This may interest you.
---------------
The column below is one man's opinion.
-----
Vick: Villain or scoundrel ... or sympathetic figure?http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/070816
By Gregg Easterbrook
Special to Page 2
I have an inclination to sympathize with Michael Vick, and not just because People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is denouncing him. They are popping champagne corks over at PETA, as Vick is the best thing to happen to the organization's profile and fundraising in years. Remember, the charges against Vick are accusations. The Duke lacrosse mess reminded us that accusations are not the same as guilt and that prosecutors might be unscrupulous. The NFL, the media and popular opinion all seem to accept that because Vick is accused, he must be guilty. He's been treated as guilty -- mocked, effectively suspended from football, deprived of most of his income -- long before any legal determination has been made. There's something deeply sick about the fact that you can go to the NFL's official shop and order a Bills jersey with No. 32 and SIMPSON on the back -- go here and try it yourself -- or a Panthers jersey with CARRUTH on the back, the NFL system actually says "Great choice!" in response, but if you go here and try to order a Falcons' jersey with Vick's name or number, you'll get a message saying your order cannot be processed.
Let me count the reasons I am inclined to sympathize with Michael Vick. One is that Vick became an athletic celebrity at age 16. Since then, has anyone ever said the word "no" to him? Did he ever hear "no" from his coaches, his teachers, Virginia Tech, the Atlanta Falcons, Reebok, Nike, Rawlings, the National Football League, ESPN or any of the sports-media companies, all of which were only too happy to indulge Vick so long as it benefited them? Vick might have believed he had become a Big Man -- someone no one could touch, someone above the rules. People who believe they are above the rules need to learn what integrity means. But only the gifted or philosophical can teach themselves character: The overwhelming majority of men and women need help from others to learn the lessons of character. Many such lessons begin with the word "no." Who in last 10 years has said "no" to Michael Vick? Of his friends, coaches, owners, university presidents or entourage, has anyone taken him aside and said, "Michael, it doesn't matter if you are on national television, it doesn't matter if you are rich, right is right and wrong is wrong." My guess is that no one close to Vick has told him this. In the end, Vick is responsible for his actions. But the contemporary cult of celebrity would not be possible unless the people around celebrities avoided saying "no." If Vick did what he is accused, it simply could not have been a secret to those near him. You so-called friends of Michael Vick, you coaches, team owners, university presidents, hangers-on and entourage -- who among you can look in the mirror today and say you acted with honor?
Next, I feel some sympathy for Vick because of the "send a message" aspect of the case. There's no doubt that many celebrity athletes are getting away with too much. Celebrity athletes as a group have become arrogant, spoiled and even antisocial. This should be a major concern for the NFL, NBA, MLB and ESPN. But even if other celebrity athletes have gotten away with too much in other instances, Vick's case must be treated on its own merits. Some commentators argue that Vick must be dealt with severely to "send a message" about athlete's behavior. No: Vick must be dealt with fairly, to send a message about justice. Seven years ago, the NFL took little action against star Ray Lewis when he pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice in a case involving the deaths of two people. Even read "in the light most favorable," as lawyers say, what Lewis did was stand by watching as two acquaintances stabbed two people to death. Lewis served only 15 days in jail and the NFL fined him $250,000 for conduct detrimental to the league. Eventually, he was back signing lucrative endorsement contracts. He got off lightly. (This is unrelated to the fact that, by all accounts, Lewis became genuinely remorseful and now spends much of his time in charity work; the question is what punishment was fitting based on what was known at the time of the offense.) But Vick shouldn't not be punished severely in order to "send a message" about what wasn't done to Lewis or other previous celebrity-athlete offenders. Vick has no serious prior offenses and does not stand accused of any act of violence against a person. He grew up poor in the crime-and-drugs plagued Ridley Circle housing project of Newport News, Va., yet unlike many around him there did not succomb to the temptation of lawbreaking. If Vick goes to jail and loses his NFL career for a first offense of cruelty to animals and gambling, while Lewis essentially got off scot-free for watching two human beings stabbed to death, that wouldn't be "sending a message." That would be a travesty of justice.
.....
