Football is the Least of Michael Vick's Problems

by Christopher McIntosh
08/20/2007

We should all make a pact to end any speculation on the effect the dogfighting and gambling charges will have on Vick's football career.

And this isn't even mentioning the potential racketeering/conspiracy charges--the "superseding indictment" that a grand jury is meeting on as I write this--or the possible animal cruelty charges he could face in Virginia.

There are only a few ways this can play itself out. None of them end well for those owning a number 7 Vick jersey--especially Vick himself.

1. He pleads guilty to lesser charges. Although I have talked to one former FBI agent who disagrees, it seems likely that he's guaranteed to get at least the 12-18 month sentence the three others have received. However, common sense indicates that if the government has accepted pleas from three co-defendants and that Vick is the man who provided the facility, the money, and the organization to stage and promote dogfighting events as well as ran his own "stable" of dogs, I find it hard to believe he doesn't go at least a step up in sentencing. Originally, the co-defendants were to be sentenced to 18-24 months (step 15 in the federal sentencing guidelines) but they got leniency for their cooperation. I can't imagine him getting less.

*Wildcard number 1. The judge, the honorable Henry Hudson, when receiving the guilty pleas warned the defendants that despite the governments recommendation he could sentence him to "five years" if he wanted to. A bit ominous for anyone considering a plea deal.

*Wildcard number 2. Virginia... is for lovers. Of dogs, apparently. There are some reports that VA prosecutors want to charge Vick with animal cruelty. In the statement the defendants plead out to, they spoke of Vick either killing dogs either by hanging, drowning, electrocuting, and/or slamming them into the ground. If he stipulates to that, he has to plead out to VA charges, and while I don't know anything about sentencing in VA, I can't imagine you get less than 2 years for no less than 8 counts of killing dogs simply because they don't fight well.

2. He could choose to plead innocent and go to trial. Regardless, at least a year is gone from his football life and he can't do any type of real training while it's going on. At best he could be back for 2008-9, but we know it won't be with the Falcons no matter what happens, Arthur Blank has pretty much made that clear.

*Wildcard number 1: NFL commissioner Roger Goodell. Even if a jury finds him innocent of these charges, Goodell is not bound by their decision. So does he go ahead and punish Vick in toto while a trial - where he is presumed innocent - runs its course? More likely, he punishes him under the Pacman Jones/ Tank Johnson hairtrigger personal conduct rules and waits for the outcome of the trial. So although he could just accept an innocent verdict, he could also say the parallel investigation run by the NFL finds him guilty and put him out of football for even more time.

Wildcard number 2: Short of some home run bit of evidence that proves the 3 are lying, plus, let's not forget the entire case that gave rise to the charges against the four in the first place, this trial is going to be trench warfare for the defense. There won't be some "if it doesn't fit, you must acquit" moment. The defense is going to have to fight each part of the prosecutor's case as well as put up their own theory of the crime. In cases like this, people are going to keep their own opinions almost regardless of outcome. Plus, let's not forget that he is not up for animal cruelty charges, so there may not even be specific refutation of the most gruesome and, as one commentator put it, "radioactive" elements.

Even if he were to get off, who would pin their hopes on him now? For Vick, there's a real danger of OJ part deux where even a not guilty verdict does little to alter his conviction in the court of public opinion. One other thing. It's easy to stand behind a guy now - as many of the Falcons players are doing - but after this is all said and done, players are going to have their opinions as well and I bet there are more than a few veterans who will look at their team's potential acquisition of Vick, look at their dog and say no. Rightly or wrongly.

If he takes it to trial and loses, it goes without saying that he's done. The sentence will be too long, he'll be too polarizing a figure, and he might not be physically capable. Vick is, after all, 27 years old and won't be back till he's at least 28. If he's pushing 30 or more after two years in the federal pen, who's going to take a chance on a QB known primarily for what he can do outside of the pocket, not within? Physical ability is one of his chief assets and the combination of atrophy and age will affect him more than most.

Make no mistake, I'm not saying we should ignore the story. The Vick situation exposes a great deal worth thinking about. The rise of dogfighting within America and the subculture it's created. How celebrity alters our perception of justice. The media's desire to turn everything about a black quarterback into primarily an issue of race. Our outrage at the treatment of dogs while health insurance companies treat "customers" in a similar fashion or the ability to legally buy DVDs of entrepreneurial geniuses who pay homeless persons to fight (like dogs) and then tape it for fun and profit.

Pay attention to the Vick controversy. Just stop analyzing the football end of it, because guilty or innocent, we only know one thing for sure.

His football career has already received a death sentence.