ALSO KNOWN AS "OOKIE": I'll try to be calm about this and just state that I strongly disagree -- for football and moral reasons -- with the decision of my preferred football club to name a new permanent starting quarterback. In lieu of a rant, I will refer instead to
the quarterback's 2007 plea agreement and
statement of stipulated facts:
12. In or about the summer of 2002 at various times, PEACE, PHILLIPS, TAYOR, and VICK "rolled" or "tested" additional "Bad Newz Kennels" dogs by putting the dogs through fighting sessions at 1915 Moonlight Road to determine which animals were good fighters. VICK was aware that PHILLIPS, PEACE, and TAYLOR killed a number of dogs that did not perform well in testing sessions around this same time period. VICK did not kill any dogs at this time. . . .
32. In or about April 2007, PEACE, PHILLIPS, VICK, and two others "rolled" or "tested" additional "Bad Newz Kennels" dogs by putting the dogs through fighting sessions at 1915 Moonlight Road to determine which animals were good fighters. PEACE, PHILLIPS, and VICK agreed to the killing of approximately 6-8 dogs that did not perform well in "testing" sessions at 1915 Moonlight Road and all of those dogs were killed by various methods, including hanging and drowning. VICK agrees and stipulates that these dogs all died as a result of the collective efforts of PEACE, PHILLIPS, and VICK. . . .
Okay. Vick served his time, and has a right to participate in society again. He could earn a living doing any number of things that do not restore him to a position of glamor and celebrity. I don't have to forgive or forget, and I have not and don't plan to. But
as chinmusic suggested last year when we discussed Vick, Roman Polanski and John Phillips, it's hard:
[T]he separation of artist from art is more difficult in sports, or at least team sports. I can watch Chinatown and block out Polanski, but how does an Eagles fan support the Eagles without supporting Vick? Support for an athlete is largely public. Sure maybe you don't buy his jersey or cheer for him when his name is announced, but when the team runs out of the tunnel or Vick throws a TD to Kolb in some wildcat nonsense, how can you make it known what you are and are not approving with your high-fives and fist bumps?
I agree, both for the reasons you stated and for football ones. Your reasons are going to make it tough for me to root for the Eagles this season. I opted not to watch last week's game (first one I've missed since I lived abroad a decade ago, and I caught most of those then despite the logistical difficulty) because I just can't find myself to care about the team when he's the featured player. The football reasons are going to make it tough for the Eagles to be a team to root for in future seasons, as they've now put themselves in a position to never know if Kolb can work as a starting QB, and to possibly be stuck with Vick going forward.
ReplyDeleteFurther, I don't know what this says about Reid's place in the team, as it seems clear that he was overruled by higher-ups either in trading McNabb during the offseason or in starting Vick this season. I don't see how can last in a situation like that, and it upsets me that two of the cornerstones (#5 and Reid) of the best Eagles teams in my lifetime are going to be out of the picture within a year's time.
What's the rule on rooting for injuries on the team you support?
I think what Vick did was terrible and barbaric, but I tend to care more about people than dogs (note: I love dogs; I just care more about people), and Ben Roethlisberger, Dontae Stallworth, and Ray Lewis are still playing in the NFL., and Leonard Little just retired last year. I'd much rather see Vick in an Eagles jersey than Roethlisberger in a Steelers jersey.
ReplyDeleteOn a more trivial note, I can't remember anybody who has had a worse two quarters, public perception-wise, than Kevin Kolb. Until the moment before the Eagles' season started, he was one of the darlings of the fantasy football preseason, with people regularly predicting a 4,000-yard season and citing him as the self-evident justification for running McNabb out of town. By halftime, there was near unanimity on the sports blogs that Vick was the obvious choice to run that team. A fall that precipitous normally results in, not from, a concussion.
I don't think I'd have to disagree with you regarding the relative value of dogs and people to have a problem with Vick. For example, despite his having a great season, I'm not the least bit unhappy that the Phillies ditched Brett Myers. Further, I think there's something qualitatively different between a single bad (known) incident involving people, ala Ray Lewis, and the systematic cruelty that Vick engaged in.
ReplyDeleteMens rea is the X axis, degree of harm is the Y. Lewis and certainly Stallworth aren't as culpable as Vick and Little in that regard.
ReplyDeleteRe Kolb/Fantasy: he didn't look comfortable in the pocket at all. He made bad decisions and executed them poorly. Still, the only football justification for this is the apparent excuse that because of injuries to the OL, they couldn't protect Kolb and Vick was better able to elude.
I'd rather see an NFL without Roethlisberger or Vick. Neither one of them deserve glamor or celebrity after what they've done. And for what it's worth, even as a huge dog lover, at least Vick paid for his crimes, which is more than one can say for Roethlisberger.
ReplyDeleteThis looks like the stemming of a locker room revolt... which is probably an even worse sign for Reid's job security.
ReplyDeleteSo he's still the dog killer, right? Just like Polanski is a rapist, etc?<span> </span>
ReplyDeleteI don't think the OL issues are just an excuse. Kolb looked likely to be beaten bloody out there. Another year of seasoning won't hurt him in any case. Vick is license to have a crappy OL, and if he has a solid year then Philly can trade him for god-only-knows-what. This is the right move for the franchise on both those levels and it's about more than short-term wins.
