Almost all teams and the league itself have personal conduct clauses. How those are interpreted, however, often is directly prioportional to the player's value to the team.

In Chad's case with the Fins, he's a past his prime player with no ties really to the team or the community and it wasn't even a sure thing that he would make the team. It was an easy choice for them. Had he been a #1 draft choice to whome the Fins were committed for a few million, I would bet there would be a different story.

On a personal note, this whole situation really saddens me because I have always liked Chad quite a bit. He always struck me as showy, but in a fun and harmless kind of way. His acts of kindness and silliness are legendary: taking random people on shopping sprees or taking crowds wherever he was to the movies or to dinner by posting the details on twitter and saying "first 100 with me" (those were things he would do almost weekly). So I'm hoping that if the details are true (I don't trust anything anyone says anymore) and that he did assault his wife that he pays for that but gets some help for the anger management issues that would allow someone to do that.

I mean, I would probably lose my job if I got into the legal trouble of some of these players. Especially if I had to go to jail, I doubt my job would be waiting for me when I got out.

Does your job have millions of dollars in guanranteed money contracted to to you? Also, can you run a 4.3 40? Can you roll out and avoid several 350 lb men who're faster than most sprinters who want to slam you t the turf? Can you do that while throwing a 30 yard out route to a sprinting receiver across the field who's got just a step on his defender? Can you do all that wearing scads of protective gear? If not, it's pretty silly to compare your job to his.

Honestly. It's silly to compare these guys' jobs to our jobs.

I would wager that if any of us had a talent as specialized as theirs - and one as valuable to our employers and in which our employers had invested so much capital - we would find ourselves in the exact kind of rarified air as they are with the exact kinds of perks that go with that.

Also, Michael Vick did not have a job waiting for him. He lost his job. He got another job after getting our of prison. Because he has the above mentioned talents.

Chad Johnson's arrest and release from the Dolphins has some talking about the behavior of professional athletes. Do you think teams should hold their players to some kind of "behavior standard"? Do you think releasing athletes who violate any policy on such a standard would lead to less thug behavior?

I believe they should be held to a standard...100%. I mean, I would probably lose my job if I got into the legal trouble of some of these players. Especially if I had to go to jail, I doubt my job would be waiting for me when I got out.

I was horrified that Michael Vick was able to play again. These people are looked up to by so many young klds, what kind of message are they sending them? We already have enough influence on kids to be thugs and it being glamorized by TV and music..

I don't have an issue with Michael Vick playing again. He broke the law. He paid his debt to society. Good for him that he still has the skill set to compete in the league and provide for his family. What message is he sending? If you break the law you will go to jail. If you are lucky you might get a second chance when you get out.

I believe the teams that allow them to play are sending a message to kids that you can be a total scumbag and still get your way. If anything, their talents are the biggest reason they SHOULDN'T be allowed to comeback. They are basically saying, "you did something most people would find unforgivable, but because you have a talent we will overlook it." Do you feel that's an appropriate role model for kids?

Chad Johnson's arrest and release from the Dolphins has some talking about the behavior of professional athletes. Do you think teams should hold their players to some kind of "behavior standard"? Do you think releasing athletes who violate any policy on such a standard would lead to less thug behavior?

I believe they should be held to a standard...100%. I mean, I would probably lose my job if I got into the legal trouble of some of these players. Especially if I had to go to jail, I doubt my job would be waiting for me when I got out.

I was horrified that Michael Vick was able to play again. These people are looked up to by so many young klds, what kind of message are they sending them? We already have enough influence on kids to be thugs and it being glamorized by TV and music..

I don't have an issue with Michael Vick playing again. He broke the law. He paid his debt to society. Good for him that he still has the skill set to compete in the league and provide for his family. What message is he sending? If you break the law you will go to jail. If you are lucky you might get a second chance when you get out.

I believe the teams that allow them to play are sending a message to kids that you can be a total scumbag and still get your way. If anything, their talents are the biggest reason they SHOULDN'T be allowed to comeback. They are basically saying, "you did something most people would find unforgivable, but because you have a talent we will overlook it." Do you feel that's an appropriate role model for kids?

Are you suggesting that a convicted felon that has paid their debt to society not be permitted to work when they get out? What is acceptable work for a convicted felon that is no longer in prison? Are you suggesting a convicted felon that has paid his debt to society and has stayed clean cannot be a good role model for kids?

