Do you care about Vick coming back?

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Do we really think this to be true? Do you think TVs around the nation will turn off if Michael Vick gets reinstated? Do you think NFL Shop will close down? Do you think that outside of maybe a short term (and I think VERY short term) loss to the team that signs him that there will be any real financial impact?

All I'm saying is that I would expect the NFL, like any business, will attempt to measure the likely impact of a Vick reinstatement on its revenue. What percent, if any, TV ratings will go down? What percent, if any, merchandising will go down? What percent, if any, sponsorship rates/deals will go down?

All three of these will be affected by how people view Vick off the field. There will be people who view him negatively enough to turn off their sets and/or not buy merchandise. There will be sponsors who spend less to advertise with the NFL.

The question is: how many? I don't know. I'm just saying the NFL is more than likely to be using that type of calculation as much as they will some sort of moral or ethical judgment.

We can see it already, in, for instance, our assumption that some franchises wouldn't touch Vick with a 20-foot pole because they know the negative effects they'd suffer from their fanbases.

[flere-imsaho]

dola,

My guess is that the PR and financial impact to the NFL is very minimal and short-term, and the PR and financial impact to the team that signs him is slightly longer-lived, but not hugely deleterious. That's just the way it is.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

All I'm saying is that I would expect the NFL, like any business, will attempt to measure the likely impact of a Vick reinstatement on its revenue. What percent, if any, TV ratings will go down? What percent, if any, merchandising will go down? What percent, if any, sponsorship rates/deals will go down?

All three of these will be affected by how people view Vick off the field. There will be people who view him negatively enough to turn off their sets and/or not buy merchandise. There will be sponsors who spend less to advertise with the NFL.

The question is: how many? I don't know. I'm just saying the NFL is more than likely to be using that type of calculation as much as they will some sort of moral or ethical judgment.

We can see it already, in, for instance, our assumption that some franchises wouldn't touch Vick with a 20-foot pole because they know the negative effects they'd suffer from their fanbases.

I agree that this will be part of the NFL's assessment of the situation, I'm just not sure that I agree that it really would have more than a negligible impact on the NFL's bottom line. An individual team? Yeah, probably. The NFL, I doubt it.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

dola,

My guess is that the PR and financial impact to the NFL is very minimal and short-term, and the PR and financial impact to the team that signs him is slightly longer-lived, but not hugely deleterious. That's just the way it is.

Heh, missed this. This is all I was trying to say.

[spleen1015]

I'm with Clinton Portis. Whatever he thinks.

[molson]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

We can see it already, in, for instance, our assumption that some franchises wouldn't touch Vick with a 20-foot pole because they know the negative effects they'd suffer from their fanbases.

There's really a ton of reasons not to sign him. There's no telling what he'd give you on the field at this point. And he's a guy with a signficant history of criminal activity and general bad behavior who will be on thin ice with both the NFL and his probation officers. He's a bad guy, with more scrutiny - what's the odds he can even get through a whole season without missing more time for more legal trouble/suspensions.

So that would seemingly rule out actually dedicating any kind of signficant cap space or playing time to him (like by planning for him to be your starting QB). So maybe he's worth it as a low-risk, low-salary guy who isn't a huge part of your plan. But then a team would have to consider - why is this low-salary, low-impact guy worth the media circus that's going to surround him?

[Bad-example]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I will say that as long as Leonard Little remains in the league Goodell is going to have a hard time keeping Vick away...

Indeed. If fans in St Louis can root for a douche like Little, maybe there will be a place for Vick somewhere.

[miked]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Pffft. Like I care about the NFL's rules. As far as I'm concerned the NFL needs only one rule: "Does Ben find this action/player/strategy entertaining?" If yes, then do it. If no, then don't.

Step 1: Make Ben commissioner.
Step 2: Increase the play to 2-3 games per week.
Step 3: No team may draft a QB on day 1.
Step 4: All free agents must be signed in 2 days.
Step 5: Awesomeness.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Bad-example

Indeed. If fans in St Louis can root for a douche like Little, maybe there will be a place for Vick somewhere.

