Thursday, May 28, 2009


Speaking of crime, we haven't said a word about Michael "Bad Dog" Vick's release from prison. Mainly, because we no longer care.

However, the mainstream media has spent zillions of words on whether or not he should be allowed to return the NFL when his sentence (now home confinement) concludes. Well, the answer is obviously "yes."

Vick did the crime, and served the time. We are a country of forgivers no matter how heinous the crime. Vick deserves the chance to serve his time, repent and then take a shot at making a living. As long as there are other convicted felons in the NFL, why single out Vick for post-found guilty exclusion? Doesn't make sense even though his actions were reprehensible.

Fellow pro-athlete Brendan Haywood (00) of the Wizards via North Carolina, makes a case on his blog today via on behalf of his fellow ACCer.

I think Roger Goodell is being tough on Vick by asking him to display “genuine remorse” for his actions. Who is he to judge if Vick is genuinely remorseful? Goodell works for the NFL but isn’t Vick’s conscience. Obviously Goodell hasn’t been the best judgment of character lately anyways (Pacman Jones).

Vick was wrong but has paid a steep price. He doesn’t owe Goodell anything. He shouldn’t be held to a higher standard than anyone else. He’s served close to two years, lost all of his money, been crucified by the media and public and any additional punishment from the NFL would be as bad as the torture that he did to those dogs…

To read Haywood’s post, click here.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Blog Archive