ReplyDeleteWhether it is a misstep on a moral or PR level remains to be seen.
On a moral level, I am unaware of what Vick is or isn't doing to combat the kind of cruelty he (admittedly, obviously, awfully) engaged in. I cannot claim to look into his soul and see whether he has grown as a person, recognized the error of his ways, or genuinely committed himself to educating others to avoid similar inhumane errors. If he has, I'd like to hear about it, and I wouldn't have a problem with him in the spotlight. Nothing wrong with a redemption arc, after all. Maybe it's just not getting covered. But why?
Oh yeah, on a PR level, maybe the general football-watching public doesn't care. That could be why. Or maybe they do care, and management and media will recognize this, and as part of their profit-making agenda they will see that what he is or isn't doing gets covered. Maybe that will see him eventually redeemed or finally judged unredeemable. I'd like that, either way. Sometimes there's nothing as instructive as an example, good or bad.
And the exclamation point on my "like" is that I'm a Steelers fan first, Eagles fan second.
ReplyDeleteVick had a reality show on BET earlier this year that tracked him from the time he left prison to just after he started in Philly. Yes, it was a clearly self-generated effort to put a different spin on his shattered image. But he made no excuses for himself. And I don't ever think I've seen or read anything that brought home to me so clearly how mind blowing it is for these athletes to go from a very rough life to being millionaires at warp speed. Dog fighting was always a part of life in his neighborhood. Which is no excuse. But... I don't know. I found myself willing to leave to door open for him to prove himself changed.
ReplyDeleteThat's my biggest problem with Vick - it wasn't a "bad decision." It was a lifestyle.
ReplyDeleteA quick thought on the other side of Isaac's trivial note. I say this as a Lions fan, but do you really make starting quarterback decisions based on how someone looked against Detroit? Isn't that like calling someone a media specialist because he aced a Larry King interview?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Isaac. If you did a moral accounting of all the bad things NFL players do and got Nate Silver and Christina Kahrl and Bill Simmons to quantify it in a single metric, it's far from clear to me that Vick is even in the bottom quintile -- and that's even before we know what we now know, which is that football is dooming thousands of athletes (many of whom will never make an NFL salary) to brain damage, putting some pretty serious moral culpability on the franchises.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Isaac as well. While I don't want to defend Vick's actions in any way, I could probably find at least one player on every NFL roster who has done somnething I'd consider even worse (e.g. battery on a woman or any sort of assault charge).
ReplyDeleteThat said, on a football-related note, if the Eagles had that little faith in Kolb, why did they get rid of McNabb in the first place? I have a sneaking suspicion 10-15 years from now Eagles fans are going to hold McNabb in much higher regard than they ever did while he was there.
I support the decision for both football and moral reasons. Mike Vick is the better option at QB than Kolb, and the moral obligation of the team to its fans and paying customers is to win games within the confines of the rules. (As we discussed re concussions, there are at times conflicting moral obligations, but off field incidents in 2007 don't implicate them.) Moreover, this post illustrates that no amount of contrition will ever seemingly satisfy his critics, so count me among the backlash to the backlash.
ReplyDeleteAs far as sports go, I actually have an easier time separating the character of the player from the product than with art. When I'm watching Vick, the only thing I'm thinking about is whether he can get a first down. Jerry Seinfeld was right when he said rooting for a team is cheering for laundry. With film or music, I'm analyzing it critically, and thinking about what went into it. This is not to say I don't enjoy Chinatown or the music of John Phillips (though I could have done without his band name decisions), but when there is something explicitly transgressive in one of those films (the daughter/sister scene, any scene with Mariel Hemmingway in Manhattan), it brings reality uncomfortably into the frame. Anyway, Vick alone among those discussed has actually done his time and expressed regret.
That came off more absolute than i meant it. Buddy Ryan was right to cut Cris Carter when he didn't think the Eagles would help with his drug problem, because the coach also has a duty to the player to be a mentor (just as he should sit someone with a brain injury). Having Brett Myers on the Phils made me uneasy, because no matter what punishment he got, he'd probably continue to attack his wife. But there, it was a situation where there was ongoing bad conduct. Vick is under such scrutiny, I don't see any chance of him repeating his crimes.
ReplyDeleteYou're coming to part of the nub of the problem -- in this age, when should we take an expression or display of contrition seriously, and when does it just look like PR-driven going-through-the-motions? What's Vick doing when the cameras aren't rolling?
ReplyDeleteI accept that he's not repeating his crimes. That doesn't mean he's atoned for them.
Why presume he hasn't? I don't particularly need contrition on his part, as prison time during his peak earning years seems a sufficient -- I would say more than sufficient -- consequence to his actions. The karmic wheel is in balance with Michael Vick.
ReplyDeleteThere are plenty of Eagles fans who hold McNabb in very high regard now (and have since he was drafted), unfortunately, they tend not to be the ones that host or get their calls on air on sports talk shows.
