DrDawkinstein Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Not to justify this, buy my very, very strong recollection is that the vast majority of Bills fans wanted no part of Vick because of the dogfighting. It doesnt matter what the fans did or didnt want. Or which particular player was involved. The bigger point is, you cant have the commissioner telling Free Agents which teams to sign with. That is collusion and fixing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Personal attacks are both cool and an effective way to discredit my statements. Don't kid yourself. Your statements discredit themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Cthulhu Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Dungy only admits he told Vick to avoid Oakland. Nothing about Cin or Buf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 There is also no chance in hell that either the Bills or especially the Bengals who still had Carson Palmer told Vick or his agent that he would start. Both were places that the QB situation was tenuous, and didn't have a clear number two. And where Vick could have eventually started if the starter crapped the bed or got hurt. But there is zero chance that Ralph or Jauron told Vick come to Buffalo and we will let you start. So I take umbrage with the writer of the article and question some of its veracity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 And that's the main separating fact for me. IF Goodell did prop up one option and put others in a bad light I think he crossed the line of objectivity/fairness. He can counsel him all he wants with generalizations but if he said 'you shouldn't go to Buffalo' that's crossing the line. The bolded part above is where it gets messy. No problem with Dungy, Vick's agent advising him in that manner...but Goodell should be hands off in that conversation. Just my 2 pennies. ...and No I did not want Vick in Buffalo. I don't disagree with you, but I think the commissioner acts in the best interests of the league first and out of objectivity and fairness second. There's no way he wasn't going to be involved to some degree in what happens with the most controversial player of this generation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappy Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Thurman Rant on 550 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simpleman Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 When are all of the posters here going to get it? Football is a business. The Bills are a business whose only purpose is to increase the wealth of it's owner and his heirs. The NFL is a business association. All decisions are made to increase the profits and health of it's shareholders/members. It's not about what is good for the sport, the community, the players, or the fans. It is about increasing the overall value of the product so it makes the owners more money. Period! Vic in Buffalo was bad for the league, and he was steered where there was a better probability that the league owners would all best profit. The NFL is a business, not a Democracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 I don't disagree with you, but I think the commissioner acts in the best interests of the league first and out of objectivity and fairness second. There's no way he wasn't going to be involved to some degree in what happens with the most controversial player of this generation. One thing that people forget is that Goodell had the final say on Vick's reinstatement - Vick was coming back into the league on the league's terms, or not at all. There was no way Goodell couldn't be involved in this situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappy Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 When are all of the posters here going to get it? Football is a business. The Bills are a business whose only purpose is to increase the wealth of it's owner and his heirs. The NFL is a business association. All decisions are made to increase the profits and health of it's shareholders/members. It's not about what is good for the sport, the community, the players, or the fans. It is about increasing the overall value of the product so it makes the owners more money. Period! Vic in Buffalo was bad for the league, and he was steered where there was a better probability that the league owners would all best profit. The NFL is a business, not a Democracy. He went to Philly 3rd on the depth chart, that seems like a place to bury Vick versus having him shine. In Buffalo, he would of been a starting QB nearly instantly. Cincy had Palmer, so odds are that Buffalo was going to end up with Vick to start. You can also see why the players didn't trust the owners, they do things to make sure that certain teams succeed. New Orleans gets crushed by hurricanes & wins a SB a few years later is another odd feat. I suspect a lean towards WWF wrestling here more than fate dictating how things go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 So vick instead of Fitz i gaileys offense wouldnt have turned the tide on the league at all? I love fitz but that is some straight bull **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nostradamus Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 (edited) For those regretting we didn't sign Vick, he is a worthless dog killing scumbag. Goodell should not be interfering in player signing's, and it sets a very troublesome precedent. But, in this case, the ends justify the means. At the end of the day, these are real people representing our city and that we are