Rhoden and Jesse Jackson strike again

I personally believe that there is no moral (as opposed to political) reason why Vick should not play in the NFL. He did the time.
I also believe he wouldn't be worth the money. Two years off for an erratic player-not good.
And I really believe some team will get desperate enough to give him a shot. Look at who's competing for the starting job in Tampa Bay.

 

Michael Gee, the best thing working in Vick's favor is time. Somebody is going to get injured this season and somebody is going to need a new quarterback. It's going to happen. Right now, Vick is getting good counseling and actually listening. He's keeping his mouth shut. He's getting his body in shape. When his chance comes, and it will come, he needs to be ready because he's only going to get one shot.
I was debating with someone recently about collusion. While I don't think that's the case, it's apparent that something is going on with the owners.

 

From those I know in the loop with his daily activities, I've been told that appears to be the case. I'm not in that loop, just repeating what has been told to me. OK?

 

You stop making sense, Mister...

 

I stated what I was told by someone who I trust pretty well on this matter. Personally, I could care less what Vick is being told or if he's listening.

 

I have been a critic of Rhoden race baiting columns in past but this is not one of them. I think it's a good column that clearly points out the possible blasphemy of comparing Michael Vick to Jackie Robinson( a anticipated nod to sj critics?)

He makes his reasoning clear in this part of column:

"Viewed from a 2009 prism, that comparison seems blasphemous. Robinson became an American icon because of his courage and perseverance. The only thing he did wrong — in some eyes — was to be born African-American.

But in the era in which Robinson came of age, his admirable qualities mattered to Major League Baseball owners. A significant segment of the American population knew little to nothing about Robinson, and saw him as someone who threatened a way of life. Owners were not going to allow Robinson or any other African-American to play major league baseball, regardless of how much character and fortitude he possessed.

Many fair-minded baseball owners had the same concerns about Robinson that fair-minded N.F.L. owners today have about Vick: What will critics say? How will the public respond?

Finally one organization, the Dodgers, and one man, Branch Rickey, were bold and pragmatic enough to weigh the risks and take the leap of signing Robinson."

 

Nobody should be agitated that Vick's unemployed now. If he had been released in February, there would have been plenty of time for somebody to examine their QB situations and make an offer. But by the time he got out, teams had essentially put together their training camp rosters.
And in the big picture, it doesn't matter if he's on a roster immediately. Once the season starts and teams see what they lack, they'll be much more inclined to call Vick.

 

I'm generally a bleeding heart, left wing commy.
OK, maybe not a commy, but I'm offended by Rhoden's column.
A) It's just wrong.
B) Rhoden has to know it's wrong.
C) He's merely carrying Jackson's water here. If you think Jackson's right, say so. But don't present his argument like a bystander, only helping it along in a few spots. Swing for the fences if that's what you think.

The columns greatest sins.
1. To make the point that Vick's a proven NFL commodity and Jackie Robinson wasn't a proven major league commodity is intellectually dishonest. Vick took the Falcons to a Super Bowl, yes, but nobody looks at him and says, wow, that guy's a great quarterback. Yes, his improvisational skills are out of this world and if you wanted to build an offense around them, it might just work, but the NFL is loathe to try anything completely new, so it's not like there has to be conspiracy to keep him out (by the way who would any of us sign if he couldn't play until week 6 or 7). If Phillip Rivers missed two years for something and nobody wanted him, OK. Or, if a black quarterback is required to make the point, go with Donovan McNabb. If the same thing had happened to McNabb as did Vick, at the same point in their careers, then yes, maybe you could say they just don't want him because he's trouble. But Vick is trouble AND very few offensive coordinators know what to do with him. Additionally, Rhoden is giving Robinson short shrift here. The scouts new what Robinson could do. He was a hero in Montreal, where he led his team to a minor league championship. The reason he wasn't in the majors already was because he was black. You can't tell me there weren't a few colorblind (or at least intellectually honest) scouts running around in those days who had to know Robinson would immediately be one of the major league's most dynamic players. Nobody can say that about Vick right now. Nobody.

2. That hunting comparison is worthy of nomination as THE STUPIDEST THING TO BE WRITTEN IN AN OTHERWISE GREAT NEWSPAPER EVER. It's not that Michael Vick killed dogs, though the brutality that's been alleged is grisly to the point I'm sure some people just can't erase it from their mind and it's enough for them to avoid Vick forever. Instead, it's that MICHAEL VICK ENGINEERED, RAN AND BANKROLLED A VAST CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE. He's not a dog killer (though he is), he's a freaking gangster in the Sicilian sense. They could have gotten him on RICO charges. It's the same thing on the Dante Stallworth incident. People say Stallworth killed a person and Vick only dogs? Wrong. The dogs were incidental. Vick was running a criminal enterprise. Period. Look, I don't get hunters either. I've never shot a gun in my life and wish all firearms were off the streets. And still, only a nitwit would make such a comparison and believe in it. Which leads to …

3. I don't even think Rhoden believes what he's writing here. It sounds more like he's trying to be a good soldier or something. Or perhaps he's personally indebted to Jackson for some scoop a hundred years ago. Who knows. Because the argument he appears to be pedaling, he's pedaling so softly, it's hard to believe he believes it. Yes, I know, he's from the thoughtful writer school, not the Skip Bayless, Jason Whitlock school of contrarian literary haymakers, throw it up on the wall with as much force as possible and see what sticks. Nonetheless, this column is too quiet. It reads like - but for the little hunting tangent - a single source sidebar to the ongoing Vick story.

Rhoden's better than this and I think he knows it.
But if he knows it, he should not have written it.

Oh, and I believe Vick has every right to pursue football as a career again.
But the GMs and owners also have the right to not be interested.

That's all.

 

No, he didn't.

 

I believe the recently deceased Jim Johnson made sure of that.

Kicked Vick's ass that day.