Vick Sentenced to 23 Months For Dog Fighting

[RedKingGold]

Not sure if this has been posted

NFL, Falcons could ask Vick to focus energies in court
By Len Pasquarelli and Chris Mortensen
ESPN.com

Updated: July 20, 2007, 11:02 AM ET
Comment
Email
Print
ATLANTA -- In what has quickly evolved into a collaborative effort that includes the input of officials from the NFL, the NFL Players Association and the Atlanta Falcons, embattled quarterback Michael Vick could be urged to take a voluntary leave of absence to focus his energy on the legal challenges from a federal dogfighting indictment confronting him, sources said Thursday and Friday.


There are, however, two critical components that must be resolved: Falcons owner Arthur Blank must be on board with a plan that has generated considerable discussion at the league level the past two days. And Vick, who might be reluctant to accept even a paid hiatus from the game, might have to be convinced that the leave could be his best option right now.


Blank and the Falcons might also be considering other options.


Under the leave-of-absence scenario, and given the projected timeline of any trial that could ensue from the federal indictments brought against the quarterback Tuesday, all parties would enter into the agreement, if it is consummated, with the expectation that Vick, 27, would probably miss the entire 2007 season.


While the concept of a leave has been broached conceptually to associates and advisors of Vick, it has not yet been formally presented to the Falcons' star. Vick could be briefed about the possibility of a paid leave of absence, however, as early as Friday. He would likely be granted time to consider the suggestion, which would almost certainly have to be made by Blank, with a decision not coming until early next week.


It has become clear, as high-level discussions have progressed, that all the parties involved in the talks are desperately seeking a resolution to a potential public relations disaster before the Falcons begin training camp next Thursday afternoon. A league source acknowledged on Thursday that "something one way or the other is going to have to happen ... by the start of training camp."


As incentive for Vick to consider a leave, the union is hopeful that Blank will offer to guarantee the player's full $6 million base salary for 2007. That could be a sticking point in the negotiations. No one will try to bully Vick into accepting the leave, but he might be reminded that while the league and Falcons are inclined for now to allow due process to play out in the courts, that stance is not an inalterable one, and unfolding events could possibly change the approach of Blank and of commissioner Roger Goodell.


Multiple sources at various levels of the ongoing discussions acknowledged a consensus was beginning to galvanize that nobody, including Vick, will benefit by the quarterback playing the 2007 season under a lingering cloud of suspicion and the ponderous legal burden of the federal indictment. In the indictment, Vick is alleged to have conspired in an illegal dogfighting venture conducted on property he owns in Surry County, Va.


Intensive talks continued Thursday with Goodell, Blank, Falcons' team president and general manager Rich McKay, and NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw discussing various options available to them. Those discussions were expected to continue on Friday.


If convicted on all counts, Vick could face a prison sentence of six years.


Neither Vick, his attorney nor agent could not be reached for comment Thursday night. Blank also was unavailable for comment and a Falcons' spokesman referred to the owner's statement released earlier Thursday in which he expressed that "we are working diligently on exploring our options."


"The commissioner is concerned about the seriousness of the charges and he wants to make sure Vick focuses on putting up the most appropriate defense," a source said. "Vick has to be convinced that it is in his best interests to take a leave of absence ... I think it's fair to say nobody's really comfortable with him playing under these circumstances."

Even a close Vick associate acknowledged early Friday that is the case.


Said the associate: "There's been a lot of stuff going on the last day or so, but the one thing that keeps getting clearer and clearer is that they don't want [Vick] around. The Falcons, the league, they know it's a mess and it's only going to get uglier if camp starts and he's on the field. If he's not [present for camp], at least there's a little bit of 'out of sight, out of mind,' you know? It removes the source of distraction. Otherwise, it's just [untenable]."


A leave of absence would at least temporarily address several possible dilemmas for the Falcons, including how to handle Vick's contract if he does not report to training camp on time. And it would enable the franchise, even if Vick doesn't play in 2007, to retain his contractual rights. Vick is scheduled for a bond hearing and his arraignment hearing Thursday, the same day the Falcons hold their initial camp practice under first-year coach Bobby Petrino.


