On the Vick Media

by KevinK on Aug 20, 2007 7:37 PM EDT

[editor's note, by chris] Although I haven't promoted these kinds of stories which aren't about Cycling, I think there's a valid point here, and anyway it's a slow news day.

I'm watching ESPN and just about gagging.

Michael Vick plead guilty to participating in a dog fighting ring that tortured dogs to death.

Every commentator spent his time talking about how quickly Vick can get back to playing football, and wondering if he'll be in shape after he gets out of prison. What planet are these people from? I think there are some more pressing issues to discuss about this case--I guess it's a shock when the former "face of the NFL" turns out to be deeply involved in something so horrible:

According to the indictment, people betting on the fights established purses as high as $26,000, while dog owners and spectators made side bets. The fights lasted until a dog was killed or it surrendered. Losing dogs, along with those deemed unsuitable for fighting, were sometimes killed by drowning, hanging, beating, shooting or electrocution, the indictment said.

from: Bloomberg

I can wrap my brain around PED use, or recreational drug use, the random DUI, or reckless driving charge. I just can't get my head around this.

Peace summary of facts
Phillips summary of facts

Tweet Comment 46 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Bold statement

Vick--either one of 'em--will never play in the NFL again.

Those lines in the others' plea deals about Vick financing and participating in gambling will earn him a lifetime ban.

Especially in the context of Donaghy's plea in the NBA, the NFL will be hyper-vigilant about the gambling issue . . .

by R Mc on Aug 20, 2007 8:22 PM EDT reply actions

Hehehe

Vick jersey selling well

"Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel. "

by Drew on Aug 23, 2007 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions

ugh!

I am still watching this game on Monday night football. All they are concerned about is if and when Vick will get back into football.

This dude killed dogs for entertainment--possibly with his own hands! That's not a mistake, that's evil. At minimum, he should be banned for life. Fuck him.

-K-

by KevinK on Aug 20, 2007 9:14 PM EDT reply actions

Attitude

Even if he doesnt play and they fire him, he'll walk with all his money.

When time comes, the first team that can, will hire him, Nike will release his shoe and all will be good.

As my boss said, "There have been murderers in the NFL. Do you think the NFL cares about some fucking dogs?"

Case in point, the Commission is running it's own "investigation".

Racing for Victory and Free Beer!

by DemonCats on Aug 20, 2007 9:53 PM EDT up reply actions

also

Vick settled out-of-court on allegations that he knowingly passed on herpes to at least one sexual partner.

-Cosmo

by Cosmo on Aug 21, 2007 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions

NFL

That's why they call it the National Felons League. There isn't a server out there that could handle the rap sheets of all the current players in the NFL.

by Waddy on Aug 20, 2007 9:37 PM EDT reply actions

I would say

there isn't a server that could handle the Cincinnati Bengal's rap sheet. How'd you like to be their team attorney?

Vlaenderen die Leu

by Peter Fontecchio on Aug 20, 2007 10:47 PM EDT up reply actions

No problem

"Hi, you've reached Chris Fontecchio, counsel to the Cincinnati Bengals. I can't take your call right now, but if this is a Bengal player accused of a crime, hire your own damn attorney." beeeeep...

Got a problem? Va fa Napoli!

by Chris Fontecchio on Aug 21, 2007 7:18 AM EDT up reply actions

Prediction

Vick either signs with the WWF or gets mauled to death by his own dags . I'm hoping for the later. That shithead needs to die. My dog will piss on fuckhead's grave.

I stopped following the National Felon league years ago! The whole league is an embarrassment to the planet!

by paolo on Aug 21, 2007 12:17 AM EDT reply actions

To bring it back to cycling

The sponsors that leave cycling claim the drugs issue is driving them away, but you never hear a sponsor of the NFL worry about its association with random 'roid test failures, players beating strippers, or this horrible incident.

You hear many ESPN commentators slam cycling for drug problems, but none of them worries all that much about this horror show--did the Falcons management know that Vick had animal cruelty as a hobby? If they did, that's many shades worse than a DS turning a blind eye to doping.

-K-

by KevinK on Aug 21, 2007 6:21 AM EDT reply actions

Systematic issues?

