Who's the Boss?

Today's post is quite long, but I think this topic deserved more space than I've seen it given - which is none at all.

I saw the title of this article by CNN/SI writer Peter King earlier today, and I was not happy to say the least. No, I was pissed. Why? Well if you haven't ventured over there, here is a link to Peter King's latest offering as the Monday Morning QB, entitled "A Boss Betrayed?" When I first saw the title, it was under a picture of Mike Vick, so it didn't take long to figure out who had been betrayed (Falcons' owner Arthur Blank), and who had done the betraying (Vick). Accoriding to King, Blank deserves our sympathy because he "did everything for Vick and got kicked in the groin." I didn't have to read past that line to realize that I wasn't going to like the article, but, for the sake of the blog, I kept reading.

King discussed with Blank about what he would do if he were in Blank's position. King said he'd spend $500,000 on a CIA-level background check on the next would-be-Vick to make sure the team was protected from the possibility that its investment might be lost. To which Blank replied:

"I can tell you we're going to be more thorough in looking into players before we sign them, particularly before we commit a lot of money to them,'' Blank said. "With Michael, I guess looking back now, we should have been concerned about the time he spent away from our facility. When he went home to Virginia, it's like he disappeared. It seems clear now that Michael had a secret life we didn't know about.''

I'll come back to this.

Next, King suggests that Blank should encourage players to stay in Atlanta year-round so that they can in essence keep an eye on them. He adds that the:

Vick story has driven home a point to him that when players leave town, they're sometimes back in the surroundings that led to trouble before they became pros. It's almost for their own good, in many cases (and certainly, as it turns out, it would have been good in this case) that some players cut ties with their past.

I'll come back to this, too.

Then King concluded with this:

The only thing left is for the Falcons, sometime in the next few days, most likely, to forever cut their ties with Vick. "Will you cut Michael Vick whenever this plea deal happens?'' I asked.

"That is unanswerable right now,'' he said.

No, it's very answerable. I think we all know that.

One last point. After the game, I asked rookie coach Bobby Petrino about his philosophy in handling the Vick story with his team.

"When you have a crisis involving one of your players, and this certainly is a crisis, I believe you do three things,'' he said. "You mourn properly, you do something positive for someone deeply affected by the crisis -- someone like Mr. Blank -- then you get back to putting your energies into what was important before the crisis. That's what we've done.''

Nice point by Petrino. I have a feeling it's not much of a Band-Aid for the bloody gash Vick has inflicted, though.

Ok, now it's my turn. It's bad enough that the NFL uses these guys, never giving two sh a hoot about them or where they come from or what they do until something goes wrong, and then they throw them under the bus and sever all ties forever. Then the owners cry woe is me for having believed in this guy and done everything he could. "We should have known, we shouldn't have picked this guy . . . if we had known, we would have thrown him back into the situation he came from. "

Yeah, I'm not buying it. This is the #1 draft pick who had one of the (if not "the") best selling football jersey around the world, one of the most popular and marketable players in the NFL despite his inconsistent (admit it, Falcons fans) performance since he entered the league in 2001, who went from the projects in Newport News, VA (aka "Bad News") to a multi-millionaire in a relatively short period of time. The same guy who could throw a ball clear across a football field (was that real?) . . . and you want us to believe that you actually took an interest in mentoring him or seeking help for this guy when you knew he had some issues even from the very beginning? If you believe that, then why don't you join ex-FEMA director Mike Brown as he spearheads the effort to help the people in New Orleans recover from Hurricane Katrina (just went there and they are still just beginning to recover) ? What's that you say? He hasn't been seen or heard from, at all much less in New Orleans, since he botched the relief effort? Oh.

Plenty of people who are far less "important" than Vick (in the NFL'$ eye$) walk around here with issues and have problems adjusting to a different environment and no one says anything to them. Rather than anyone trying to ease his transition from Bad News to "Good News" (HA!), and actually caring about Mike Vick and [insert names of any other "disappointing" NFLers] we stick them in an environment in which they are destined to fail, throw "opportunity" at them, and then wonder why they can't get it together.

