Look, I am by no means a Michael Vick apologist(or fan for that matter). As far as I can tell, he's pompously arrogant, and his apology before entering prison last year did nothing to change that. Of course, I do not know him personally but my feeling is that he's going to come out of jail pretty much the same guy that he was when he went in. That feeling, though, has far more to do with the criminal justice system than it does with Vick specifically.
Still, he was released from prison on Wednesday of last week and, on Friday, he contacted his probation officer confirming his arrival in VA. The ultimate question from a sports perspective is "should Vick get a second chance int he NFL".
The question isn't "if" because the answer to that is "of course". With all apologizes to John Connor, there is fate that we do not make for ourselves and one of them is that Vick will be back playing in the NFL. Sure, PETA will have a flip out and they should. VIck's actions were atrocious. Then again, that's why he went to prison, isn't it? This is the system that we have, like it or not, for punishing criminals in our society. When they leave, of course they have a "Scarlett letter" for the rest of their lives and Vick will, and should, be no different. In fact, if anything, Vick has at least answered for the wrongs that he's committed, unlike some NFL players (I'm looking at you, Adam Jones).
Even if it were not inevitable, Vick deserves this chance. I have no idea the man that Vick was before and I have no idea the man that Vick is now. Shooting the proverbial bird to the home fans in Atlanta in 2006 and funding a dogfighting ring does not paint a very good picture for the man he was before prison. And we can assume all we want that Vick did not change. That he did not learn any sort of lesson. I am relatively certain he won't do anything this outrageous in the future for no other reason than that he does not want to go back to jail. And maybe he didn't learn anything but that does not mean that he shouldn't get an opportunity to prove society wrong.
And maybe you feel that Vick has not fully paid his debt to society, and that's a fair feeling. Maybe he does not deserve the "privilege" of playing the NFL. I always think that sentiment is silly. Jones actually paints a perfect example for why Vick's reinstatement is inevitable and why the "privilege" of the NFL really does not provide any sort of incentive for good behavior. Jones ordered one man to shoot another man while he was suspended from the NFL… "allegedly". I am not making a value judgment between the actions of Vick and Jones at all it is not my function in society, nor do I particularly have a preference to either. Both are pretty awful. Clearly, though, taking the game away from players is not exactly the deterrent it seems.
Then of course there is the problem with us, as football fans, talking out of both sides of our mouths. First we want to proclaim the privilege of playing football professionally, but want players to treat it as a profession. I don't know that it can be both ways. I certainly like the idea of being able to be employed, and it certainly would be a shame if I could not do that. However, we expect players to treat football as a profession. They need to be prepared to play every Sunday. When Terrell Owens drops a pass in the open field with nothing but 6 in front of him, there is a general uproar that this is his JOB, he has to make that catch. Every Sunday, fans expect that players will take the field and be prepared to play because, after all, they are paid to do it.
Privilege, though, implies something more than just the ability to make a lot of money. It is a privilege to be a doctor, or lawyer, or President of the United States. Those jobs have certain burdens that require our trust. All any of the players in the NFL did to "deserve the privilege" was be born with exceptional athletic ability and the dedication to work hard at the craft. There's nothing to suggest that Vick is not willing to do that. Positions of privilege require something beyond being born. They require being worthy. I have never heard a compelling argument to suggest that professional athletes need to be "worthy". Of course, there is the obligatory argument that they are "role models" and children look up to them. Let me first say that I am not a parent, but I would expect that a good parent, in explaining the difference between right and wrong, is competent to explain that dog fighting is wrong and that Vick is by no means a role model.
Or maybe, we give him the opportunity to truly become a role model. We give him a chance at redemption and then we can point to Vick and say "this guy, he did some really bad things. It could have ruined his life, but you know… it didn't. He paid the price for his bad actions, and then he turned his life around. It's never too late son/daughter"…. assuming he steps up and does. Sure, I would rather my future kids to look up to someone like Derrick Brooks, who has never done anything but work hard and contribute to the community. That being said, I would also like them to grow up and understand that they cannot be self righteous and think they understand everything about the world. I would like them to understand that bad things happen. Hell, I'd like them to grow up and understand that they WILL do bad things (hopeful, nothing nearly as bad as Vick), but that they can change. Most of all, I would like them to grow up and understand that they should be forgiving and that they can be forgiven.
I cannot imagine why someone would do the things that Vick did. That does not mean, though, that he should be left out in the cold for the rest of his life. Let's give him another chance, shall we?
This article appears in May 20-26, 2009.