That was a different administration. If Little committed his crime today, he'd be looking at a different situation with the NFL (I think).

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by molson

what's the odds he can even get through a whole season without missing more time for more legal trouble/suspensions.

I agree with most of the rest of what you wrote, but for this I'd say the changes are pretty good he gets through a season with no legal trouble.

I'm assuming he's not completely stupid, so:

1. He'll know he'll be under tremendous scrutiny, so would be less likely to do illegal things.

2. Aside from the dog fighting and the marijuana incident, he doesn't have anywhere near the track record of some other people in the NFL currently.

I absolutely agree that whatever team signs him will be to a low/no guaranteed money contract so it's low-risk, high-reward.

[JediKooter]

Were his state charges ever resolved? Last I heard, after he was put in the big house on the federal charges, the state of Virginia was still going to prosecute him.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

1. He'll know he'll be under tremendous scrutiny, so would be less likely to do illegal things.

I'd say the whole water bottle at the post-9/11 airport incident shows this is unlikely...

[molson]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

I agree with most of the rest of what you wrote, but for this I'd say the changes are pretty good he gets through a season with no legal trouble.

I'm assuming he's not completely stupid, so:

1. He'll know he'll be under tremendous scrutiny, so would be less likely to do illegal things.

2. Aside from the dog fighting and the marijuana incident, he doesn't have anywhere near the track record of some other people in the NFL currently.

I absolutely agree that whatever team signs him will be to a low/no guaranteed money contract so it's low-risk, high-reward.

He did fail a drug test while he was out on bail, when he knew he would be tested.

[flere-imsaho]

Well, I did say I'm assuming he's not completely stupid.

[molson]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Well, I did say I'm assuming he's not completely stupid.

I'm not sure if it's stupidity, more like a sickness. Some criminals just can't help but commit crimes. In a way, they can't help it, it's how they were raised, the culture they're from, etc. I'm not saying that criminals aren't responsibile for their actions, but it is very difficult to change. Maybe he's changed. Maybe he can do some good. I tend to doubt it though.

Can he go a whole season without using marijuana? I can almost hear the supporters (marijuana isn't worse than other stuff, there's no victim!). Problem is, that's the same logic Vick will use. A criminal becomes an expert in justifying his criminal behavior. That might involve minimizing, emphasizing moral issues, or as we've seen a lot in this case, deflecting with accusations of racism.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

All I'm saying is that I would expect the NFL, like any business, will attempt to measure the likely impact of a Vick reinstatement on its revenue. What percent, if any, TV ratings will go down? What percent, if any, merchandising will go down? What percent, if any, sponsorship rates/deals will go down?

All three of these will be affected by how people view Vick off the field. There will be people who view him negatively enough to turn off their sets and/or not buy merchandise. There will be sponsors who spend less to advertise with the NFL.

The question is: how many? I don't know. I'm just saying the NFL is more than likely to be using that type of calculation as much as they will some sort of moral or ethical judgment.

We can see it already, in, for instance, our assumption that some franchises wouldn't touch Vick with a 20-foot pole because they know the negative effects they'd suffer from their fanbases.

You know, this has convinced me its a no-brainer from a business standpoint that they will reinstate him and someone will sign him.

Whatever your opinion of his football skills, it would be hard to argue that he was not the most popular player in the league (or most watched/interesting/notable, if you prefer those teams). I would argue that most people who are likely to watch the NFL are not in PETA, and will not stop watching the NFL if Vick is in it. I bet they'd gain more fans/viewers than they'd lose - and by a HUGE margin.

There is already talk of blackouts in Jacksonville. They have a terrible situation at backup QB. One could argue (and I would) that they have the least talented starting QB in the league. There are a lot of reasons it makes sense for them to sign him.

[ColtCrazy]

There really needs to be some sort of way that you lose your right to be a mega-millionaire in the nation's most popular sport when you break the law as severely as he did. I voted not seeing him, but consider Leonard Little can kill someone and still play (unreal) then we'll see Vick again as well.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Samdari

I bet they'd gain more fans/viewers than they'd lose - and by a HUGE margin.

Now there I'd disagree, because I don't recall any viewer erosion surrounding his absence.