Ok, why can't they? For starters, it is highly likely that our player's - whom I'll call "Superstar" - friends and family are/were still living in Bad News when Superstar "made it out" of wherever he came from. You tell Superstar to associate with better friends now that he has money . . . but people are constantly trying to erode every dollar Superstar takes in, so he trusts the people he's known his whole life, not these new "friends" - as well he should, IMO. But his "boys" from home are seeing dollar signs just like the NFL sees. They may even be jealous of our Superstar, and as close as they may be to him, they resent that they didn't make it like he did. They don't feel bad when they exploit him because, well, that's what friends are for. He makes it, we all make it. Superstar probably had several bumps along the way to his professional career, but no one says anything because he's performing, and that's all we want him to do.

That is, until he makes "the big mistake." Superstar and his friends get into trouble. Had this trouble occurred when Superstar was not, well, Superstar, nobody outside of the neighborhood would have cared, and everyone involved would have probably gone to jail. But wait! Hold on! Superstar was involved in this trouble! Now why would he do that? He had so much money, so much opportunity - why would he do this to himself?

Well, the answer is that he had some help. I can tell you the exact moment the problem began. It started the first time someone looked the other way when he did something inappropriate because he was a "freakish" athlete with "freakish upside potential." Anyone who is judging Mike Vick and calling him anything but his name for ruining his opportunities is being shortsighted. It is just as important to be in a position to take advantage of that opportunity as it is to have it in the first place. Can Arthur Blank and any other coach, athletic director, etc. who encountered Mike Vick truly look himself (or herself, but this is football we're talking about) in the mirror and say that he tried to help that kid take advantage of the opportunity that he had in his grasp?

King's perspective infuriates me for its shortsightedness. Tracking a grown man during the off-season and encouraging him to stay in the city where he plays is not the solution. Neither is paying anyone $500,000 to do a background search on the next prospect? What happens when the search turns up that the prospect - gasp! - grew up in the 'hood? "Good thing we found that out beforehand!"

King's article is nothing but a shameless attempt to absolve Arthur Blank (the man with the money, as King reminds us) from any blame whatsoever in this Vick debacle. Blank even uses the old standby of "copping" to having flaws that aren't really considered flaws (i.e., loving someone too much). Give me a break. You cannot green-light everything your player does, admit that you had no clue what he did in the off-season (which, incidentally, is twice as long as the "on-season"), and then turn on him when it's seemingly safe to do so.

I'll close with this excerpt from this article I found when I was looking for images of Arthur Blank. The article is ironically entitled "The Most Respected CEO," but what I found even more ironic is this quote from Blank himself, after comments regarding how he wooed Warrick Dunn:

In an era of absentee owners and - worse - meddling egocentric tyrants like Al Davis of the Oakland Raiders and George Steinbrenner of the New York Yankees, Blank has become involved in a deeply personal way. "I really am interested in each one of these fellas," he says. "Personally and professionally, in their families and their kids and their interests and their foundations, and how we can help them with their life's work. I care for them. I suffer when they're injured. I wish our fans could be down on the field and see these guys. They go to the locker room and I see the blood, see the throwing up, see the pain. And what you see on the inside is worse. They've laid it on the line for themselves and for their teammates and for the city. It's not about money. They play with a tremendous amount of pride. It's a huge commitment they've made. I came in the day after our last game [a loss at Philadelphia in the playoffs] to say goodbye. I gave 'em each a hug and told them thank you for what you've done for this city; you've turned this community around, made them feel connected again; told 'em I wish there were four-and-a-half million people who could be in this room and give you a collective hug. It's all about caring."

I couldn't agree with you more, Mr. Blank. I would just appreciate it if you would actually practice what you preach.