31 July 2009

Should Michael Vick play?


OK, every single sports writer and blogger in the universe is writing about this, so here's my two cents:

The man committed a crime and seems like a fairly unpleasant individual. However, he was also tried, convicted, served his sentence, and has been released. Football is how he makes his living. And the crime doesn't have anything to do with his profession (e.g., you wouldn't want an accountant who'd been convicted of embezzlement working in his profession again). And the NFL lets far less savory characters play. Let him play.

That said, I'm sure glad there's no way the Eagles would want him, and I pity the team that takes him on, because they are going to take so much shit from so many people (including, likely, the fan base) that, frankly, it's probably not worth it. Unless they're the Raiders. In which case he'll fit right in.




3 comments:

Keith said...

Um... is there an "eat crow" icon I can post here? I actually agree with pretty much all you said here about letting the guy try to move on... I just have to laugh at your comment "I'm sure glad there's no way the Eagles would want him, and I pity the team that takes him on".

Well, start pitying.

Elizabeth Weaver Engel, CAE said...

As Life-Long Eagles Fan Mom pointed out on the phone yesterday, the fact that Tony Dungee is vouching for him says a lot. (We hope.)

Chick in the Huddle said...

i can't help but laugh at the irony of this post!!