Without an excused absence, Vick could technically be in default of his contract if he does not report to camp on time, perhaps providing the Falcons the right to attempt to recover bonus money already paid to him. There are default provisions, described by one source with close knowledge of Vick's contract as "very tight language," written into the lucrative 10-year extension he signed in December 2004. Vick advisors spent time Thursday discussing the potential default ramifications with NFLPA officials.


And members of the NFL Management Council, the labor arm of the league, earlier this week began closely reviewing Vick's contract, to see what options might be available to Blank and the Falcons if they opt to pursue any bonus payments.


The 2004 extension has long been advertised as a 10-year, $130 million contract. In reality, because the final season of the contract voided as soon as Vick reached minimum playing time thresholds, it is a nine-year deal worth about $118 million. Vick has banked more than $40 million, but $37 million of that was in bonuses -- an initial signing bonus of $7.5 million and then subsequent roster bonuses of $22.5 million and $7 million. But for salary cap purposes, the Falcons exercised an option to convert the roster bonuses into signing bonuses.


That might seem incidental because Vick got all of the money coming to him anyway. But if the Falcons attempt at some point to force Vick into paying back part of the bonus money, how the conversions are interpreted might be a point of contention. A ruling in a grievance case involving former Denver first-round wide receiver Ashley Lelie last year made it more difficult for teams to seek repayment of option or roster bonuses.


Atlanta officials might contend that the two most recent bonuses paid Vick, totaling $29.5 million, were converted to signing bonuses, and that they should be permitted to pursue a prorated share of that money. The Vick came would likely counter that, while the money was paid as signing bonuses, it was actually earned as roster bonuses.


But any contentiousness, and a possible arbitration hearing, could be avoided if Vick accepts a proposal for a leave of absence, one in which all parties agree he will miss camp.


"It would certainly give everyone some much-needed breathing room," allowed one league source late Thursday night. "People could get on with their business."


Make no mistake, for both the Falcons and the NFL, there is clearly a business component attached to the Vick case.


The league faces a backlash, not only from animal rights groups, but others as well, And in the statement that Blank released Thursday, he noted his responsibility to his sponsors. The team recently entered into an agreement with Russell Athletic in which the apparel maker will pay $1 million-$2 million annually to sponsor the Falcons' training camp. It could be a camp disrupted by protests if Vick attends.


In another Vick-related matter, the quarterback's camp has begun interviewing candidates to beef up his legal defense team, in the event he goes to trial. Vick's longtime personal attorney, Lawrence Woodward, is expected to remain part of the defense team, but advisors have urged that the Falcons' star consider adding counsel with experience in the federal courts.


The Vick camp has solicited recommendations and is believed to have interviewed at least one prominent defender from the prestigious Washington, D.C., firm of Wilmer Hale.

Len Pasquarelli is a senior NFL writer for ESPN.com. Television reporter Chris Mortensen covers the NFL for ESPN.

Probably the best solution for all sides. Vick would still get paid and the NFL would get out of the inevitable media circus.

[Ksyrup]

This was the easy solution from Day One. The only question is whether Vick agrees.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Unless there's some great reversal in the way things are going (such as the case failing spectacularly, say due to planted evidence or something), I think he's probably going to be nothing but a liability from a PR standpoint, which would make it difficult for a lot of teams to employ him. If he pleas or if he's found guilty, yeah, it's all over.

Yeah, his choices would be pretty much down to the Raiders.

[st.cronin]

I actually think its possible, even if he goes to jail, for him to rehabilitate his image. Massive donations to the humane society, a weeping shameful apology, etc. It can be done.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I actually think its possible, even if he goes to jail, for him to rehabilitate his image. Massive donations to the humane society, a weeping shameful apology, etc. It can be done.

It can be done, but do you think it would happen? I have a hard time picturing it.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

It can be done, but do you think it would happen? I have a hard time picturing it.

No. My guess is that he never plays football again, and just sort of disappears from the public eye.

[Synovia]

Blacks and white, though, appeared to view the incident very differently, just as was illustrated by a poll released earlier in the week about reaction to slugger Barry Bonds' approach to Hank Aaron's home run record. Of the fans and non-fans, 54 percent of whites would ax Vick while 66 percent of blacks favor keeping in for the time being.