cheering for. And I am glad that, in October, we won't be put in the position to cheer for the guy that electrocutes puppies. Instead, we'll be cheering for Shawn Merriman to break that dog killer's legs. Edited August 18, 2011 by Nostradamus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Dungy only admits he told Vick to avoid Oakland. Nothing about Cin or Buf. And I'm sure Vick could figure out that much on his own. Anyone who needs to be told to avoid Oakland deserves to be there anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 (edited) Thurman Rant on 550 I agree with Thurman that Ralph (or someone who can be coherent in conversation) needs to be on the phone with Goodell THIS MORNING asking/demanding "WTF iS GOING ON HERE?!?" Edited August 18, 2011 by DrDareustein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Linen Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 For those regretting we didn't sign Vick, he is a worthless dog killing scumbag. Goodell should not be interfering in player signing's, and it sets a very troublesome precedent. But, in this case, the ends justify the means. At the end of the day, these are real people representing our city and that we are cheering for. And I am glad that, in October, we won't be put in the position to cheer for the guy that electrocutes puppies. Instead, we'll be cheering for Shawn Merriman to break that dog killer's legs. I disagree. I find it encouraging to watch a person redeem themselves. It's not an easy thing to do either. I think Vick is turning into a nice feel good story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Cthulhu Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Kelly and KD make some great points, but I still think this thing stinks. As he was a prospective free agent (if reinstated) vick and his agent should have been able to solicit every team in the league without interference. Apparently they did this, and the Bengals and the Bills both made him attractive offers. Goodell, in an incredibly powerful position over Vick and a representitive of all 32 teams, should be the last person attempting to steer him towards one franchise over another. It's contrary to the spirit and the letter of free agency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanM.D. Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 I don't disagree with you, but I think the commissioner acts in the best interests of the league first and out of objectivity and fairness second. There's no way he wasn't going to be involved to some degree in what happens with the most controversial player of this generation. First...I enjoy having an intelligent conversation here. Thanks. Second...I think the commissioner acting out of objectivity and fairness IS in the best interests of the league. I.e. they are mutually inclusive in my mind based on what I think the Commissioner of any league should be doing. Again...just one man's opinion. Third...I agree that he had to be involved. That, however, does not exclude objectivity. Lastly...as noted above, this all may be a bunch of baloney. Goodell may not have done anything. My premise/position is based on the theoretical 'meddling/tampering' that he is suggested to have done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Kelly and KD make some great points, but I still think this thing stinks. As he was a prospective free agent (if reinstated) vick and his agent should have been able to solicit every team in the league without interference. Apparently they did this, and the Bengals and the Bills both made him attractive offers. Goodell, in an incredibly powerful position over Vick and a representitive of all 32 teams, should be the last person attempting to steer him towards one franchise over another. It's contrary to the spirit and the letter of free agency. It's a dangerous precedent to set for the commish to approve certain teams for reinstated players. Goodell, probably unintentionally, really screwed up the balance of power in the league. I'm sure Giants, Redskins, and Cowboys fans are really thrilled at what he did. And I'm sure the Pats, Felons, and Jets are glad that they don't have to face Vick twice per year. Also, there have been other players reinstated into the league (Plaxico Burress, Lawrence Phillips); has the commish ever steered such players or even "approved" the signing by such players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappy Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Kelly and KD make some great points, but I still think this thing stinks. As he was a prospective free agent (if reinstated) vick and his agent should have been able to solicit every team in the league without interference. Apparently they did this, and the Bengals and the Bills both made him attractive offers. Goodell, in an incredibly powerful position over Vick and a representitive of all 32 teams, should be the last person attempting to steer him towards one franchise over another. It's contrary to the spirit and the letter of free agency. This is exactly right, how is FA / FA without interference from league parties ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QB Bills Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Damn, just thinking of having Vick throwing to Evans the last couple of years makes me want to kick Goodell in the balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Vick also said in that interview that the only place he would have succeeded is in Philly, because they let him play any way he wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts