like Vick was hitting all the points that a media consultant would tell him he needed to say. Vick now says he knows dogfighting is wrong. Maybe I'll believe he's telling the truth--when he tells us exactly how he ever came to believe it was okay.

It won't work, Mr. Vick

So now we know for what Michael Vick's sharp lawyers were holding out in the neogtiations over the quarterback's plea deal, and it appears they got: he will plea to a felony charge of using interstate commerce to facilitate dogfighting, he'll admit that he was present when dogs were killed, but he claims he didn't participate in the killing.

And I would hope that if Mike Vick thinks putting this spin on it is going to help his reputation or rescue him with public opinion, he's got another think coming. It does not in any way mitigate his guilt. (and frankly I suspect he did kill some of the dogs himself, even though he won't admit to it.) But now we know what the negotiations were all about. UPDATE: well, now news of the actual plea deal has come out--and it turns out Vick admitted that the "collective efforts" of he and his friends resulted in the death of the dogs, and what he most strongly denies is that he gambled on the fights. Still won't help him much. Speculation now runs as to whether Vick named any other big shots (NFL players or otherwise) as being involved. Stay tuned.

Protecting Michael Vick

A few continue to do it. For example, in today's Washington Post, some of Vick's friends deflect some of the blame: "The most prominent theory [as to how Vick got in trouble], espoused by Boddie and Reeves, blames much of Vick's troubles on his continued association with childhood friends who have questionable pasts. Those same friends were the ones who agreed to testify against Vick in exchange for more lenient sentences for their roles in the crimes." Meanwhile, Gregg Easterbrook writing on ESPN a couple of days was even worse, arguing that all this happened because Vick was pampered from the age of 16, that no one ever "said no", to him; and of course (you knew it would happen) Easterbrook flashes the race card, writing that the reaction against Vick comes from "racial animus": "But suppose everything about the Michael Vick controversy was exactly the same except Vick was a white quarterback from an upper-middle-class family in Winnetka, Ill., Newport Beach, Calif., or Coral Gables, Fla. Can you say with a straight face that the public reaction and government action would the same?"



Yes, Mr. Eastbrook, I do. It would be. And all those who want to make any kind of excuses for Michael Vick need to remember: the evidence apparently strongly shows that Vick paid for the house himself, and knew what it would be used for; that he was intimately involved in the training, the fighting, and the gambling over these dogs; and he was intimately involved in killing them. And he lied about it for months. He got himself into this, period.

Dogfighting case closer to sacking Vick

More horrid details about Michael Vick's involvement in the dogfighting case---now his co-defendants finger him as having participated in horrible, brutal executions of supposedly under-performing canines. I guess my question has to do with not only how anyone could facilitate dogfighting; but rather, how anyone could think brutally killing dogs in this way is somehow, in any way, OK? How could someone claim in public to love animals (and Vick has so claimed) and then in private kill these animals, and yet sleep at night? i don't get it.

And some say ordinary folks can't impact corporate America

But, in fact, they can. The public is not happy right now with Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick, due to the dogfighting and animal abuse charges against him. Public opinion on that is clear. So what has happened to Vick's shoe contracts and other deals with sponsors? Gone. Pretty much all gone.

Mr. Vick's forced vacation

When the Michael Vick story first broke, I thought--as I noted here--that the league would have to let him play while his due legal process played out. Innocent until proven guilty and all that. Well, but last night NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell told Vick to stay away from training camp while the NFL reviewed his case; Goodell clearly indicated that Vick could be suspended or worse way before any trial, given that the commissioner has the right to suspend players if they're found to be in violation of the NFL's personal-conduct policy.

And having thought about it, i can see the commissioner's point. He has to look out for the league and its image. In doing so, he's not bound by the Bill of Rights. He suspended Tank Johnson and Pacman Jones and others before the conclusion of any public trial. And it's hard to imagine Vick playing for the Falcons right now, and the games involving the team going on as usual, with this huge cloud--heck, it's practically a tornado, now--hanging over Vick. Michael Vick had a chance to be a huge, popular superstar. He may have thrown it all away. Here's an example of the anger against him. UPDATE: and by the way, it's not just dogs that get abused in this way.

The troubling case of Michael Vick

I've always enjoyed watching Michael Vick play quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons. His speed and athleticism are simply amazing. He can make plays that no one else can.

That having been said, the indictment against Vick (and others) for supporting and participating in dogfighting is profoundly disturbing. It's disturbing partly because I have pets of my own. It's disturbing because apparently a lot of evidence has been gathered suggesting that dogfighting did go on at a home owned by Vick, that the dogfights themselves (as I gather they always are) were brutal (in a typical fight, the winner was the dog who lived; the loser, the dog who died from his wounds), that dogs not ready or not able to fight were killed in brutal ways, that Vick knew of, agreed with, and supported all this. And indeed, is it really credible that dogfighting on a large scale could be going on at a home Vick owned, completely unknown to him?

That having been said, in our society, we're innocent until proven guilty. Vick must have his day in court. And there's the dilemma for the NFL and the Falcons--they can't assume Vick to be guilty. They must stand by him, allow him to play, until the legal process plays out. Mike Vick says he's innocent. We'll see. In the meantime, what else can the league do but allow him to be with the Falcons as usual, as training camp begins? I don't see how the NFL can adopt a guilty-until-proven-innocent policy.

But if Mr. Vick admits guilty in this matter, or is proven guilty, I believe the league should suspend him indefinitely. For multiple seasons, making Pacman Jones' suspension look like a tea party. There is no place in the National Football League, or in society, for this kind of brutality against defenseless animals. UPDATE: Michael Wilbon of the Washington Post has a good column as well on this case, pointing out how Vick has put everything--his NFL salary, his endorsements, over $100 million in all--at risk because of this. Not smart.