This has more cemented my oppinion of Atlanta as a racist community. The fact that 66% of black people still want this guy playing, even after this, is ridiculous. Racism is alive and well in America. Its just not what the media likes to think it is.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Synovia

This has more cemented my oppinion of Atlanta as a racist community. The fact that 66% of black people still want this guy playing, even after this, is ridiculous. Racism is alive and well in America. Its just not what the media likes to think it is.

or maybe atlanta has a large dog fighting fanbase.

[larrymcg421]

Most people I've talked to (of both races) that still want him playing actually don't know everything involved. Some think he only owned the property, some think he attended a few dogfights but was not a major player. When I tell them what is involved in the indictment, their tune changes pretty quickly. I'd like to see a breakdown of that poll based on how much info is known about the case. Maybe even do a push poll method to see how people react to the specific facts.

Just because the poll has different results based on racial lines does not mean race is the motivating factor. You can't conclude that until you rule out other potential factors.

Also, it's silly to say that the racism alleged by the media does not exist. There may be other forms of racism that don't get reported quite as much, but the traditional form of racism is alive and well.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by RedKingGold

Probably the best solution for all sides. Vick would still get paid and the NFL would get out of the inevitable media circus.

I guess it makes sense for now, but I just can't stand the fact that even if he's guilty, he gets paid millions of dollars to do nothing.

It sucks.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Synovia

This has more cemented my oppinion of Atlanta as a racist community.

Clearly you have a firm grasp of the obvious

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Most people I've talked to (of both races) that still want him playing actually don't know everything involved. Some think he only owned the property, some think he attended a few dogfights but was not a major player. When I tell them what is involved in the indictment, their tune changes pretty quickly. I'd like to see a breakdown of that poll based on how much info is known about the case. Maybe even do a push poll method to see how people react to the specific facts.

Just because the poll has different results based on racial lines does not mean race is the motivating factor. You can't conclude that until you rule out other potential factors.

Also, it's silly to say that the racism alleged by the media does not exist. There may be other forms of racism that don't get reported quite as much, but the traditional form of racism is alive and well.

No, what I'm saying is that the media reports anything a white person says that involves black people, its a national story, but guys like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton can spew racist hate, and nobody calls them on it.

I've been to atlanta, and the black population's oppinion of Mike Vick is absurd. (Up until this) they saw his as some sort of Joe Montana/Randal Cunningham/Gale Sayers/Jesus cross, when its been apparrant for the last 3 years or so, that hes really not that good of a football player, and is a despicable human being. They love him BECAUSE hes black, and that, is racist.

[miked]

: ping : OJ

[Ksyrup]

I'd be more interested to see the racial split if he pleads guilty or is convicted. That would tell you more.

[Ksyrup]

Chrysler pulls SUV ad with electrocuted dog

Internet video ad pulled from YouTube was in 'exremely poor taste' says Chrysler.

July 20 2007: 12:51 PM EDT


DETROIT (Reuters) -- Chrysler Group apologized on Thursday for an advertisement that showed a dog being electrocuted beside its new Dodge Nitro sports utility vehicle.

The ad, created by BBDO Netherlands which supports Chrysler's sales in the Dutch market, shows a dog being electrocuted after urinating on a Nitro's wheels. The agency is part of Omnicom Group Inc's BBDO Worldwide.

The ad, which ends with the dog going up in flames, has the tagline "charged with adrenaline." According to Chrysler, the ad was placed exclusively on the Internet.

[rkmsuf]

can they use a cat instead? I'm for that.

[Huckleberry]

Obviously that would be fine. It's well-established that dogfights are terrible. Catfights, on the other hand, are wonderful.

hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0pEUJrmvAM

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I'd be more interested to see the racial split if he pleads guilty or is convicted. That would tell you more.

It probably wouldn't tell you what you're thinking it would tell you, though. I have very little doubt that there's a higher percentage of white people who have a problem with dogfighting than black people. Sure, there's a racist component to the poll, but the fact that it's dogfighting is unquestionably playing into the results, too.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I have very little doubt that there's a higher percentage of white people who have a problem with dogfighting than black people.

