Jump to content





Will Michael Vick be Traded or Released

- - - - -

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
44 replies to this topic

Poll: Michael Vick - Traded or Released? (104 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you think ultimately that Michael Vick will be traded or released?

  1. Traded (44 votes [42.31%])

    Percentage of vote: 42.31%

  2. Released (60 votes [57.69%])

    Percentage of vote: 57.69%

If Traded, what would Falcons receive for Michael Vick?

  1. 2nd round choice (5 votes [4.81%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.81%

  2. 3rd round choice (14 votes [13.46%])

    Percentage of vote: 13.46%

  3. 4th round choice (9 votes [8.65%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.65%

  4. 5th round choice (16 votes [15.38%])

    Percentage of vote: 15.38%

  5. 6th round choice (10 votes [9.62%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.62%

  6. 7th round choice (42 votes [40.38%])

    Percentage of vote: 40.38%

  7. current NFL player (8 votes [7.69%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.69%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 g-dawg

g-dawg

    AFMB Hall of Fame

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,187 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 10:07 AM

I still think it will be very difficult to trade Michael Vick.   It will take a "three sided agreement" because the Atlanta Falcons, another NFL team AND Michael Vick will all have to agree.

Q:  Why does Michael Vick have to agree the trade you ask?    
A:  Well because he has a current NFL contract that is one of the most lucrative in all of the NFL and his market value now is probably less than 20% of the contract - so, to trade Mike means you also are trading his contract and the "assuming team" assumes the contract -

Q:  Will another team want to assume that contract?  
A:  Ummmmmm..........NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!  

Q: So what does that mean?  
A:  It means that Vick will have to agree to take less......

Q:  Will Vick agree to take less money than what is on his contract so the Atlanta Falcons can trade him?
A:  I don't think so......

Q:  Why not you ask?  Vick and his agent has to know that nobody is going to pay him on his existing contract, right?
A:  Of course Vick and his agent know this but they will want to control the situation and get multiple bidders so they can maximize Vick's new contract.   They can only do this if he is a free agent.   Therefore, I do not think they will "help" the Falcons - just my thoughts - could be wrong but this is my theory.   If we do get a pick for Michael,  I would think it would be no higher than a 4th rounder - probably more like a 6th rounder though....

#2 Joremarid

Joremarid

    AFMB Hall of Fame

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28,757 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 10:17 AM

it wont take my vote, but my choice was released.

#3 Statick

Statick

    Falcon Lord

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,331 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 10:18 AM

He'll get released. It'll be cheaper to wait for us to release him and pay him that 7.5 million. No team would want to trade for him and take on that contract or endure the bad press from animal activists, lovers, etc. OR have the news about Vick be the dominate theme in the media moreso than the actual team that he's on. (*see our last MNF game)

If he happens to miraculously get traded, then I would expect we wouldn't get higher than a 5th round pick for him.

P.S. - Man, I hate that guy.

#4 birdonawire

birdonawire

    Roster Player

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPip
  • 646 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 10:30 AM

A team like the 49ers that "badly" need a QB should go after Vick and offers something in a trade to avoid having to compete for him with some other team. No matter what some posters same Vick is a better option at QB for several teams, and then some owners have no guts and are not doing enough to win in the first place.

#5 Bartkowski

Bartkowski

    Genetically Engineered Falcon

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,931 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 10:35 AM

It won't take my vote either but I say released.

#6 g-dawg

g-dawg

    AFMB Hall of Fame

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,187 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 10:59 AM

View PostBartkowski, on May 20 2009, 10:35 AM, said:

It won't take my vote either but I say released.

that is odd....wonder why it won't take some of your votes........I'm sure Al "I wuz wobbed" Gore will protest this outcome since we have "hanging chads"  :rolleyes:

#7 Lowndesfalc

Lowndesfalc

    Starting Lineup

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,128 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 11:03 AM

RELEASED, 7th rounder if trade possible

#8 BruceReville

BruceReville

    Worshipper Of TOFU!

