Michael Vick Overkill
| 7
|
by Tyduffy
Michael Vick was sentenced to 23 months in a federal prison for his involvement in a dog-fighting operation. He was also fined $5,000 and will have three years probation.
Vick's sentence was longer than the 12 to 18 months recommended by the prosecutor as part of his plea agreement. This was because the judge felt that Vick had not been entirely honest about his involvement in the physical killing of dogs and because he felt that Vick's failed marijuana test hurt his credibility.
Because Vick elected to begin serving his time in November, he would be eligible for release, pending good behavior, in the Summer of 2009.
The NFL has not stated what, if any, further punishment Vick would receive should he attempt to re-enter the league at that time.
At most, it probably took you a minute to read through that information. This was the hard news from Michael Vick's sentencing. So why has this spawned hour upon interminable hour of ESPN programming?
Yes, it is certainly a newsworthy story that should have been the lead on Sportscenter and on ESPN.com. But how much coverage does it warrant? Have Roger Cossack on to translate the legalese, fine. Have a reporter who was at the courtroom, fine. Maybe even have another reporter who talked to officials at the NFL, fine. But that should have been it?
Why do we have the entire NFL Countdown crew speculating on the potential for Michael Vick to possibly come back in the league in 2009 or 2010? Shouldn't that be a story for 2009 or 2010? How can someone possibly project what job prospects Vick will have 2-3 years from now? The league could be entirely different. Tom Brady could have a career-ending injury and the Lions could be coming off their second Super Bowl victory. We could have flying cars. World War III could have broken out. Americans could have converted to soccer. Who knows. So why have Emmit "freaking" Smith stumbling his way through a commentary about it?
Why are Mike Greenberg and Mark Schlereth torturing thousands of morning commuters by figuring out "hypothetically" if Michael Vick had not killed dogs, if he had somehow been released by the Falcons, and if money, salary cap considerations, and location desireability were not a factor, which teams would have had Vick as a starting quarterback?
It is the same situation with Barry Bonds. Two minutes of hard news, 10 hours of wall to wall coverage the next two days. Naughty black men, reporters speculating without actually reporting, hosts struggling to find anything interesting to talk about. The pattern repeats itself.
ESPN self-proclaims itself to be the "World-Wide Leader in Sports." They have paid outrageous amounts of money to assemble some of the finest sports journalistic talent available. They are in a unique position to make a difference and to impose high standards and create meaningful dialogue.
The handling of the Vick case, and similar stories, reeks of infotainment and gossipy garbage cloaked under the veneer of legitimate journalism. It is deragatory and insulting to the average sports fan.
ESPN may claim it is responding to its audience, but I highly doubt that hordes of intoxicated plebs will be storming Bristol with pitchforks if they don't get their recycled and tired Michael Vick coverage.
The Odds and Sods
