RealGM

Jarrett Bell of USA Today wrote a piece on Michael Vick, and at the end of it was an interesting quote from one particular NFL head coach.

"I would look at Michael like I look at every other prospect that's available: He goes back into the pool," Bears coach Lovie Smith said in the article. "That's what everyone in society does. Martha Stewart went to prison. She paid her time. Now she's back in society.

"Mike made a mistake, and he's paying the price for that mistake. Once you've paid your debt to society, you have to say, 'OK, let's go on from there.' "

Commisioner Roger Goodell has not committed on a timetable for Vick's reinstatement. But Vick, serving a 23-month sentence for financing a dogfighting ring, has to show true remorse before he is allowed back on an NFL field.

So make a play for Jay Cutler or wait on Michael Vick? Chances are, the Bears will do neither. But it makes for good conversation.

Chewie wrote:The REAL question is whether SportsWorld would be interested in Michael Vick.

Would the Bears Ever Consider Michael Vick?

I am going to have to implore you to read this article thouroughly before jumping into a full-on attack about this idea. Michael Vick is scheduled to be a free man in July of this year. His future in football is of course a huge question mark... Arthur Blank, the owner of the Atlanta Falcons, said back in October of 2008 that he would like to see Vick play in the NFL again, just not with the Falcs.

There has also been interest in Vick from the new UFL, with commissioner Michael Huyghue stating several months ago that there was a 98% chance Vick would play in his league in 2009. Of course, Vick would undoubtedly prefer a return to the NFL.

NFL commish Roger Goodell stated on Wednesday that he would consider reinstating Vick, but that he needed first to gather all of the information that he could:

I think it's clear he's paid a price, but to a large extent he's going to have to demonstrate to the larger community -- not just to the NFL community and to me -- that he has remorse for what he did and that he recognizes mistakes that he made.

All of the legal mess that Vick still has to untangle will certainly be a deciding factor in his possible return to the league... but for a moment, let's assume that he gets it all worked out.

Everyone makes mistakes, but he has to show that genuine remorse in his ability to be a positive influence to correct the things that he did wrong publicly," he added, according to the report.

Let's also assume that he is able to persuade Goodell into reinstating him. After all, regardless of what you personally think about his crimes, he is following the guidelines set before him by the judicial system, and seems serious about getting his life back together.

The purpose of this article is not to get into a moral debate about his previous criminal history... and not to get into a debate about whether the legal system handled it correctly. The purpose is to consider this: If Michael Vick were deemed by the courts and by the NFL to have paid his debt, and were willing to allow him to continue his career in the NFL, would the Chicago Bears consider bringing him in?

Vick was one of the most talented athletes to ever put on a uniform, and it could certainly be argued that the system in Atlanta wasn't suited for him. If he has been keeping his body in shape, there would have to be some interest from teams about what he could contribute on the NFL level.

How would you feel about the Bears giving him a shot? http://www.windycitygridiron.com/2009/3 ... ever-consi

Cliff Levingston wrote:If the Bears really are interested in Pat White in the second round, maybe it would make more sense to grab Vick for cheap and instead spend that 2nd rounder on a decent safety or to further bolster the offensive line.

Cliff Levingston wrote:If the Bears really are interested in Pat White in the second round, maybe it would make more sense to grab Vick for cheap and instead spend that 2nd rounder on a decent safety or to further bolster the offensive line.

Enrique wrote:http://voxday.blogspot.com/2009/03/dogs-are-property-not-people.html

I came across this article recently and thought it was interesting.

Michael Vick is a thug. I would not want him to dog-sit my dogs... I wouldn't want him quarterbacking my team, for that matter. But, if there is an NFL coach wanting to roll the dice with a strong-armed quarterback who is less accurate than a Keynesian economist analyzing the latest stimulus plan, he should be free to do so.

Nevertheless, dogs are property, not people, and how a man treats his property is his concern, not mine, so long as he isn't doing it in a manner that will offend the neighbors or disturb the community.