Monday, July 23, 2007
The Michael Vick Dilemma
The recent statement by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell related to Michael Vick's indictment on dog-fighting charges has many wondering about the commissioner's motives for not following his recently established precedent for suspending troubled NFL players.
Following reports of the indictment, a statement released by the NFL stated in part, "The activities alleged are cruel, degrading, and illegal. Michael Vick's guilt has not yet been proven, and we believe that all concerned should allow the legal process to determine the facts."
Odds are long against Vick coming through this untarnished. Conviction and plea agreements for federal cases are reportedly in the upper 90 percentile.
Innocent until proven guilty is a foundational right of all Americans. Waiting until the legal system has run its course before deciding on league action seems appropriate. It's what each of us would want, our day in court.
Why wasn't Adam "Pacman" Jones afforded similar treatment? In May of this year, he was suspended for the 2007 season for violations of the NFL's personal conduct policy.
In a statement at the time, Goodell said, "The highest standards of conduct must be met by everyone in the NFL because it is a privilege to represent the NFL, not a right. These players, and all members of our league, have to make the right choices and decisions in their conduct on a consistent basis."
Like Vick, Jones has yet to be convicted for any of the charges brought against him.
Obvious distinctions can be drawn between the two men and their patterns of conduct. Authorities had contacted Jones on 10 separate occasions for questioning. His conduct seemed to indicate that he didn't care what the league or anyone else thought about his actions.
However, Vick hasn't exactly been a model citizen. Frustrated by the fans, Vick's departing obscene gesture as he left the field on November 26th of last year after losing to the New Orleans Saints leaves one wondering whether Vick's conduct meets the "highest standard" referred to in Goodell's suspension of Jones.
Further, his scrape with airport authorities over a bottle with a secret compartment that security officers said smelled of marijuana doesn't reflect well on Vick or the league.
Goodell's one-year suspension of Jones served to send a message to the NFL's players. At the same time, the suspension established precedent for disciplining players without waiting for their day in court.
This puts the commissioner in the unenviable position of deciding Vick's fate. The slippery slope that Goodell has started down is difficult to climb back up. Should he be consistent with the discipline meted out to Jones and similarly suspend Vick? Should he wait until the legal system runs its course?
One thing seems certain. Public sentiment seemed to favor Goodell's action toward Jones. In the Vick situation, public sentiment is divided. Many favor a wait and see approach, while many others are calling for Vick's suspension. The commissioner is in a no win situation.
The NFL and the Atlanta Falcons have a much larger stake in Vick than in Jones.
To state that Michael Vick is a huge star is an understatement. He is the face of the Atlanta Falcons. His appearance on game day is an almost unequaled fan draw. His suspension would cost the league and the Falcons millions.
We will never know whether that stake is influencing the NFL's stance in this case, but the seeming lack of consistency in the treatment of these two high profile cases will have many questioning the motives and actions of the NFL and its commissioner.
Todd Beckstead is the founder of MonsterDraft.com, a fantasy football draft tool.