It's why I made the distinction about ticket sales being lower with Ryan than with Vick ... people who go to games and people who watch games on TV aren't necessarily the same people.

Take me, I'll turn the TV on at some point most Sundays but I'd sooner have dental work done than go to the Georgia Dome. It's a mediocre building with the worst staff I've ever seen at a venue, even worse parking, and it's easier to watch a game on the big screen than on the field. But I'll casually watch on TV, just like 8% to 15% of the rest of Atlanta. We'll watch because it's on and as long as it's an NFC matchup then those folks are going to be clicking through on TV (AFC games generally get noticeably lower ratings in Atlanta and in a number of other markets).

If you lose one major sponsor in the stadium and a minor sponsor on the local radio and because of Vick, you've eaten up the difference in ticket sales pretty quick.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

If you lose one major sponsor in the stadium and a minor sponsor on the local radio and because of Vick, you've eaten up the difference in ticket sales pretty quick.

That would have to be any team's biggest concern really, more so than losing/gaining fans. It would be interesting to see how many sponsors, if any, would walk away from a team because they signed Vick.

[Raiders Army]

I think he'll land in Minnesota instead of Favre.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

That would have to be any team's biggest concern really, more so than losing/gaining fans. It would be interesting to see how many sponsors, if any, would walk away from a team because they signed Vick.

Any that have middle income women as a significant target almost certainly.

Generally I'd figure the most conerned would be publicly held sponsors that are sensitive to their image with shareholders, especially those who may already have one or more groups after them for some reason or another already; i.e. somebody who maybe already has a questionable relationship with a different situation might be more reluctant to deal with another shit storm.

And on a micro level I'd think any pet related product would have to pull out or face a serious hit to their sales, and any conglomerate that has a major pet product in their overall portfolio would have to think about it long & hard.

[Fidatelo]

If I owned a team I'd try to sign him with a well-hidden, vaguely-worded stipulation that would essentially allow me to either
a) enter him into a dog fight as one of the dogs; or
b) allow me to drop him off on a deserted island with no supplies and not have to pick him up for 45 days.

Then if he survives whichever event I chose he can be allowed to try out at wide receiver.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

Then if he survives whichever event I chose he can be allowed to try out at wide receiver.

Better yet, gunner & occasional punt returner.

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Better yet, gunner & occasional punt returner.

Punt returner, perhaps, but I'm assuming the stipulations of his parole will preclude him from taking on the role of gunner.

[Sun Tzu]

Originally Posted by molson

I'm not sure if it's stupidity, more like a sickness. Some criminals just can't help but commit crimes. In a way, they can't help it, it's how they were raised, the culture they're from, etc. I'm not saying that criminals aren't responsibile for their actions, but it is very difficult to change.

srsly?

[molson]

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu

srsly?

For realzies

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

Punt returner, perhaps, but I'm assuming the stipulations of his parole will preclude him from taking on the role of gunner.

He can have the role, he just has to perform it unarmed. Part of the beauty of the plan really

[Swaggs]

Most people know that I am not the biggest VPI or Vick fan (and the dogfighting stuff makes me sick), but I think he seems to be the rare athlete/celebrity that has "manned up" and he appears remorseful.

I wouldn't want him on my team (because I don't think he is anywhere useful enough to offset the negative publicity), but, in a way, I really appreciate the contrast between him and all the steroid users who cannot seem to admit wrong.

[Eaglesfan27]

I don't think he will be allowed to play this year and I hope he isn't allowed to play. I hope whenever he is cleared that whatever team is stupid enough to sign him sees a huge drop in revenue.

[DeToxRox]

Haven't read this whole thread so if someone else said this I apologize but it's this simple:

Leonard Little killed a person, then years little got busted driving drunk, and he's still in the NFL.

If he can be in the league, Vick can be in the league, and I could give two shits about it.

[fantom1979]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Haven't read this whole thread so if someone else said this I apologize but it's this simple:

Leonard Little killed a person, then years little got busted driving drunk, and he's still in the NFL.

If he can be in the league, Vick can be in the league, and I could give two shits about it.