The assumption in the ESPN reports is that whoever they're nailing that day, it's just one more indication of a rotten system. Whereas with Vick, I think there's an assumption that it's an isolated incident. And of course, dogfighting is probably not a systematic problem (though I wouldn't assume it's completely isolated). But bad character in football is probably about as prevalent as cheating in cycling.

Either way, what I find stunning in this and the Giambi cases is the complete lack of responsibility and accountability. Giambi is an admitted cheater, probably on a massive scale (loser to MVP-level). He'd be a four-year absentee if he were in Cycling, automatically. Baseball? "he seems nice, let's forget it." Vick, we'll see, but the accountability starts with the media, who won't lift a finger til the fans speak up. In Cycling, all of that has happened. In football and baseball, the fans haven't said bubkis, so the media won't either.

I have a much larger rant about this, but it involves both politics and religion, so I'd better skip it.

Got a problem? Va fa Napoli!

by Chris Fontecchio on Aug 21, 2007 7:24 AM EDT up reply actions

I'd suspect

that dogfighting is a bigger phenomenon than what you see here.

I cringe every time I hear Randy Jackson say Dawg, or hear of Calvin Broadus (Snoop Dogg)--cuz all of that comes from a culture that sees the fighting dog as some sort of weird cultural hero and role model.

by R Mc on Aug 21, 2007 9:02 AM EDT up reply actions

Some comments I've read

including the one by Marbury and Clinton Portis seem to indicate it is.

I am guessing more of these stories will start to come out during the season. Vick was doing this for five years before he was caught by accident. I doubt it would have taken much effort to find if some reporter were out there digging around. My guess is there are several reporters out there right at the moment driving around looking for these places.

It's interesting to contemplate what the NFL will do if/when several players are found to be involved in dog fighting.

-K-

by KevinK on Aug 23, 2007 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions

Eh.

I'll risk the wrath and link this.

Dead on, no matter your perspective, I think.

by Sui Juris on Aug 21, 2007 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions

not so fast . . .

Reebok and Nike dropped Vick in a hurry. Remember, "sponsorship" in the NFL is not the same as it is in pro cycling.

by R Mc on Aug 21, 2007 9:00 AM EDT up reply actions

that's true, though

I don't think the NFL or the Falcons have suffered any special scrutiny for this case--or the dozens of others over the years.

To frame it more generally, do teams and the league that they're in have any special responsibility for oversight of their employees off-field conduct? It's a tricky issue. Especially in this case--I am guessing that coaches and players in the Falcons organization knew that Vick was doing this, but they didn't fire him, or report him to the cops.

The NFL has been successful at deflecting players' criminal behavior away from the league and the teams.

-K-

by KevinK on Aug 21, 2007 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions

I haven't watched ESPN with any regularity since

they dropped world cup skiing and pro cycling. When they criticize cycling it just shows their disdain for something they can't market to Joe Six-Pack. F them. Besides our local (NESN) sports highlight show is better anyway. Sweet, trustworthy Hazel Mae...

Vlaenderen die Leu

by Peter Fontecchio on Aug 21, 2007 6:31 AM EDT reply actions

Networks never mess with the NFL

Broadcasting the NFL is worth millions. The networks won't bite the hand that feeds them.

by Punctured on Aug 21, 2007 8:50 AM EDT reply actions

And work it, they do

From Salon.com's King Kaufman (yesterday):

The new deal is that up to 11 games a week will be streamed online. Great news for the legions of fans who can't get the DirecTV satellite service or don't want to switch their TV provider just to have their choice of NFL games to watch on 17 of the 52 Sundays in a year. Right?
Wrong. The deal is only good if you already subscribe to NFL Sunday Ticket, which, in the second most fan-unfriendly deal in North American team sports, is available for $269 but only to DirecTV subscribers. And! You also have to subscribe to the $99 add-on bell-and-whistle package known as SuperFan. Also, it doesn't work on a Mac.

Kinda puts Cycling.tv in perspective, doesn't it?

by Sui Juris on Aug 21, 2007 9:43 AM EDT up reply actions

I'm not the first

person to point out that the public outrage about this case is larger than what we see when one of these guys is convicted of beating his wife.