SKy, you'd be amazed at the response I recieved saying exactly that on another forum. I'm now the official racist jerk over there.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Synovia

No, what I'm saying is that the media reports anything a white person says that involves black people, its a national story, but guys like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton can spew racist hate, and nobody calls them on it.

I've been to atlanta, and the black population's oppinion of Mike Vick is absurd. (Up until this) they saw his as some sort of Joe Montana/Randal Cunningham/Gale Sayers/Jesus cross, when its been apparrant for the last 3 years or so, that hes really not that good of a football player, and is a despicable human being. They love him BECAUSE hes black, and that, is racist.

They like him because he's black?

I wonder why this has not helped the Hawks. If one black player is worth 70,000 people in the stands in the Georgia Dome, you would think 10+ black players would worth more 10 people in Phillips Arena, right?

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

Obviously that would be fine. It's well-established that dogfights are terrible. Catfights, on the other hand, are wonderful.

hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0pEUJrmvAM

Please repost this video any time we get involved in a pointless political debate. Nobody can hold on to any hate while watching it.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

It probably wouldn't tell you what you're thinking it would tell you, though. I have very little doubt that there's a higher percentage of white people who have a problem with dogfighting than black people. Sure, there's a racist component to the poll, but the fact that it's dogfighting is unquestionably playing into the results, too.

I think what I was getting at is it might isolate, to an extent, the true "reverse racism" issue discussed above if there was still a significant percentage of black people who supported Vick even after guilt/conviction. Sure, a percentage of those might be people who either don't have a problem with dogfighting or actually enjoy it, but I think the majority would be the "we're supporting him because he's black" contingent. I think a lot of that played into the Bonds poll, too.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

It probably wouldn't tell you what you're thinking it would tell you, though. I have very little doubt that there's a higher percentage of white people who have a problem with dogfighting than black people. Sure, there's a racist component to the poll, but the fact that it's dogfighting is unquestionably playing into the results, too.

I wonder what other felonies this might be true about.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I think what I was getting at is it might isolate, to an extent, the true "reverse racism" issue discussed above if there was still a significant percentage of black people who supported Vick even after guilt/conviction. Sure, a percentage of those might be people who either don't have a problem with dogfighting or actually enjoy it, but I think the majority would be the "we're supporting him because he's black" contingent. I think a lot of that played into the Bonds poll, too.

I don't follow that. If someone doesn't have a problem with dogfighitng, it's immaterial whether or not he gets convicted. Someone has has no problem with dogfighting doesn't think it should be illegal in the first place. Note what Portis said. I'm quite certain he spoke not realizing that most of America had a major problem with dogfighting. I'm equally as certain that he said what he really felt: his dog, his property, he can do whatever he wants.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

They like him because he's black?

I wonder why this has not helped the Hawks. If one black player is worth 70,000 people in the stands in the Georgia Dome, you would think 10+ black players would worth more 10 people in Phillips Arena, right?

If Michael Vick was white, would he have the same approval rating there? I say no.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I don't follow that. If someone doesn't have a problem with dogfighitng, it's immaterial whether or not he gets convicted. Someone has has no problem with dogfighting doesn't think it should be illegal in the first place. Note what Portis said. I'm quite certain he spoke not realizing that most of America had a major problem with dogfighting. I'm equally as certain that he said what he really felt: his dog, his property, he can do whatever he wants.

Perhaps. I guess you're painting a far broader picture of acceptance of dogfighting within the black community then I believe exists. But you'd likely know better than I would.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Perhaps. I guess you're painting a far broader picture of acceptance of dogfighting within the black community then I believe exists. But you'd likely know better than I would.

I don't think it's widely accepted, per se,, but I have little doubt in my mind that it has a higher rate of acceptance among blacks than whites. It has been my perception for quite some time, and the reading I've done on it in the last week or so has bolstered that. Humane society and law enforcement sources talk quite a bit about the "explosive growth" of dogfighting in black communities in the last 15-20 years.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Synovia

If Michael Vick was white, would he have the same approval rating there? I say no.

