Don’t expect Mike Vick, aka “Ookie”, to play a down in the NFL this year

ESPN’s John Clayton has got it all wrong, and I’m not just talking about the Shaub trade “seem[ing] to be the wise thing” at the time (is it ever a wise thing for a team to trade away it’s best quarterback?). Clayton writes,

Vick must be treated as a first-time offender in the league’s new conduct policy, so he must be found guilty or admit guilt before the commissioner can suspend him.

This is plain WRONG. The NFL’s drug policy this is not; there is no differentiation made between first-time and repeat offenders in the NFL’s Collective Bargaining Agreement section on off-the-field player misconduct, and any differentiation made in the league’s new conduct policy is there solely to drive home the point that repeat offenders will be treated harshly. Make no mistake, under the CBA “negotiated” in 2006, the Commissioner has sole discretion in doling out punishment for “conduct detrimental to the integrity of, or public confidence in, the game of professional football” and has the sole final say in any appeal of his disciplinary decisions (see CBA Article XI, Sections 1(a) and (b), linked above). Argue all you want about the wisdom of such a policy, it’s what is currently in place due to poor negotiating on behalf of the NFLPA (and argue all you want about the legality of the policy, I am too lazy myself to do any research on the topic; regardless, the Commissioner can take action under the CBA and it’d be up to the player in question to fight the legality of the CBA disciplinary and appeal process).

The bottom-line is that it is in Commissioner Goodell’s sole discretion to dole out whatever punishment he sees fit for Mike Vick’s alleged actions and involvement in Bad Newz Kennels, whether Vick is ultimately convicted or not. In the court of public opinion, which is where the Commissioner’s power to make and enforce disciplinary decisions regarding “conduct detrimental to the integrity of, or public confidence in, the game of professional football” grows from, Vick has already lost. Vick’s actions have further harmed the reputation of the league and its players, and if the public won’t stand for him to be let off the hook, Goodell has standing and will perhaps be compelled to make certain that Vick’s alleged misdeeds, or neglect that allowed the misdeeds of others to occur and/or continue, won’t go unpunished, regardless of what happens in a court of law.

And because of that, don’t expect “Ron Mexico” to play a down this year.

Update: The guys at ProFootballTalk.com bring up another policy that Commissioner Goodell has at his disposal: the league’s gambling policy.
PFT writes:

The league’s gambling policy prohibits “[a]ssociating with gamblers or with gambling activities in a manner tending to bring discredit to the NFL.” Vick is charged with conspiracy to utilize interstate commerce with intent to promote, manage, etc. a business enterprise involving gambling. Indeed, the indictment contains multiple references to gambling arising from the dog fights in which Vick was involved.

Under the league’s gambling policy, a violation may result in “severe penalties,” up to and including a suspension from the NFL for life.

For more of perhaps the best coverage of the Vick Investigation/Indictment on the net, visit PFT.

Update #2: The guys at PFT (linked to several times above) have also pointed out this morning that even if it is assumed that the Conduct Policy requires only counseling for first-time offenders, which I emphatically do not believe, Vick is not being charged with one first-time offense. Vick’s first charged offense happened in 2001, and he is charged with several repeat offenses from 2001 until April 2007.

Explore posts in the same categories: assholes, Bad Newz Kennels, Michael Vick, pit bulls, Ron Mexico, sports