Should Vick be banned for life from the NFL?

[notreallyme]

Originally Posted by MountainHawk

Should he in the ethical sense? No, we shouldn't take away people's careers after they are done serving time.

This one.

As for the gambling policy, what is it? (Google Monkey?)

[_BullDog_]

Originally Posted by Boston Buckeye

well, I think his NFL career is done. Even after his time, he'll be X years removed from the league, which is hard to recover from. The game is so fast these days.

Also, how many owners will want the liability?

So the discussion may be moot, unless this is very Pete Rose-ian and we want to know if he should be banned from the HoF also. IMHO, Rose shouldn't be banned from the HoF, so my opinion is the same here.

Vick isn't good enough to be in the HoF

[Brutus Buckeye]

Originally Posted by Feif

No, this is a political discussion, discussing the workings of the justice system, and how other people view crime and punishment for the crime.

also, the league is given a monopoly status by the gov't (I think - MH, help me out on this one).

If what I said is true, this definately belongs in political.

[Brutus Buckeye]

Originally Posted by _BullDog_

Vick isn't good enough to be in the HoF

that may be so. But the HoF isn't the only thing a ban would impact.

It also impacts the league's pension benefits, too.

[_BullDog_]

Originally Posted by Boston Buckeye

also, the league is given a monopoly status by the gov't (I think - MH, help me out on this one).

If what I said is true, this definately belongs in political.

I do believe your are correct.

[yinyin]

Originally Posted by Boston Buckeye

So the discussion may be moot, unless this is very Pete Rose-ian and we want to know if he should be banned from the HoF also. IMHO, Rose shouldn't be banned from the HoF, so my opinion is the same here.

http://web.baseballhalloffame.org/hofers/rules.jsp

5. Voting — Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

[MountainHawk]

Originally Posted by Boston Buckeye

also, the league is given a monopoly status by the gov't (I think - MH, help me out on this one).

If what I said is true, this definately belongs in political.

Baseball is the only league with a specific anti-trust exemption. However, the NFL clearly gets some protection somewhere, maybe because of the collective bargaining laws, or there is no way a draft could be held.

[Brutus Buckeye]

Originally Posted by yinyin

http://web.baseballhalloffame.org/hofers/rules.jsp

5. Voting — Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

thats fair. But this isn't about Rose. Nor is his ban ONLY about his HoF status.

Also, I defy anyone to show that any player in the baseball hall of fame meets ALL those requirements perfectly. Being deficient in 1 area does not mean disqualification from the whole thing.

There are managers and owners in the hall who have NO playing ability.

[Feif]

Originally Posted by yinyin

http://web.baseballhalloffame.org/hofers/rules.jsp

5. Voting — Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

Exactly. And it should be up to those who vote as to whether Rose should be allowed in or not. As it stands now, the vote isn't based on that. He isn't allowed to receive votes. He isn't on the ballot.

[yinyin]

Originally Posted by Feif

Exactly. And it should be up to those who vote as to whether Rose should be allowed in or not. As it stands now, the vote isn't based on that. He isn't allowed to receive votes. He isn't on the ballot.

5. Any player on Baseball's ineligible list shall not be an eligible candidate.