SportsBoner.com

At the risk of annoying and offending the higher ups who run the NFL, it’s a good thing Sportsboner.com registers as nothing more than a tiny particle in the vast opinionated expanses of the blogosphere. By now, news of Michael Vick’s reinstatement to the NFL with the subsequent suspension of up to 6 games under strict conditional stipulations have as a result bred numerous differing opinions on the matter.

Such is the conflicting nature of professional sports. On one hand, it’s just a game. However on the other platinum-adorned-blinged-out hand, it’s a multibillion dollar business. Such is the stake exposed when you also throw in federal and state charges of gambling and bankrolling a heinous “hobby” of dog-fighting.

To be clear, and at the same time offer my bit of qualifying statements, I am personally one of the heartier dog lovers who humbly roam this very earth. I like maybe 90% of the population of this existential third-rock-from-the-Sun, am also strongly against killing another human being. Weirdly enough along this politically-correct-PETA-bread-box-filled-media-strum, the two became almost (almost) two differing subjects at opposite ends of the spectrum.

At the risk of the proverbial can of worms being opened, and the lack of time/space to adequately fill my garbled, inane thoughts on the matter; let’s just say while Vick committed/bankrolled the slaughter of many dogs, there is a player in the league who committed actual manslaughter via drunk-driving. Guess who’s still playing, and who’s waiting to play for the 2009 season after serving a two-year federal prison sentence, no less?

I am in no way advocating the killing of dogs, or humans for that matter (remember to refer to my qualifying statement, two paragraphs up). My stance on this particular conundrum is simply: either let Michael Vick back into the league fully and unequivocally, or don’t let him back at all. If he deserves a second chance, then accept him 100%, not under the folly, smoke and mirrors of “disciplinary” action, when the U.S. Courts have already handed down their verdict. The term double jeopardy aptly applies to this situation.

Against most popular opinion, I do not see playing in the NFL as a privilege. Playing sports while being paid for it, is a privilege. Above all the glamour though, the NFL is essentially still a company, a huge one at that with many many employees. Michael Vick is just another employee. In the real world (outside the reach of million dollar contracts and the “realities” of the T.O. show), if an employee happens to land in jail, he/she would more than likely lose their job. At the same time, a convicted felon would find difficulty securing a highly desirable job with a less than favorable record. I personally do not see any difference regarding Vick’s situation. Again I do not approve of his actions, yet his debt to society is paid. Morally it may not be sufficient, but legally he has done his two years in prison. Therefore, if the NFL chooses to let him back into the league, they should do it fully and without further suspension. He should not be punished again for something he has fulfilled adequately in the eyes of the United States legal system. The NFL is not the judge, jury and executioner of Michael Vick’s moral fate. However they control his professional career and thereby if they feel so strongly against his actions outside of work, they should not let him back in the league at all.

Nevertheless various media outlets and the league itself will paint Commissioner Roger Goodell as being “merciful” in letting Vick back to play but under the conditions he sets (one being sitting out the first 6 games or so). At the forefront this seems very forgiving and lenient on Goodell’s part, but in my immoral opinion, it’s nothing more than a public relations coup for the league… and a win-win situation. To say the league is concerned about its image and want for cleaning up the riffraff that pollutes various teams is a veritable wool over everyone’s eyes. It’s about the money, and it’s always about the money. A lesser player of stature than Vick’s dealing with the same situation would have washed out of the league by now and be forever forgotten until called upon for ESPN trivial pursuit. With Michael Vick’s unique talent and marketing value in terms of buzz, jersey and shoe sales, his reinstatement means more to the bottom line than to NFL’s spic-and-span image. At least that’s not what they’re willing to admit.

If I were Commissioner Goodell (oh if only!), I would not reinstate Michael Vick at all. Because if (key word, if) I were to give Vick a 2nd chance (a man without any prior convictions), he would be welcomed back without disciplinary action given his time was served. Any other violations would of course mean permanent banishment. This of course applies not only to Vick but any violators. Even Steven. If I truly wanted to send a moral message, I would follow what countless other employers/companies faced with convicted ex-employees, disallow their reinstatement because of their actions, not accept them back under false pretenses because of their potential to bring in the big bucks. But then again, it’s just business… nothing personal right?

Then again, if I were only to be the coveted commissioner of the National Football League, I’d abolish that ridiculous rule against extravagant end-zone-TD celebrations. That and allow Pete Rose into the Hall of Fame… oops wrong league.