I am my children's role model but if they asked about Michael Vick I would tell them he did some very bad things and paid for them. Don't do what he did, unless it's signing a million dollar sports contract!

Oh btw... My family volunteers at the local humane society. We are failed foster's (meaning we adopted our last foster). We hate what Vick did but don't wish a career death sentence on him.

Do you feel that's an appropriate role model for kids?

I hope that my daughter is not so bereft of role models that she feels the need to seek out professional athletes.

As a parent I will encourage my daughter to look in other directions for role models and don't think that just because someone has national exposure that they are a role model or should have to live like one. I find the idea patently ridiculous. Why should someone have to live their life according to someone else's moral code simply because they worry that a child somewhere might look up to them?

Are you suggesting that a convicted felon that has paid their debt to society not be permitted to work when they get out? What is acceptable work for a convicted felon that is no longer in prison? Are you suggesting a convicted felon that has paid his debt to society and has stayed clean cannot be a good role model for kids?

You didn't ask me.......but when has that ever stopped me? :laugh:

I can't endorse any kind of system-wide rule that would prevent Michael Vick from working after he finished his sentence.

However, I wish that (engage fantasy mode, I realize this isn't the society we live in) our collective outrage would have been enough for the sports teams/advertisers to run, fast, in the other direction from Mr. Vick. Just like Wheaties did when they realized Tiger didn't fit the image they desired, and he lost that endorsement.

He broke a law. He served his sentence. And, imho, the punishment wasn't severe enough when compared to the crime. And it was horrifying to me to see how prevalent the idea was at the time, that went something like this: "oh it was just some dogs. people are overreacting. plus he can really play football well and his poor team will be sad"

Animal cruelty is WAY up there, on my list of most horrible things someone can do. It's not equal to some of the horrors humans inflict upon each other, but the helplessness of animals causes me to react very strongly to any stories about animal cruelty. If my viewpoint were more common, I believe Vick would never have worked again, not because he was prevented by any rule, but because the bad PR would have caused everyone to shy away.

(shutdown fantasy mode), I understand not everyone feels the way I do about animals.

What do you mean "thug" behavior?! There are men in high society who have committed domestic violence. I am amazed at the hasty generalizations of people in a certain demographic.

"Thug life". You know, going to night clubs with guns, getting in fights, beating up their wives or girlfriends, drinking and driving, etc. Dressing, acting, and embracing "thug life". I don't care how much money someone has or if they're in "high society". Thug life is thug life.

I’m sorry but that is pure ignorance
So you are saying anyone who has ever been in a fight is engaged in "thug life", any individual that has ever beating on a significant other or female for that matter is engaged in "thug life". Any person who has ever drinks and drives is engaged in "thug life" (then every college student in this nation are thugs). What do you mean by dressing and acting, what does that mean. Do you mean dressing like America's idea of an inner city African Americans or hip-hop artist? Moreover, do even know what "thug life is thug life”, do you what that means. Do you actually know someone who is a thug, or is this your assumption based on what you think it is from music videos and exaggerated media outlets.

If you’re going to talk about one individuals action which is classified as domestic violence, not actions of a so called "thug", then yes it is shameful and not to be grouped into a small minded idea of what you think to be thug life. Any person regardless of race, ethnicity, background, and career is capable of domestic violence and should not be taken lightly.

(Here we go) . I don't think race was mentioned by the OP. I think it's pretty ignorant to even involve that at all. If your view of thug life relates to the hip hop culture, that's on you. To others, since you mention race, thugs might be the KKK, Neo Nazis, The Taliban, MS XIII, The Drug Cartels, Koney, and so on and so on. So, look else where for that debate. Also, use Websters Dictionary and define thug for us all. You might learn something.

What do you mean "thug" behavior?! There are men in high society who have committed domestic violence. I am amazed at the hasty generalizations of people in a certain demographic.

"Thug life". You know, going to night clubs with guns, getting in fights, beating up their wives or girlfriends, drinking and driving, etc. Dressing, acting, and embracing "thug life". I don't care how much money someone has or if they're in "high society". Thug life is thug life.

I’m sorry but that is pure ignorance
So you are saying anyone who has ever been in a fight is engaged in "thug life", any individual that has ever beating on a significant other or female for that matter is engaged in "thug life". Any person who has ever drinks and drives is engaged in "thug life" (then every college student in this nation are thugs). What do you mean by dressing and acting, what does that mean. Do you mean dressing like America's idea of an inner city African Americans or hip-hop artist? Moreover, do even know what "thug life is thug life”, do you what that means. Do you actually know someone who is a thug, or is this your assumption based on what you think it is from music videos and exaggerated media outlets.