ReplyDeleteI am surprised to find myself in agreement with you, Benner. I'm a huge animal lover (not more than people, though), and the thought of such systematic and ingrained cruelty in Vick's life turns my stomach. He was living with pain and torture and killing as part of his day-to-day, and that's really nauseating. However, I don't have to be friends with the guy. I don't need him to come over to my house for Christmas, so the question of "what kind of person could do such a thing?" kind of doesn't come into the equation. I'd like my athletes to be nice folks, but it doesn't affect my fandom if they aren't. The truth is that lots of people aren't nice in all kinds of industries, and I equally don't need the lawyer on the other side of a deal I'm working on to be nice to get the job done.
ReplyDeleteHe should have been and was punished to the extent society deemed appropriate. It really surprises me, again, that I think this, but that's enough for me. Also, if we're going to insist on contrition, all the guy can do is say he's sorry and pay his dues and not do it again. Really, that's all ANY of us can do when caught in wrong-doing. I don't see any reason why Vick is under particular suspicion of NOT being sorry enough, when he's gone to all the lengths we could reasonably expect.
Now, I'm a professional woman in my mid-30s who understands that professional athletes have more than just feet of clay- not exactly the demographic that might hero-worship Vick to the point of attempting to emulate him in some respect. Whether these morally- and criminally-fallible athletes should be allowed to return to play when we all know that many kids look to them as role models- maybe that's a different question. Still, doesn't Vick teach a better lesson than Roethlisberger, for example? He did the crime, got caught, did the time, and has come back- by all appearances- a contrite man who is no longer doing the criminal activity. Roethlisberger provides the counter-example, in that he shows that one can be, at best, a boor and a douchebag to young women, and at worst someone who commits sexual assault. But if you have enough fame and money, the right crew and a sympathetic chain of command at the local police station, it more or less all blows over with no record, no time, no lasting consequences except damage to reputation, which, let's be honest, he probably doesn't care much about in the first place.
I seriously never would have guessed that I'd be defending Michael Vick's place in the NFL, but here I am. Weird.
<span>I can never root for Roethlisberger (and was proud that my son said that, unprompted, having heard at school what he had done). </span>
ReplyDelete<span>I think what he did was worse than what Vick did.</span>
<span>But that doesn't mean I would ever root for Vick, or now, for the Eagles.</span>
<span></span>
<span>It's one thing to say he's paid his price to society and can come back and earn his living.</span>
<span>It's another to say he should be honored, and cheered for, and rooted on. </span>
<span>Can't do it.</span>
That was me.
ReplyDeleteI don't conflate punishment with karma restoration, especially when it came to a years-long deliberate scheme to kill dogs and profit.
ReplyDeleteOne of the issues here that I have is the concept of cheering for someone like Vick or Roethlisberger. I have found in the past that my enjoyment of, say, an actor may be tainted by knowledge that he has engaged in something deeply wrong or else revealed some serious character flaw. Like with Mel Gibson---I really enjoyed some of his earlier movies, but I can't imagine setting aside my knowledge of the anti-semitism, abusive phone calls (and possibly worse) with his girlfriend, and all of the other crap.
ReplyDeleteWith sports, it's a bit different, in at least two opposing ways. On the one hand, there is the fact that acting is so much more subjective. Knowing that someone is a major ass makes it harder for me to accept that person as a light-hearted joker, sensitive boyfriend, etc. But athletics is objective in many ways, and a great, successful pass is what it is: a great, successful pass. A higher score is a higher score. My experience of the skill involved is not changed by the fact that the practitioner is an ass.
On the other hand, athletics, by their nature, involves cheering. I'm down with the concept that Michael Vick has paid his price, but I don't know that I could cheer for the man to have future successes, other than "succeeded in not treating other living beings like crap." And, I feel for Steelers fans---Pittsburgh lives and breathes Steelers football. But, nope, I could not cheer for Roethlisberger.
When is someone rehabilitated? When as he paid his debt to society? Michael did prsion time and is working with the humane society. If anyone could get through to young people still in the dog fighting game, he can. (Perhaps more than a well intentioned angry PETA member) I get that he did evil things to dogs, but he was cought, the law applied its penalty, and it doesn't seem to be enough. Read John Water's "Role Models" chapter on the Van Houten girl. It's the most eloquent treatise on forgiveness I've read yet.
ReplyDeleteIt may be enough for him to have paid his debt, but it doesn't mean people will want to sit in the stands, or watch on TV, and holler, "Goooo, Vick! Woo hoo! Awesome, Vick! Yeaaaaa, Vick!"
ReplyDeleteCheering for someone brings it to a level beyond foregiveness.
Yeah, I actually AM a Steelers fan, and it's a question I've considered. My take on it is that I'm cheering for the team and not for Roethlisberger particularly. And I won't cheer for him particularly. And I wouldn't be sad if he were kicked off the team, but if he's not, I want him to perform the best he can for the good of the TEAM. I'll leave any individual aggrandizement of him out of it. That is really the best I can do with it.
ReplyDelete