I think you are missing my point. You made the statement that the reason the black population in Atlanta support Michael Vick is because he is black. Now you are asking if Vick were white would he have the same approval rating. To me, that is no better than the garbage that Jackson and Sharpton If race in and of itself is the determining factor of who the black population supports and who they don't, I wondered why Phillips Arena is empty during basketball season when the Hawks has a majority of black players on it.

[larrymcg421]

Again, I think there's a big difference in acceptance of dogfighting and acceptance of what has been accused of Michael Vick. I think dogfighting may be more accepted in the black community in the sense of, "dogs fighting dogs, it's not that big a deal" (which is what most people I've talked to have initially said), but when they hear about the mutilation done to the animals, it's a much different story. I don't think that aspect is more widely accepted, and I suspect that the racial disparity in the poll is more reflective of the respondents knowledge of the facts moreso than their acceptance of Vick because he's black.

[spleen1015]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

I think you are missing my point. You made the statement that the reason the black population in Atlanta support Michael Vick is because he is black. Now you are asking if Vick were white would he have the same approval rating. To me, that is no better than the garbage that Jackson and Sharpton If race in and of itself is the determining factor of who the black population supports and who they don't, I wondered why Phillips Arena is empty during basketball season when the Hawks has a majority of black players on it.

If the Hawks had a player that a majority of the sports world thought was going to be one of the best to ever play, then they would be filling the arena. You know the ATL would be all over Lebron James if he were in that city.

I think the point he was trying to make is that the black community wouldn't be supporting Tom Brady as much as they support Michael Vick.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

If the Hawks had a player that a majority of the sports world thought was going to be one of the best to ever play, then they would be filling the arena. You know the ATL would be all over Lebron James if he were in that city.

I think the point he was trying to make is that the black community wouldn't be supporting Tom Brady as much as they support Michael Vick.

Tom Brady can hang with the brothas. Peyton Manning...not so sure.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I think the point he was trying to make is that the black community wouldn't be supporting Alex Smith as much as they support Michael Vick.

That's a much better comp.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

Tom Brady can hang with the brothas. Peyton Manning...not so sure.

[spleen1015]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

That's a much better comp.

Yeah, I thought so myself, but I couldn't think of anyone else quick enough. And, well, you take Brady away from Bill and he's not any good either.

[larrymcg421]

Tom Brady can hang with the brothas. Peyton Manning...not so sure.

I don't know about that. I've seen tons of Manning jerseys in the ATL, but can't remember the last time I saw anyone wearing Brady.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I don't know about that. I've seen tons of Manning jerseys in the ATL, but can't remember the last time I saw anyone wearing Brady.

That's just to keep the whities off their back.

Tons of Brady gear at the dog fights.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

Yeah, I thought so myself, but I couldn't think of anyone else quick enough. And, well, you take Brady away from Bill and he's not any good either.

Oh boy.

[spleen1015]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

[/i]


I don't know about that. I've seen tons of Manning jerseys in the ATL, but can't remember the last time I saw anyone wearing Brady.

Are white or black people wearing them?

[Young Drachma]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/07/20/martin/index.html

[Ksyrup]

This is a long article from the Tallahassee Democrat about issues in that area, as well as Florida generally. There is some backup for the earlier comments about using other animals for training that is just unbelievable.

Originally published July 20, 2007

Dogfighting: A dirty little secret
Officials say it's a vastly underreported crime locally

By Stacy Jacobs DEMOCRAT STAFF WRITER

No one talks about it. No one admits to being involved.

However, deputies and animal activists agree that dogfighting is happening within the city of Tallahassee, as well as in far stretches of Leon and surrounding counties. It's an underground sport, usually accompanied by drug dealing, alcohol and gambling.

In Florida, it is a felony to breed, sell or transport dogs for the purpose of fighting, as well as to organize dogfights or be a spectator of such fights.

"We receive information and tips probably between six to 10 times a year about possible organized dogfighting activities," said Leon County Sgt. James McQuaig, who works in the vice unit. "We're fortunate to (make the arrests) that we're able to get, but we know there are more going on."

