Vick case thread....please behave

Jeebus. Does Rhoden ever write about anything that isn't race-related?

 

ahh no. go to the Times advanced search and look at Rhoden columns since last September - 7 columns about Vick - all pretty mcuh blaming everyone but Vick for the problems he experienced over past few years.

Rhoden is no Bryan Burwell its safe to say.

 

This was written before the Federal Indictment. Based on the Federal indictment, it seems that the question shouldn't be whether Vick was indicted federally because of his race, but whether Gerald G. Poindexter, the commonwealth's attorney, did not investigate Vick because of race.

Rhoden looks silly, now, because the Federal indictment, if true, is a no brainer, Poindexter looks like a fool not going after what tuned out to be a concentration camp for dogs owned by VIck

 

It wasn't written before the feds got involved in that big-time raid in Dayton, OH back in March, though. That makes his column look even worse.

Next time, WJR, a little research please?

 

Starting to wonder if Michael Vick has glossy's of Rhoden:

Sports of The Times
The Elusive Vick Takes His Hardest Hit
By WILLIAM C. RHODEN
I’ve argued for a number of years that Michael Vick of the Atlanta Falcons is one of the most important players in the N.F.L. His approach to quarterback — with speed, quickness and a rifle arm — makes him, on some days, the most dangerous player on the field. Many of the arguments against the way he plays the game reflect a deeply rooted cultural bias against athleticism at one of the most hallowed positions in sports.

The debate has now moved beyond the playing field, and Vick is facing an unprecedented rush. The federal government is accusing him of not merely crossing the line between good and bad judgment, but of going completely out of bounds.

Earlier this week, Vick was indicted on federal felony charges alleging that he had sponsored dogfighting since 2001, that he frequently gambled on dogfighting and that he authorized acts of cruelty against animals on property that he owned.

An 18-page indictment suggested that Vick was not just a distant spectator sitting on the 50-yard line; he was the quarterback for Bad Newz Kennels.

Now the federal government must prove its case, and Vick has to think long and hard about whether he wants to challenge the government’s evidence or strike a deal.

•

The pressure also shifts to the N.F.L. and its new law-and-order commissioner, Roger Goodell. Goodell is like a scrambling quarterback approaching the line of scrimmage who must decide: does he run or does he pass? The animal-rights activists — and a number of fans in general — are clamoring for the league to suspend Vick; the players union is ready to fight such a suspension. The owners and N.F.L. sponsors, ever taking the public pulse, are looking for Goodell to suggest a great move that assures the public that the inmates are under control.

So far we’ve been blitzed by cautious statements by the N.F.L., the Atlanta Falcons and the players union about how disappointed they are in Vick, but also how they are committed to letting the legal process run its course.

Nike made a statement yesterday by suspending the introduction of Vick’s latest shoe — the Air Zoom Vick V.

Since he joined the N.F.L. in 2001, Vick’s No. 7 jersey had been among the top-five sellers, according to the N.F.L.

My original position on the Vick investigation is that, for all its validity, it had the earmarks of overzealous federal prosecutors taking on a high-profile athlete. I still feel that way, but my hope is that the investigation and indictment becomes a catalyst — not for a referendum on conduct and African-American athletes — but for a far-flung war on animal fighting. Animal-rights activists say that dogfighting is more popular today than ever.

Yesterday, Senator Robert C. Byrd, Democrat of West. Virginia, spoke out against the practice of dogfighting in the United States.

What’s troubling for me, and it should be troubling for all of Vick’s so-called handlers and advisers, is how Vick came to be so close to this fire in the first place. How did one of the N.F.L.’s brightest stars, one of a multibillion-dollar league’s most recognizable faces — indeed, the face of his franchise — become inexorably linked to dogfighting, one of the lowest forms of savagery in modern society?

Guilty or innocent? You wonder. From the Falcons’ executive staff to Vick’s business associates, was there — is there — anyone telling Vick, “You, know Michael, this may not be such a good idea?”

Association can be as devastating as doing the deed itself. That’s certainly the case here.

•

The Vick indictment is not a pleasant document to read. It describes, point after point, heartless, often barbaric acts of cruelty. During an April raid, law enforcement officials found a stand used to hold dogs in place for mating. They found an electronic treadmill modified for dogs, and bloody carpeting.

Last June, a search uncovered the graves of seven pit bulls that were allegedly killed by members of the Bad Newz Kennels after sessions to test their fighting ability. Documents allege that sometimes dogs were starved, and described how a fight ended when one dog died, or when a dog gave up. According to documents, losing dogs were sometimes put to death by drowning, strangulation, hanging, gunshot, electrocution or body-slamming them to the ground.

“This has become bigger, much larger than Michael Vick,” said Christopher A. Bracey, a professor of law and an associate professor of African-American Studies at Washington University in St. Louis. “He has become a poster child for animal rights and animal fighting, for conspicuous consumption, for bad judgment and for what happens when you give someone too much too soon.”

How do young, newly created millionaires react when wealth allows them to indulge their dark side? We have to embrace the presumption of innocence, but the sad truth is that no matter what happens now, this indictment has thrown Vick for the greatest loss of his career.

 

Fixed

 

Are you saying what Rhoden initially wrote wasn't race-related, slappy?

 

And true to form of course NBA ref fixing scandal is racial:

July 23, 2007
Sports of The Times
Union Chief Wonders if N.B.A. Was Focused
By WILLIAM C. RHODEN
Last week, Bill Hunter, the executive director of the N.B.A. Players Association, received what, at the time, seemed to be an unusual e-mail attachment from the N.B.A. office.