Born from Jets...

by ssmith on Aug 21, 2007 9:59 AM EDT reply actions

The cold truth is that more people

can be sympathetic with a pet like their own being mistreated than with a spousal abuse that they know nothing about. It is also true that animal rights activists have a much larger "machine" in place than spousal abuse does as well. Both should be equally in contempt but it does not work out that way.

Coup De Pot Rouleurs

by Clydesdale on Aug 21, 2007 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions

that's true

I'd argue that torturing an animal to death is especially nasty and worthy of the strong reaction.

The dogs depend on their owners and handlers for food, water, etc... They have no recourse, and no escape. So, these guys, possibly Vick, derived joy from inflicting pain, and ending the life of a sentient being that depended on them.

-K-

by KevinK on Aug 21, 2007 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions

I agree

The idea that really turns my stomach is the fact that Vick hung losing dogs and if they somehow didn't die he then drowned them by hand.

Ugg. How depraved can you get?

by ursula on Aug 21, 2007 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions

It's revolting

The commentators on ESPN are completely glossing this over. Is sadism "a mistake"? I don't think so. It's more like a character trait.

Here's one of the more sane comments from Frank Deford at NPR:

There has been some muted protest that Michael Vick has been suspended too precipitously by the National Football League and unfairly stripped of his rich endorsements, before the indictments against him for dogfighting and dog-killing could be settled in court.
However, given the heinous charges against Vick, it is difficult to imagine any public company -- yours, for example? -- that would blithely keep such an employee till the government had gotten round to working things out with him.

-K-

by KevinK on Aug 21, 2007 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions

Not any different than doing the same to a

toddler or infant to me. All are completely dependent on you and your good will.

Coup De Pot Rouleurs

by Clydesdale on Aug 21, 2007 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Here in Kansas we have been

working for 10 years to get animal cruelty to be a felony. It was not until this year that they finally passed it in the Senate. The push really hit home after this incident:

Senator Haley had championed the proposal, nicknamed "Scruffy's Law", beginning in 1997. That was the year that four Kansas City boys (Wyandotte County) tortured and killed a 6-pound, 12-year-old Yorkshire terrier named Scruffy.

Scruffy was shot with a pellet rifle, placed in a plastic bag, doused with flammable liquid, set on fire while still alive and beaten repeatedly with a shovel. The perpetrators videotaped the whole event.

and the weak sentencing that followed:

Sentencing for Scruffy's Killers (on Friday Sept. 11, 1998)

On June 27, 1997, four boys allegedly tortured, burned and beat to death a 12-year old Yorkshire Terrier named Scruffy.

Admittedly acting out of "boredom", the perpetrators recorded the entire killing and distributed the 6-minute videotape to their friends.

Jose Gutierrez, age 17
Admitted to videotaping the incident.
Convicted: animal cruelty, felony arson
2 years probation and psychiatric evaluation

Marcus Rodriguez, age 18
Convicted: animal cruelty, 1 year county jail.
Convicted: felony arson, 2 years, 3 months prison.
Eligible for parole after 2 years.

Richard Golubski, age 20
Admitted in court to choking and pouring a flammable liquid on the dog. Denied further involvement.
Convicted: animal cruelty, felony arson
2 years probation and psychiatric evaluation.

Lance Arsenalt, age 21 "the Leader"
Convicted: animal cruelty, 1 year county jail.
Convicted: felony arson, 1 year, 10 months prison.
Eligible for parole after 2 years.

If it had not been for the ability to bring the felony arson charges because they set fire to the little guy then there would have been little or no serious punishment available under the law.

As a Yorkie owner and animal lover I was physically sick when they showed clips (yes, actual clips of the torture) on the evening news. My first reaction was to do the same thing back to the guys that did it. If someone ever did something like that to my dog a literally do not know what I would do to them. I personally will never watch another game of NFL even if Vick does not come back because of their weak stance on allowing so many acknowledged criminals get away with the things that they do. It is no wonder that it seems like the younger generation at times has no respect for anything. Look at the examples they have paraded in front of them.