Dogfighting is not always as organized as the ring in which Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick is accused of being involved. Tallahassee-Leon Community Animal Service Center Supervisor Jeff Doyle said that he hears about spontaneous dogfighting instances.

"What we see are situations where a young man is walking a dog down the street and comes upon another young man with a dog and they spontaneously engage the dogs," he said.

Neighbors sometimes report these instances, but Doyle said that by the time officers and animal control arrive, the fight is usually over.

LCSO spokesman Chris Chase said that organized dogfights aren't necessarily limited to rural areas.

"It was initially spread out to more of a rural culture, but has branched into the inner city," he said. "There have been cases involving houses in the city limits, where they fought indoors."

Deputies arrested two men in Augustin connection with an Aug. 22 dogfight and took 14 dogs into custody, according to a court record. This was following a raid on a dogfight on Blue Bird Drive within Tallahassee's city limits. Devin Garmon was arrested on 10 charges of felony animal cruelty and 10 charges of dogfighting, and Derrick Brown was arrested on charges of cruelty to animals and fighting animals.

The trial date for Garmon and Brown has not been set; their lawyers think that the date will be set on July 30 during a court hearing.

Deputies said that 10 of the dogs they took had puncture wounds and lacerations. Dogs that are involved in fighting are usually euthanized when the Humane Society takes them, said Laura Bevin, Southeast regional director for the U.S. Humane Society.

In this case, all of the injured dogs were pit bulls.

"These dogs are bred specifically for their aggressiveness," she said. "You have a real danger with any dog that's been bred as a fighter and trained as a fighter. ... Some people who want to rehabilitate (the dogs) are related to the dogfighting world."

Bevin, who is considered an expert witness on dogfighting by the courts of Florida and who cowrote the state's law on dogfighting, said the draw for people is money and power, and it spans all races and socioeconomic positions.

"There's a lot of money involved in dogfighting," she said, adding that money isn't just made from gambling. "The dog can go to stud and make a lot of money.

"A lot of people get that vicarious thrill and live through the violence of the dog. ... A lot of people say, 'I love my dog,' but if it doesn't win, it gets shot in the head. They love the dog as long as it's the baddest dog on the block."

Bevin said she's heard of dogfighting activity along Woodville Highway.

The indictment against Vick and three other men said that losing dogs died in the fighting pits or were electrocuted, drowned, hanged or shot.

"We hear that dogs that lose or no longer have the drive are killed in all kinds of manners," Richard Ziegler, Leon County Animal Control director, said. "I haven't heard of the electrocution part (around this area). It's gunshots, usually, or they are just left there to die on their own; it's slow and painful."

The violence isn't contained to only the animals in the fights.

"There have been times when (Animal Control) has found people stealing pets for bait dogs and stuff like that," Bevin said. "Some of the dogs that don't make it (as fighters), they're used as bait. They can't really fight back, but you can get that dog that you're trying to train ready to fight."

Bait animals are used by trainers as an easy target for dogs that are training for fights.In other instances, rabbits, cats and even puppies are tied into sacks and placed at the front of a treadmill while the fighting dog runs furiously on the device hoping to get closer to the sack.

Mark Johnson, an assistant state attorney in Gadsden County, said that the trouble with prosecuting these cases is convincing a jury of what happened. He prosecuted a dogfighting case from 2005 where the jury decided the defendants were not guilty; the Sheriff's office did not manage to catch them in the act.

"The hardest part is finding out who is responsible," Johnson said. "Take the Michael Vick case, where you have other individuals in charge. Of course, it's happening on his property and he's in another state, and you're trying to prove he's the one responsible. Proving it is sometimes a whole lot different than what we know happened.

"Unless you have factual evidence, it's difficult to prove it."

[Bearcat729]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

can they use a cat instead? I'm for that.

You mean like this?

hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ray5rtU87o

hxxp://www.snopes.com/photos/advertisements/sportka.asp

The video clip starts innocently enough: an orange tabby strolling through a suburban neighborhood comes across a small blue automobile parked in a driveway. As the cat watches, the vehicle's sunroof enticingly slides open; the curious feline hops onto the car's hood, then runs up the windshield and pokes its head into the open sunroof the see what's inside. But what happens next is horrifying: the sunroof automatically begins to close again, trapping the cat by its neck. As the tabby struggles furiously to extricate itself, the sunroof lid slices off its head, and the viewer sees the decapitated body slide to the ground.