The document was a questionnaire requesting detailed background information and disclosures from N.B.A. officials. “I was wondering why they sent to me a questionnaire seeking all this background information,” Hunter said yesterday during a telephone conversation from Italy.

Now it all makes sense.

Last Friday, the league acknowledged that the F.B.I. was investigating Tim Donaghy, a veteran N.B.A. official, on the suspicion that he bet on games, including ones in which he officiated.

Hunter said that after he received the inadvertent e-mail message, he called his secretary, who told him that the N.B.A. said the document had been sent to Hunter by mistake; it was intended to go to the referees.

“So I guess they’re now doing this huge background check on every referee,” Hunter said, “asking for their history, credit rating, everything.”

According to law enforcement officials, authorities are examining whether Donaghy made calls to affect the point spread in games on which he or associates had wagered over the last two seasons.

For Hunter, the allegations raised issues of where the league spends its energy and resources in marketing, and monitoring, itself. In recent seasons, the league has made a concerted effort to control player behavior on and off the court. Now, in the wake of the F.B.I.’s investigation, the N.B.A. may have a major blind spot.

“When we talk about image,” Hunter said, “the focus has always been on the players, because we have a league that is predominately black, so a lot of other things probably tend to go unscrutinized.

“If anything, this demonstrates that they weren’t fully focused,” Hunter added, referring to the N.B.A., “that they were focusing more on the game in terms of player conduct as opposed to reviewing whether or not the game itself was in jeopardy, in terms of conduct by referees.”
A determination of guilt or innocence has yet to be made, but the mere fact that the F.B.I. is conducting its inquiry forces a league to look at the men and women who enforce games and help determine their outcome.

One of the critical but unanswered aspects of the F.B.I. investigation is how long the N.B.A. and Commissioner David Stern knew that a veteran referee was under investigation.

Yesterday, two people briefed on the investigation said the league did not know of it until after the season ended.

“I don’t know what Stern knew or what he didn’t know,” Hunter said. “He didn’t disclose anything to me. All I know is that David pays people to keep him informed. He makes every effort to know everything there is to know.”

•

Perhaps the F.B.I. informed Stern of the investigation but asked him to refrain from making any moves until it made sure it had a solid case, Hunter said.

Hunter pointed out that Bernie Colbert, formerly a special agent in charge of the Buffalo division of the F.B.I., is now the N.B.A.’s chief of security.

“David pays for information,” Hunter said, referring to the league’s willingness to devote resources to a security staff. “He doesn’t like to be embarrassed. Maybe in this instance he was. All I know is that his chief of security is a former F.B.I. agent.”

Hunter said that none of the players had expressed any knowledge about an investigation, although some players, Rasheed Wallace in particular, had expressed concerns about Donaghy. In 2003, the N.B.A. suspended Wallace, then with Portland, for seven games after he confronted Donaghy on the loading dock of the Rose Garden arena. Donaghy had called a technical foul on Wallace during a game against Memphis.

Hunter said the players union challenged the fines levied against Wallace. “We got most of his money back because we just thought this guy was way out of line when he confronted Rasheed when it was all about the calls that he had made during the course of the game,” Hunter said.

We have yet to hear Donaghy’s side of the story and the F.B.I. has yet to make any arrests. But at a time of plummeting television ratings, the N.B.A. can ill afford a scandal that violates the essence of what the public loves about games: honest and fair competition.

•

“It affects us because it affects the image, sanctity and the integrity of the game,” Hunter said. “If in fact that’s going on, I know that Stern has to be extremely concerned.”

Stern, who did not respond to a request for comment last night, said in a statement last week that the investigation was focused on a single referee.

The league can only hope that Donaghy was acting alone among officials and not in a network.

“We’ve got a serious problem as it is,” Hunter said. “But if it penetrates beyond that” — and involves others in the league — “then we’ve got grave problems.” Stern knows how to market. In 2003, in a typical lecture about the importance of preserving the image of the N.B.A., he said that what fans “want to see is basketball, and we’re anxious to show our game.”

Stern has presided over expansion, globalization, lockouts and brawls. But in the wake of a potential scandal, maintaining the public’s trust could be the commissioner’s toughest sell yet.

 

Yep, once a criminal enterprise crosses state lines the Feds get involved.

 

Now that's (the NBA article) the Rhoden I know and loathe. I was beginning to actually wonder if I had possibly misjudged him as I found myself in a great deal of agreement with him on the two Vick articles.

There's plenty to say about that last piece, which is properly understood, IMO, as both Rhoden's attempt to settle old scores in the NBA's moment of crisis as well as the opening round of negotiations for the next NBA collective-bargaining agreement. A very cheap series of swipes by Bill, but, nonetheless, effective. More later.

Thanks for the postings of the articles, Boom.

 

One of strange things here is that the amount of $ Vick bet relative to his income was pretty small.

Thus, that begs the Q as to what else was driving this behavior when he had to know the (or at least some) of the risks involved. Was it the gambling, was it the dog fighting, was it the environment, or all of the above?

These are the pertinent questions I believe.

It seems as if lately sports are becoming more scandal than sports. I can't put my finger fully on it yet, but something is changing. Is it the athletes, is it that we are getting more of the real truth revealed, or is it that what we expect has morphed?

I will ponder this.