</Rant Off>

Coup De Pot Rouleurs

by Clydesdale on Aug 21, 2007 10:05 AM EDT reply actions

What to say?

First want to thank Kevin for the opening and his comments later- they are dead on. And for Chris to promote this diary.

Second... I'm exhausted with these Vick revelations. They are so awful... Vick's conduct has been so selfish... I don't believe that people are born evil but they sure can get twisted as both Michael Vick and his brother are.

Something I noticed in this that is similar to cycling occurred on the Sunday Night Football halftime show where they were discussing Vick. (This happened the night before the plea agreement.) Bob Costas asked Tiki Barber about the possibility of Vick "rolling over" on other players being involved and Tiki's eyes to me got real big and said no way will Vick out any other player as he knows that would make him the enemy of every other player in the league.... Omerta at its worst folks. Its in every sport and to honestly expect it to really end in cycling in a comprehensive way is not realistic.

by ursula on Aug 21, 2007 10:29 AM EDT reply actions

I just don't know...

I don't think that Vick's likely 5 year prison sentence is out of measure with his crime. That seems just.

I do worry when dogs get more concern than humans. It isn't that the dogs don't deserve concern, but I can't see my way clear to prioritize a pet over a person. I can see how and why people do, but it still seems odd to me when cruelty to animals unites a nation when cruelty to humans is accepted as "just one of those things".

Again, I'm not criticizing anyone for helping animals or punishing those who abuse them, but something seems out of balance to me. Sort of like when people rushed to New Orleans after Katrina to rescue pets when people were still suffering, in danger, and in need. I fully believe that the animals deserved rescue, but never before humans. I guess there is just a limited amount of concern available and an unlimited amount of cruelty and injustice in the world. I choose to prioritize my concern for people above my concern for pets.

I guess where the rubber hits the road, I think that Vick's behavior toward animals in deplorable, but things like partner abuse or child abuse are unacceptable. When it comes to righting the wrongs of this life, people first, pets second. So I'm glad Vick is being held accountable for his actions, but I'm not going to make him out to be the worst sports villain ever. For example, Jonathan Boyer's (first American to ride the TdF) crime was much worst than Vick's.

Brooklyn Chewing Gum: Vlaanderens Mooiste

by Koppenberg on Aug 21, 2007 1:02 PM EDT reply actions

One reason for prioritizing concern

for animal abuse is stated in this study.

"According to a 1997 study done by the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) and Northeastern University, animal abusers are five times more likely to commit violent crimes against people and four times more likely to commit property crimes than are individuals without a history of animal abuse."

I just grabbed that one off the internet, there are hundreds more like it that show the same type of statistics.

Agree with Koppenburg on the Katrina statistic, although I have to say there are organizations whose goal is geared toward animal advocacy. They have the resources to go in and rescue the animals, but may not have the resources to help rescue people (i.e., they have crates and leashes at their disposal, but no people food.) So they do what they can.

by bethie on Aug 21, 2007 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions

Yeah

I just can't find a way to criticize folks who do prioritize animals, but I can't make sense of it either.

If Vick had been raising pigs instead of dogs and eaten them after he killed them, we'd call him a farmer. I don't understand why it is ok to raise a cow, pig, or sheep for food in California, but not a horse or a dog or a cat. I'm not inclined to eat horse or dogs or cats, or even guinea pigs (cuy) which are the national dish of Ecuador. But I can't see why pet animals create a moral line that doesn't affect other animals.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't disagree that Vick should go to jail or that cruelty to animals is something that isn't in our common interest to punish. BUT I guess I see the concern we show for dogs over pigs, cows, and chickens is a cultural construct. I'm not sure I see a difference between killing a cow to make a brooks saddle and killing a dog in a fighting ring. Or rather I feel a difference, but I can't explain it logically. Since I can't logically explain it, I'm hesitant to crucify someone who sees things differently than I do.

Brooklyn Chewing Gum: Vlaanderens Mooiste

by Koppenberg on Aug 21, 2007 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions

Ding.

If Vick had been raising pigs instead of dogs and eaten them after he killed them, we'd call him a farmer.

