Digging the hole ever deeper

So Michael Vick is back in the news again, and yet again, it's for the wrong reasons.

I have linked to a reasonable, but incomplete AP article on the fact that Vick is being targeted by federal authorities again. This time for illegally dipping into MV7's, his company's, pension plan to the tune of $1.7 million in order to benefit himself. Those benefits included using at least a portion of the money to pay restitution ordered as part of his dog fighting conviction/plea.

As the trustee of a company's pension plan, this is a big federal no no.

The AP story fails to mention how. So let's address that...

When Vick entered his plea to the dog fighting charges, he was a first time offender, and as such, got off with a light sentence based on sentencing guidelines. Now the U.S. Department of Labor is alleging that Vick, in order to address one federal offense, committed a second one. The law that Vick allegedly violated is US Code: Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 31, Section 664 and reads as follows -

Any person who embezzles, steals, or unlawfully and willfully abstracts or converts to his own use or to the use of another, any of the moneys, funds, securities, premiums, credits, property, or other assets of any employee welfare benefit plan or employee pension benefit plan, or of any fund connected therewith, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

As used in this section, the term “any employee welfare benefit plan or employee pension benefit plan” means any employee benefit plan subject to any provision of title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

It is interesting to note that Vick's bankruptcy does not absolve him of his fiscal responsibility to any pension plan he set up for his employees. And, if the allegation is true, Vick, in essence, stole $1.7 million from his employees, apparently with the aid of two of his fiscal advisers.

This severely complicates things going forward for Vick. According to the AP report -

Vick's plan for paying his creditors is based largely on his intention to resume his NFL career. Vick was suspended indefinitely after his 2007 indictment, and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has said he will review Vick's status after he is released.

The Falcons still hold the contract rights to Vick but have said they will try to trade him. Vick's bankruptcy plan would allow him to keep the first $750,000 of his annual pay. After that, a percentage would go to his creditors based on a sliding scale.

In essence, Vick's future earnings are already being garnished to pay off his debts and the plan is based on the idea that he will return to playing football. As if Goodell didn't have enough ammo in regards to Vick between the dog fighting, lying to the NFL, and getting nailed for drug use while awaiting trial, now there's this. With this additional violation of federal statute, not only does it allow Roger Goodell to extend the suspension, it also looks like there may very well be additional jail time for Vick, whose stupidity seems to know no bounds.

And before I have the occasional meat-head that yells that it's a racial thing and the government is just trying to keep a black man down, let's remember that Randy Moss, Terrell Owens, and Warren Moon have all done quite well in spite of their bone-headed moves, and none of them ended up in jail.

The Pundits' Double Standards

After the Goodell-Walsh meeting on Tuesday regarding Spy-Gate, ESPN went on the offensive...full bunker mentality.

Their NFL Today program went off full-bore talking to Chris Carter and Mark Schlereth about whether or not the punishment of the Patriots was severe enough. Both went on a tirade about how the punishment wasn't enough given what the film showed.

What the film showed was nothing more than standard coach footage inter-spliced with the coaches signals and time on the clock.

I could put that together based on television broadcasts.

Not quite the same angles, but I could still get formations, personnel packages, clock time, and coaching signals from the various networks. If I wanted end-zone angles, I could easily create a computer generated model for that would show me the same play from other angles.

Carter and Schlereth both condescended to the fans, saying that the untrained eye wouldn't understand the advantage a team could gain from this.

I watched.

What I saw, like I said, was film that would give me pretty much what i would get from a standard coach's film combined with the notes that are typically garnered from the non-electronic spying that the teams engage in all the time.

As for Schlereth's rhetoric - Noted at profootballtalk.com:

Indeed, let’s consider this quote from Schlereth, which he offered up on ESPN Radio on Tuesday afternoon: “This besmirches to the organization to the point where regardless of how you look at these three championships that they’ve won over the last seven, eight years you will still always look at them and say ‘Yeah, but . . . they had this Spygate thing, how much of it was inappropriate, how much cheating went on, and how much did it help them during the course of some of those games?”

I thought him talking about how the Patriots' dynasty would always be tainted was a bit disingenuous considering he earned two of his Super Bowl rings for a Broncos squad that was not only caught filming opponents, but was in violation of the salary cap by close to $30 million in both of the Super Bowl seasons. If he thinks the Pats' punishment wasn't severe enough for filming, I'd love to hear what he thinks the penalty should be for his Broncos that were guilty of the same violation and an additional one that was meant to give the team a competitive edge.

Considering the cap in 1998 was $52.4 million in 1998, that means that the Broncos were over the cap by almost 60 percent. SIXTY PERCENT! What buys you a bigger advantage? A coaching tape with hand signals, or the fact that you don't have to cut players that know the system inside and out and replace them with younger players unfamiliar with the system because your team is paying 157 percent of what every other team is paying their players? The Broncos claimed that there was no competitive advantage in the $29 million "accounting gaffe" that largely involved John Elway and Terrell Davis' contracts. But the league fined them $950 thousand and a third round draft pick back in 2004 for the violations in the late 1990's.

As I rant here, I think it's important to note that ESPN has worked hard to destroy its own journalistic credibility with things like the Barry Bonds love-in last season. Right now the ESPN pundits are putting forth the "if it didn't give the team that much of an advantage then why did they do it" line in their attacks on the Patriots. Why then did the Broncos put forth contracts with hidden deferred monies to their stars in the years in question if it didn't help them?

On ESPN's second face, last year the likes of Buster Olney and Jayson Stark repeatedly fawned over Bonds, argued that they would vote for him first ballot because, "it was just the era, and everyone else was doing it." Supporters like to point out that he hasn't failed a test, the cheating is alleged. They don't like to be countered with the fact that Bonds hasn't disputed a single fact in Game of Shadows. The man's a cheater, admitted to a grand jury. Get over it now.

Today, the station that was ramming Barry Bonds down our throats all last year, calling Roger Clemens the best pitcher ever, and pretty much exonerated Andy Pettitte because he came clean after getting caught, is expressing moral outrage at the actions of the Patriots. Actions that, anyone that can do a little Internet research can find, were perpetrated by Eric Mangini's Jets, the aforementioned Broncos, and even the Miami Dolphins (does it not count if they purchased the tape? It ends up as the same result).

Are the reporters being told by the producers not to dig?

It would make sense, given the moral outrage at the Patriots 52-7 pasting of the Redskins last season. Everybody was talking about winning games like that demanded payback, and that losing teams, losing coaches don't forget about losses like that. It was funny how none of the network or newspaper research departments turned up the one previous meeting between teams coached by Bill Belichick and Joe Gibbs. The Redskins put a 42-17 thrashing on Belichick's Browns in 1991. Yeah, the loser of a blowout remembered. And yeah, payback was a bitch.

I could be wrong, but it certainly seems like the the national outlets are going out of their way to demonize the Patriots. They did something wrong. They got caught. They were punished. Get over it people.

Was it worse than the salary cap violations of the Broncos? No, but there was nowhere near this much outrage. Maybe because by the time it hit for the Broncos, they were six years removed from being any good.

Was it worse than Zach Thomas admitting the 'Phins got the Pats' O-line calls and audibles from a tape the team "bought"? No. But the Dolphins were patted on their back for their ingenuity...maybe because it was one of only six wins Miami had all season.

Was it worse than the Jets taping from the Gillette end zone? No, but the Jets were off to one of the worst starts in football, which developed into a grim season, when they copped to their actions.

Only the Patriots were winning when it happened.

Only the Patriots continue to get vitriol.

But they're not alone in their actions.

For a good read on the subject, check out the commentary at PFT.