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,110 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 11:05 AM

Seeing as how they tried to trade his rights away once and no one knocked on the door - I say released.

#9 falcon82

falcon82

    Starting Lineup

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,039 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 11:10 AM

It doesn't take the vote if you don't answer both questions.

He'll get cut, since he has no trade value it all ... and I doubt any team will sign him to much more than a vet-minimum 1-year contract. And one thing is for sure, teams won't be lining up for him, since he's a PR nightmare. As owner you need either a strong fanbase that trusts you 100% (don't see one like that in the NFL) or a very desperate one.

#10 Splinter

Splinter

    Rookie

  • Forum Members
  • PipPip
  • 152 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 11:10 AM

Released and then picked up by a team which he will lead to glory for seasons to come while Matt will end up like Ryan Leaf.

We're doomed I say you..doomed!!!

And my hones oppinion, I couldn't care less what happends him, as long as he's not on our roster i'm happy.

#11 birdonawire

birdonawire

    Roster Player

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPip
  • 646 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 12:47 PM

View Postfalcon82, on May 20 2009, 10:10 AM, said:

It doesn't take the vote if you don't answer both questions.

He'll get cut, since he has no trade value it all ... and I doubt any team will sign him to much more than a vet-minimum 1-year contract. And one thing is for sure, teams won't be lining up for him, since he's a PR nightmare. As owner you need either a strong fanbase that trusts you 100% (don't see one like that in the NFL) or a very desperate one.


How do you know this? Most teams feel that he is still under suspension so why trade, also he could not negotiate a new contract while still in prison. Just because no team was publicized as wanting to trade does not mean noone wanted to.

#12 falcon82

falcon82

    Starting Lineup

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,039 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 01:03 PM

View Postbirdonawire, on May 20 2009, 06:47 PM, said:

How do you know this? Most teams feel that he is still under suspension so why trade, also he could not negotiate a new contract while still in prison. Just because no team was publicized as wanting to trade does not mean noone wanted to.

Because it's obvious ... why trade for somebody when I can have him for free, since the owner of the team already said that he won't play for the team again!? Yes, there are some teams who might be desperate enough to give it a try, but without giving up draft picks and for 1year with the veteran minimum as salary ... if he proves himself, they can always give him a new contract, if he doesn't, he's a cheap backup, or it doesn't hurt your cap if you cut him.

#13 DriveHomeSafelyAtlantaWins

DriveHomeSafelyAtlantaWins

    Starting Lineup

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,326 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 01:03 PM

I wonder if Goodell's idea of "showing remorse" might include Vick renegotiating his contract with us so that we can get some compensation by trading him. After all, you could argue that it's the "right thing" for him to do, since he harmed our team by all of this. Without some kind of pressure tied to whether or not he gets reinstated, I don't see why he would renegotiate.

#14 Ghost Rider

Ghost Rider

    Veteran Falcon

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,201 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 01:11 PM

I hope he is traded and I put fifth but I put he will be released because I think his contract will dictate him being untradable. No one will pay that contract right now. I would say Mike would renegotiate to be tradable but he still thinks he can make 10 plus mil a year. That is not happening.

#15 g-dawg

g-dawg

    AFMB Hall of Fame

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,187 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 01:13 PM

View PostDriveHomeSafelyAtlantaWins, on May 20 2009, 01:03 PM, said:

I wonder if Goodell's idea of "showing remorse" might include Vick renegotiating his contract with us so that we can get some compensation by trading him. After all, you could argue that it's the "right thing" for him to do, since he harmed our team by all of this. Without some kind of pressure tied to whether or not he gets reinstated, I don't see why he would renegotiate.

I think Goodell would be "overstepping his bounds" if he put pressure on Vick to renegotiate his deal with the Falcons which would just help the Falcons trade Vick.   I am sure the NFL Players Association would not allow this to happen.

