I only skimmed through, but I think I now better understand your stance. Unlike chicagopurple's stance, I respect your stance. You aren't condemning Vick as a person, you just think he doesn't deserve to be back in the NFL. While I still cannot agree, I respect the hell out of that argument and can definitely see where you are coming from. It is in my nature to give everyone the benefit of the doubt. Maybe one day that will bite me in the butt. As a matter of fact, it probably will. But I still wouldn't change it.BGM wrote: If you would like to know exactly how I feel about this, I encourage you to check out this discussion from back in 2010.
http://www.vikingsmessageboard.com/view ... k&start=30
You may see it as me as being a judgmental jerk, and that is fine and your opinion. But, for me, it's about someone doing something so fundamentally cruel and reprehensible and STILL being allowed to do something that is a huge privilege - not a right. YMMV. I also have deep and emotional opinions on this issue. And I stand by every word.
Vick on the Vikings?
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Vick on the Vikings?
Re: Vick on the Vikings?
I would fall into the category of hoping Vick is never a Viking. I would go into the "messy" issue of whether or not his "paid debt to society" grants him a complete erasure of his past. The fact of the matter is: he did commit a reprehensible act. Maybe he has truly repented (regret combined with an action to change and go the other direction) and is a good person.
When talking about the casting stones: the context of that admonishment was an execution of a woman who had committed adultery. (OK - mods - I made this a separate line so you may delete it (the line) if I have crossed the line on acceptable posting )
Let me ask the hypothetical? If OJ Simpson were released from prison (and somehow magically could play QB like Rodgers, Brees, et al) would you endorse giving him a chance on he Vikings? He's paid his debt to society and said he is sorry for the Robbery (He was aquitted of those nasty murder allegations and the civil case against him is only a preponderance standard) Should we judge him then? I'm not saying Vick is a bad person either, but sometimes poor decisions go beyond "fixing" and there are life-long consequences that happen as a result of poor choices.
I understand and respect restoration after mistakes. Sometimes, however, the scars of poor choices are permanent ones. Just my 2 cents
When talking about the casting stones: the context of that admonishment was an execution of a woman who had committed adultery. (OK - mods - I made this a separate line so you may delete it (the line) if I have crossed the line on acceptable posting )
Let me ask the hypothetical? If OJ Simpson were released from prison (and somehow magically could play QB like Rodgers, Brees, et al) would you endorse giving him a chance on he Vikings? He's paid his debt to society and said he is sorry for the Robbery (He was aquitted of those nasty murder allegations and the civil case against him is only a preponderance standard) Should we judge him then? I'm not saying Vick is a bad person either, but sometimes poor decisions go beyond "fixing" and there are life-long consequences that happen as a result of poor choices.
I understand and respect restoration after mistakes. Sometimes, however, the scars of poor choices are permanent ones. Just my 2 cents
I've told people a million times not to exaggerate!
Re: Vick on the Vikings?
You shouldn't change it. It's a good quality to possess.admvp wrote:I only skimmed through, but I think I now better understand your stance. Unlike chicagopurple's stance, I respect your stance. You aren't condemning Vick as a person, you just think he doesn't deserve to be back in the NFL. While I still cannot agree, I respect the hell out of that argument and can definitely see where you are coming from. It is in my nature to give everyone the benefit of the doubt. Maybe one day that will bite me in the butt. As a matter of fact, it probably will. But I still wouldn't change it.
Your entire post was excellent but I just quoted the line above because I thought you phrased it so well. I think for many of us, the scars left by Vick's criminal treatment of dogs are deep enough that we simply don't want to be put in a position where we're asked to actually root for him on a weekly basis.Just Me wrote:I understand and respect restoration after mistakes. Sometimes, however, the scars of poor choices are permanent ones. Just my 2 cents
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 4:16 pm
Re: Vick on the Vikings?
When i started the thread that you need a veteran qb to provide some competition for Ponder, Vick is not the type I had in mind. Hopefully the Vikes learned their lesson with McNabb about former Eagles qb's. You want no part of Vick.
Re: Vick on the Vikings?
I get your point, but I don't think it is an accurate comparizon. I've euthanized animals before for a variety of circumstances. By the logic you suggest in your point, you could also say that since I've killed animals before, I might as well engage in dog fighting as the final result is the same. It goes beyond killing the animals IMHO.Valhalla wrote:
I've gone vegetarian before for months, I respect it but don't do it normally. But that still says a lot of us are probably meat eaters and we eat animals that have been killed. You know, if one is really set against what Vick did and judges him, then let's go the whole nine yards and be total vegetarians as well.
I've told people a million times not to exaggerate!
Re: Vick on the Vikings?
Please no!
Re: Vick on the Vikings?
I do like the idea of a playmaker, Smith isn't. They're also both coming off years in which they've been injured (think both concussions?)
If nothing else we'd get some damn exciting football with Vick. Something we wouldn't get out of Vanilla Smith. Even if he might be more likely to stay healthy. He's still the definition of a caretaker. (And if Kaepernick struggles to finish up the year, he might not even be an option. Heck the way the Eagles look Vick might not either!)
If nothing else we'd get some damn exciting football with Vick. Something we wouldn't get out of Vanilla Smith. Even if he might be more likely to stay healthy. He's still the definition of a caretaker. (And if Kaepernick struggles to finish up the year, he might not even be an option. Heck the way the Eagles look Vick might not either!)