That is absolutely spot on. I'm a quiet vegetarian (that is, I'll almost never discuss the issue unless seriously engaged on it), but watching people flip out over what happened to these dogs (which is appalling) while being seemingly completely oblivious to what goes on in a meat processing plant is something that does tempt me to get going on the issue. All that said, I'm right there with you on prioritizing people over animals. See my link earlier in the thread.

by Sui Juris on Aug 21, 2007 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions

It would be spot on

if farmers tortured pigs to death as a hobby, or to demonstrate their big man status to their neighbors.

As for prioritizing people over animals; I'm not inclined to think that it's necessary to solve the injustices of the world in rank order in order to effect some progress.

I think the strong reaction to this case stems from the surprise that a star athlete is so thoroughly involved in something so toxic, and the general tendency for rich athletes to get away with heinous behavior.

-K-

by KevinK on Aug 22, 2007 8:53 AM EDT up reply actions

There are differences

The way an animal is killed is the difference. There are packages of poultry and beef at the store that claims that the animal was treated humanely. I recently bought eggs from free range chickens as opposed to those locked in a coop. If Vick was running a pig fighting ring and killed the pigs the same way he killed dogs, he would still be scrutinized. Maybe not on the same scale as most of us don't associate with pigs as we do dogs.
Vick will not go to jail for killing dogs, he's going for the inhuman manor in which he treated and killed dogs, along with gambling, tax evasion, and everything else that goes along with running an illegal business.

by trauck on Aug 21, 2007 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions

well

you can start here for a very well and fairly written examination of the matter. Or you can email and ask me about what I've seen with my own two eyes and done with my own two hands (family worked in the stockyards & meat processing plants, and I've personally taken pigs through the process, from corral to rending). I'm not crusading to get anyone to stop eating meat or using leather or anything, but no one should kid themselves about the cruelty and killing involved in that side of our food supply.

by Sui Juris on Aug 21, 2007 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions

As another Vegetarian I will 2nd

your comments. I do not actively campaign against those that have made other choices. I am aware and have seen what happens to our food supply behind closed doors.

Coup De Pot Rouleurs

by Clydesdale on Aug 21, 2007 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions

As a vegan,

you egg eaters and milk drinkers are savages! Kidding, but I agree that food choice is a personal matter and mine is based more on environmental and health concerns rather than animal rights issues (although those are important). Honestly, I think using animals for food is perfectly fine if done thoughtfully (for example, I fully support the rights of sport hunters).

But, if folks need a more emotional experience of the the agribusiness/farming industry issue, watch the last 15 minutes of Fast Food Nation (the whole beginning bit is pretty crappy) or read the book of the same name (which is excellent). Or Omnivore's Dilemma. Or Diet for a Small Planet.

Also, check out organicathlete.com.

Ok, sorry, I'm done now.

Born from Jets...

by ssmith on Aug 21, 2007 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions

oh

please please don't put anyone through the movie version of Fast Food Nation (and all they really share is a title). God that was awful.

by Sui Juris on Aug 22, 2007 9:22 AM EDT up reply actions

No argument...

FFN sucked. Great book, but I sat thru the movie pretty dumbfounded.
Here's another resource: http://www.veganfitness.net/

Born from Jets...

by ssmith on Aug 22, 2007 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions

Fast food nation was lacking in

theatric quality but the message was pretty clear. Thanks very much for the tip to organicathlete.com there looks to be some great info on there about nutrition that I have currently been wondering about. Another good movie to see is "The Future of Food". A great look into where we are headed with G.M. foods.

Coup De Pot Rouleurs

by Clydesdale on Aug 22, 2007 9:44 AM EDT up reply actions

and to echo omnivores

what kind of life can you lead without cheese?!

(Actually, if I lived next door to San Francisco's Millennium restaurant, I'm sure I could live a pretty damn good one, as a vegan.)

by Sui Juris on Aug 22, 2007 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions

Understand, but

I wasn't trying to imply that there is no cruelty involved in the steak or chicken we eat. Just there is a difference in what Vick did versus what a farmer does. But as the book you refer to does, there is even an awareness towards how we get our food.

by trauck on Aug 21, 2007 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions