Here's my issue with that, and I honestly don't remember your stance on the Vick situation so not speaking about you directly but many of those in the media using that argument.
Many of the same people now using the "image to uphold" and "its a business" excuse are the same people who were saying Mike Vick had a RIGHT to play in the NFL again. That the NFL would be WRONG to suspend him an extra year, or to ban him outright, for what they did. That its taking a mans "livelihood" away (as if Mike Vick couldn't make money anywhere besides the NFL). That the NFL shouldn't disallow Mike Vick back into the league if a team will have him no matter what hit the image of the NFL would take.
I agree, I've been saying that the whole time. Dungy was an amazing coach, and Gruden was lucky to have had Dungy's guys in Tampa.
I honestly don't know what the coverage was in the actual cities, and if there's any place I would say McNabb ISN'T overrated, it'd be in Philly, where they seemingly hate him (and often times when I talk to philly fans, they go the opposite direction under rating him)
I don't know, I distinctly remember for most of the 2000's him being talked about as an "elite", top 5 type QB.
Rush is a fat slob drug addict.
Sorry I'm late, did anyone else cover this point?
Vick paid his debt. He can play. Vick took responsibility for his mistake. Ultimately, it's up to the league if they want him to play or not. Vick puts butts in seats.
Limbaugh doesn't have that upside. Ultimately, that's what the league does. They do a cost/benefit analysis. I believe the current owners vote on new owners, but I might be mistaken. Maybe that's baseball.
If they said "Yes." then it's because owners are behind the scenes and don't usually don't figure into the image of the league.
Vick paid his debt. He can play. Vick took responsibility for his mistake. Ultimately, it's up to the league if they want him to play or not. Vick puts butts in seats.
Limbaugh doesn't have that upside. Ultimately, that's what the league does. They do a cost/benefit analysis. I believe the current owners vote on new owners, but I might be mistaken. Maybe that's baseball. If the league said "No." I would certainly understand it would be due to image. He is too polarizing a figure. If they said "Yes." then it's because owners are behind the scenes and don't usually don't figure into the image of the league.
I'm not saying he can't play. I'm saying you can't make an argument that the "image" thing isn't allowed to disqualify Vicks "right" to play football if a team wants him, but say it is allowed to disqualify Rush if the owners vote him in. You can't say it doesn't matter that its a business, Vick has a RIGHT to play in the NFL but then say that its a business, and thus its perfectly fine for the Commissioner to simply bar him from owning a team.
This isn't even going into the fact that Vick is a convicted Felon whose acts happened while employed by the league who repeatedly violated the leagues rules in ways that permanent banishment would be completely justifiable (lying to the commissioner) where as Limbaugh's stigma's all came outside of him being in the league and violates no league rules.
You're correct, the owners vote on it and have to approve him. After that, the NFL itself can say "no dice". If the owners want to vote him down, so be it. If the Commish wants to vote him down even, so be it, though I like that less.
However if he does its utter and completely hypocritical BS on the part of Goodell, and that doesn't change the fact that all the idiots in the media now that previously were talking about Vicks "Right" to play and how business/image doesn't matter in regards to the Commissioner over ruling a team wanting him who are currently calling for the commissioner to simply throw him out due to business/image.
The Rams suck....Rush and the rams deserve each other.
When is L.A. getting a football team? :2razz:
No one here cares.
We have real football here...its played on Saturdays.
The corporate Sunday BS has very little resemblence to the game.
The NFL thought that they could keep a team away and then get cities here to flock to offer to build stadiums for them on the taxpayer dime. Angelenos are smarter than that and gave the NFL a big thumbs down.
Now the NFL is trying desperately to get a team here...and are finding that people here have no interest in their merchandise.
The day the Rams and Raiders left was great for LA....there are so many better things here to do with your time.
So you opt for the corporate Staurday BS? :rofl
College Football isn't even close to the same corporate BS as the NFL....
Sharpton, Jackson Attack Limbaugh's Rams Bid - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com
Anyone else feel this is just another case of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson making a stir just to get more publicity?
When is L.A. getting a football team? :2razz:
The UFL has a team there I believe.
What ever happened to "civility a must"?
Rush is a fat slob drug addict.
Sorry I'm late, did anyone else cover this point?
Link (current)?Rush is a fat slob drug addict.
Sorry I'm late, did anyone else cover this point?
Link (current)?
Anyone who works in the field of drug addiction will tell you: "Once a drug addict, always a drug addict". Rehab is a life long process. Don't fool yourself.
College Football isn't even close to the same corporate BS as the NFL....
Anyone who works in the field of drug addiction will tell you: "Once a drug addict, always a drug addict". Rehab is a life long process. Don't fool yourself.
Have you seen the BCS?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?