The video doesn't show any blood or gore; the horror comes purely from what it depicts. If the clip were intended as, say, a public service announcement warning car owners about the dangers of leaving sunroofs open, it might even be tolerable. But what has angered and outraged legions of cat fanciers is the revelation at the end of the video clip that it's an advertisement for a car — the Ford SportKa, billed as "The Ka's Evil Twin."

How could one of the world's leading automobile manufacturers be so out of touch with the public sensibilities to think that a clip showing one of its cars slicing off a cat's head would be effective (or even an acceptable) advertisement? Sometimes companies are willing to embrace the outrageous for publicity's sake, but it's hard to tell what Ford was thinking in this case — the controversy has prompted the familiar response (used by Nokia last year to disclaim a similar clip) of blaming an advertising agency for going ahead with a concept the client didn't approve and proclaiming shock that the concept was fully developed into a finished spot anyway (and then somehow "leaked" to the Internet):
Ford's European operation and Ogilvy & Mather, its advertising agency, began an investigation into how a proposed ad — which both insisted had been rejected — had begun circulating on the Internet.

The car maker said the advert was conceived as part of a "viral" campaign, where short videos are released on to the Internet and redistributed by e-mail, as people find them funny. But it insisted it was not meant to be developed. As an alternative, a clip showing a comedy pigeon being thwacked by the bonnet, had been chosen.

"It was done as a proposal somewhere deep down in the bowels of the agency," Ford said. "As soon as we saw it we said absolutely not. We are appalled — this is not something we want to be associated with."

"A full investigation has been ordered by Ford and Ogilvy to determine how this unapproved material found its way into the public domain," said a spokesman for Ford. "The action in the video clip was totally computer generated — no animal was harmed."
However, some cynics have suggested that nothing "backfired," and Ford got exactly what it wanted — an effective "viral marketing" campaign that attracted a good deal of attention to their new SportKa model through the controversy it generated:
[O]ne advertising executive insisted that Ford was protesting too much. "No publicity is bad publicity and the cynical part of me thinks that this 'leaking' was intended all along," he said. "It's got them terrific media coverage, after all."
The alternative concept supposedly chosen by Ford — a clip that shows a SportKa's hood automatically flying open to deflect (and kill) a pigeon attempting to land on it — was found scarcely less offensive by animal rights groups.

For those concerned about the cat depicted in the SportKa clip, Ford maintains: "The action in the video clip was totally computer generated, and we would like to assure you that no animal was harmed in its making."

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Bearcat729

You mean like this?

hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ray5rtU87o

lol

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Bearcat729

You mean like this?

hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ray5rtU87o

I don't find that funny at all.

*shurg*

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by KWhit

I don't find that funny at all.

*shurg*

Me neither.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Bearcat729

You mean like this?

hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ray5rtU87o

That is a very sad response.

[nole4sho]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Am I the only one who wishes Noop would just say what the fuck is on his mind instead of these cryptic three word statements?

I am sure if he said what he really felt he would be banned. I am sure he agrees with most if not all of what you all have been saying...

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by nole4sho

I am sure if he said what he really felt he would be banned. I am sure he agrees with most if not all of what you all have been saying...

Is it just me, or do these two sentences contradict each other?

[KWhit]

Yeah. That confused me too.

[Axxon]

Here's a hypothetical that I thought of when reading the following quote.

If Vick is convicted of conspiracy to engage in illegal gambling, the federal guidelines call for a sentence of between 10 and 16 months, Sadow said, noting the sentence can be split with a term of prison and home confinement. If Vick were to plead guilty and accept responsibility for this offense, Sadow said, his potential sentence under the guidelines would drop to six to 12 months.

Now, if he if he were sentenced to house arrest and he then were to buy the Georgia Dome and then live there would he be able legally to play in home games?

[Fidatelo]

I don't get what a quote about trouble shooting service problems has to do with Michael Vick, or how it led you to ponder the Georgia Dome thing.