#16 Ghost Rider

Ghost Rider

    Veteran Falcon

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,201 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 01:14 PM

View Postg-dawg, on May 20 2009, 02:13 PM, said:

I think Goodell would be "overstepping his bounds" if he put pressure on Vick to renegotiate his deal with the Falcons which would just help the Falcons trade Vick.   I am sure the NFL Players Association would not allow this to happen.



x2. No way would they allow it.

#17 g-dawg

g-dawg

    AFMB Hall of Fame

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,187 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 01:15 PM

View Postjoremari, on May 20 2009, 10:17 AM, said:

it wont take my vote, but my choice was released.

I chose release myself but still voted that "if traded" it would be for 6th rounder.    The whole reason I did the double poll was so that if you did vote released, you could still vote on the "if traded" what would Falcons get - go back and vote in both!

#18 birdonawire

birdonawire

    Roster Player

  • Pure Football
  • PipPipPip
  • 646 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 01:19 PM

View Postfalcon82, on May 20 2009, 12:03 PM, said:

Because it's obvious ... why trade for somebody when I can have him for free, since the owner of the team already said that he won't play for the team again!? Yes, there are some teams who might be desperate enough to give it a try, but without giving up draft picks and for 1year with the veteran minimum as salary ... if he proves himself, they can always give him a new contract, if he doesn't, he's a cheap backup, or it doesn't hurt your cap if you cut him.


You are right , why trade for him if you can have him for free? The problem is , will you be the only team after him? No one person can answer for all 32 teams or 3 teams. The only guarentee is the Falcons and even that could change. For example the 49ers do need a QB, they wait. some other team's starter gets injured and the backup is a nobody and they make a play for him then his price has doubled. And saying what type of contract that a team would offer is just as bad as saying no team wants him. It's all wishful thinking on your part because you and no oneelse has any idea of what will happen period. So it's not obvious except to the people that hhate him so much they want nothing to happen in a positive way .

View PostDriveHomeSafelyAtlantaWins, on May 20 2009, 12:03 PM, said:

I wonder if Goodell's idea of "showing remorse" might include Vick renegotiating his contract with us so that we can get some compensation by trading him. After all, you could argue that it's the "right thing" for him to do, since he harmed our team by all of this. Without some kind of pressure tied to whether or not he gets reinstated, I don't see why he would renegotiate.


The Commish may want to do just that but the problem is he cannot leagally rule on what is done with a players contract that has already been signed. He can only keep him suspended and if it it only to try to force him to re-negotiate the NFLPA would have him in court in no time. His job is not to dictate contracts but to follow the rules of the CBA.

#19 falcon82

falcon82

    Starting Lineup

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,039 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 01:56 PM

View Postbirdonawire, on May 20 2009, 07:19 PM, said:

You are right , why trade for him if you can have him for free? The problem is , will you be the only team after him? No one person can answer for all 32 teams or 3 teams. The only guarentee is the Falcons and even that could change. For example the 49ers do need a QB, they wait. some other team's starter gets injured and the backup is a nobody and they make a play for him then his price has doubled. And saying what type of contract that a team would offer is just as bad as saying no team wants him. It's all wishful thinking on your part because you and no oneelse has any idea of what will happen period. So it's not obvious except to the people that hhate him so much they want nothing to happen in a positive way .

You can dream all you want ... I did like Vick, before the first clues of his illegal actions came out, he was exciting, but not very good. Now after  sitting around not playing football for so long, all that's left is his athletic ability and well, we don't know how much he was able to do in prison to keep that at a high level. If a GM is stupid enough to cough up a 7t, I'm happy with it, but I seriously doubt it. Or does Al Davis need a QB?

Edit: Just after watching the interviews, to all reporters out there secretly readying the forum: Stop asking everybody about Vick ... this is a new TEAM and not the Mike Vick show.

#20 cocktailcove

cocktailcove

    Roster Player

  • Forum Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 420 posts

Posted 20 May 2009 - 02:04 PM

whatever happens get him off our roster and out of this town.    my god, going to ajc's falcon page is like steping into the Vick version of "being john malcovich".    Whatever has, is and might happen to the dog killer.  F#@k mv, f#@ck ajc.