The new commish has not been as forgiving as the last commish. I think that is the real difference in situations.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Haven't read this whole thread so if someone else said this I apologize but it's this simple:

Leonard Little killed a person, then years little got busted driving drunk, and he's still in the NFL.

If he can be in the league, Vick can be in the league, and I could give two shits about it.

So the process can never change. Because Little is still in the league, no one that does as bad as Little can ever get a worse punishment than he did. I think that's silly and makes it impossible for a league to ever adopt a strict policy, because they'll always be unfair compared to someone who was punished in the past.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

So the process can never change. Because Little is still in the league, no one that does as bad as Little can ever get a worse punishment than he did. I think that's silly and makes it impossible for a league to ever adopt a strict policy, because they'll always be unfair compared to someone who was punished in the past.

He let Pacman back in the league. Pacman is a 10 + time convicted shithead who helped get a guy paralyzed. He used all 9 lives and still got one more from Goodell. Why shouldn't Vick?

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Samdari

There is already talk of blackouts in Jacksonville. They have a terrible situation at backup QB. One could argue (and I would) that they have the least talented starting QB in the league. There are a lot of reasons it makes sense for them to sign him.

How did David Garrard fall from grace so quickly?

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

I think he'll land in Minnesota instead of Favre.

Not Minnesota. I think that's one of the locations where you'd see some pretty constant protesting of such a move.

Come to think of it, though, that would hinder Oakland, given there would be plenty of people from SF who would come across the bridge to protest.

[SFL Cat]

Vick is the quarterback version of Pacman Jones.

[Thomkal]

Reports are that Vick is going to be working with the Humane Society of America upon his release. The head of that organization met with Vick in prison recently, and apprantly believes he's remorseful.

I'd actually like to see him on an episode of Dog Town, a great show on National Geographic channel. They took several of his dogs and did a special episode on them. It'd be interesting to do a follow up with him working at Dog Town and seeing first hand what dog fighting and other abuses does to dogs. Make him work with some of them to see if there is really any compassion and remorse.

Otherwise I don't particularly want to see him back in the NFL, but no doubt he will get that chance. I will be surprised if the commish lets him back this season though. Let's see where he is a year from now and then decide.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Now there I'd disagree, because I don't recall any viewer erosion surrounding his absence.

It's why I made the distinction about ticket sales being lower with Ryan than with Vick ... people who go to games and people who watch games on TV aren't necessarily the same people.

Take me, I'll turn the TV on at some point most Sundays but I'd sooner have dental work done than go to the Georgia Dome. It's a mediocre building with the worst staff I've ever seen at a venue, even worse parking, and it's easier to watch a game on the big screen than on the field. But I'll casually watch on TV, just like 8% to 15% of the rest of Atlanta. We'll watch because it's on and as long as it's an NFC matchup then those folks are going to be clicking through on TV (AFC games generally get noticeably lower ratings in Atlanta and in a number of other markets).

If you lose one major sponsor in the stadium and a minor sponsor on the local radio and because of Vick, you've eaten up the difference in ticket sales pretty quick.

Good point about the sponsors - you would lose those.

I think the number of viewers the NFL would lose due to Vick's returning would be immeasurably small, so even if more people don't tune in to watch Vick, the net is at worst zero.

But ticket sales - you'd probably get on the order of 100 cancellations, and gain up to 10,000 ticket sales.

Once the sponsor's realized that people were more excited about Vick's return than indignant, they'd come back too. Although, you might lose a year from them.

I just think the whole idea of sports fans changing their consuming habits based on moral indignation is a figment of the media's imagination. The public did not care when Augusta did not let women in. They did not care when most of baseball was on steroids (in fact, they paid more attention). I think its that last point that is Vick's ray of hope. Wherever he goes, people will pay more attention to the team. A large bit of media coverage will be negative, but in a market where people are not paying attention (like Jacksonville) I think the net effect of that additional attention will be good for the team.

[Matthean]

Let's see, his highest passing completion was 56.4% and then it went down from there. He's not played in two years so I doubt his accuracy is even the same as it was when he left(52.6%). He fumbles the ball around 75% of games. One of his best years in terms of accuracy and QB rating was the year he fumbled it more than he threw for TDs. He actually had 17 total TDs and 19 total TOs. He was getting sacked almost 2.7 times a game in his last three seasons. He's basically a lesser talented Pat White at this point. I'm giving his return a fairly "meh" type response.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

I'd actually like to see him on an episode of Dog Town, a great show on National Geographic channel. They took several of his dogs and did a special episode on them. It'd be interesting to do a follow up with him working at Dog Town and seeing first hand what dog fighting and other abuses does to dogs. Make him work with some of them to see if there is really any compassion and remorse.

Dude, he reportedly electrocuted dogs himself and threw in untrained family dogs into the fighting pit to get torn apart by the pitbulls. I think he has already seen what dogfighting does to dogs and thought it was a hoot.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Reports are that Vick is going to be working with the Humane Society of America upon his release. The head of that organization met with Vick in prison recently, and apprantly believes he's remorseful.

As I stated in the original thread, this is the most obvious route to take if he wants to rehabilitate his image. Do a big mea culpa in appearances/advertisements for the Humane Society and donate whatever money/time he can and it'll eventually wash over. At some point he's gotta realize how much earning potential he just pissed away because of some ephemeral enjoyment of dog fighting.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by KWhit

Dude, he reportedly electrocuted dogs himself and threw in untrained family dogs into the fighting pit to get torn apart by the pitbulls. I think he has already seen what dogfighting does to dogs and thought it was a hoot.

That was when he thought it was okay to do so. I want to see if that mindset has changed at all.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by KWhit

Dude, he reportedly electrocuted dogs himself and threw in untrained family dogs into the fighting pit to get torn apart by the pitbulls. I think he has already seen what dogfighting does to dogs and thought it was a hoot.

If this is true it makes me sick. Maybe he should be dropped in a UFC ring and be forced to fight it out.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Do a big mea culpa in appearances/ advertisements for the Humane Society and donate whatever money/time he can and it'll eventually wash over.

I don't believe they plan to let him off the hook that easily, at least not on their time. Although I was surprised & disappointed that they were considering working with him as of earlier this week, they did make it pretty clear that cutting some PSA's wasn't going to cut it. They apparently want him in communities at the grass roots level and not only talking the talk but walking the walk in a close order drill to genuinely try to reach current/future dog fighters.

It has also crossed my mind that they might be giving him just enough rope to hang himself with if they do eventually allow him to work a deal with them.
What's the phrase the commish has been using, something like he wants to see "genuine remorse" (or something like that). If he botches the deal and the Humane Society walks away from him after a few months because of a lack of sincerity, that's all Goodell would need.

And it's never a bad bet to go with Ron Mexico to fuck something up.

[kcchief19]

Has his release been on ESPN and whatnot this morning? The local media have been following him like crazy. They followed him from Leavenworth to a Residence Inn near the airport. He is supposedly driving cross country to Virginia but I guess was trying to throw the media off the sniff so they would stop following him. I think if he kept going they'd give up by the time he got to Columbia.

[JonInMiddleGA]

His initial stop actually provide perhaps the only humor I've found in the whole mess.

Vick and fiance Kijafa Frink drove to a hotel about half an hour away, and from there they’ll start the more than 1,100-mile drive home to Hampton, the newspaper reported.

Yep, I bet they did. {wink, wink, nudge, nudge,)

[Fighter of Foo]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

That was when he thought it was okay to do so. I want to see if that mindset has changed at all.

How the fuck could you EVER know the answer to that? Seriously, how?

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

That was when he thought it was okay to do so. I want to see if that mindset has changed at all.

umm, what?

IMO, The only reason his mindset has changed is because he got caught. Do you really think he never saw firsthand what fighting did to dogs, he just didn't care. You think all of a sudden some switch is gonna get flipped and he is going to see dogs as cute, cuddly, companions?

A tiger doesn't change it's stripes. Had he never been caught he would still be carrying out these heinous acts to this day.

[tucker342]

I really just want Vick to go away and most importantly not be picked up by the 49ers