If you’re going to talk about one individuals action which is classified as domestic violence, not actions of a so called "thug", then yes it is shameful and not to be grouped into a small minded idea of what you think to be thug life. Any person regardless of race, ethnicity, background, and career is capable of domestic violence and should not be taken lightly.

(Here we go) . I don't think race was mentioned by the OP. I think it's pretty ignorant to even involve that at all. If your view of thug life relates to the hip hop culture, that's on you. To others, since you mention race, thugs might be the KKK, Neo Nazis, The Taliban, MS XIII, The Drug Cartels, Koney, and so on and so on. So, look else where for that debate. Also, use Websters Dictionary and define thug for us all. You might learn something.

Well that’s my might point, thug life doesn't constituent someone beating on his wife, so we shouldn't attach that to this incident. It’s not a race thing. It wasn’t my position to discuss race, my assumption was that since the initial post mention both two African American athletes that the cogitation was being associated with race. My mistake. And my view isn't that thug life is assoicated with the hip hop culture that is so far from my belief. The real issue is about domestic violence and how our society at times overlooks people down falls.

I'm sorry, but there are plenty of talented folks out there that can play football... and contrary to popular belief, sports are not the be all and end all to life... We have players beating their wives, and mothers (Dez Bryant.. albeit alledgedly) and engaging in illegal activity... and I do believe that leaves an impression on young minds... same with Chris Brown and his beating Rihanna and throwing furniture out of windows.... It's a sad sad day when we allow behavior like this to happen as a society because... "Aw! What the hell! They play good football!" or put on a good show or whatever.... Yeah, they paid their debt to society... but so have many other ex-cons that aren't famous and they have trouble getting a minimum wage jobs for less than what these guys do... yet because they put on a good show, it's ok and they can get paid the big bucks for it.

there are not "plenty" of people that can play pro football. that is why they get paid millions.

its the same for any job where someone is highly skilled.

They are paid the millions because they are an advertising tool (and because they have good agents)... Once their usability as a walking billboard is up so are the millions. I'm pretty sure Manny Ramirez isn't going to be making the big bucks playing for the Minor Leagues (granted his talent may be drug induced, but he is the only guy I can think of right now)... And a lot of people around here question Romo's ability on the field... but yet, he is still playing... again, because he makes a good billboard (and the Jerry likes him). Yes, some do have massive amounts of talent.... but it doesn't mean much if their images can't be sold. Even Tiger Woods personal profits plummeted when his infidelity scandal came about... granted he is still one rich mother... but companies dropped him like a hot potato...

Whether it "reforms" players or not, it is in a team's best economic interest to send the message to their fans that they will not tolerate or condone behaviour like that.

It's in a teams best economic interests to win games. To do that you recruit and pay the most talented players and coaches you can.

You can have the greatest collection of scholar/athlete/anbassadors for the game but if they don't win the team loses money. It's why Michael Vick got a second chance: he's that good that he gives his team that much more of a chance to win. It's why Chad Johnson got cut: he's considered past his prime and the negativity outweighed the positives (also, he was playing for a first-year coach who saw a prime cahnce to set an example). It's why Dez Bryant and Elvis Dumervil and Nick Fairley and Adrian Peterson and Rey Maualuga are not sweating their arrests this year on various charges: they're stars. Their value to their team outweighs the negatives.

It has always been this way in professional sports. If your value to the team is judged to be great enough, you get a pass. Hell, Ray Lewis stabbed a guy to death in a parking lot and he's still revered.

Al Davis' old adage will always ring true in professional sports: just win, baby. There's too much money involved nd the stakes are too high.

Chad Johnson's arrest and release from the Dolphins has some talking about the behavior of professional athletes. Do you think teams should hold their players to some kind of "behavior standard"? Do you think releasing athletes who violate any policy on such a standard would lead to less thug behavior?

I believe they should be held to a standard...100%. I mean, I would probably lose my job if I got into the legal trouble of some of these players. Especially if I had to go to jail, I doubt my job would be waiting for me when I got out.

I was horrified that Michael Vick was able to play again. These people are looked up to by so many young klds, what kind of message are they sending them? We already have enough influence on kids to be thugs and it being glamorized by TV and music..

I don't have an issue with Michael Vick playing again. He broke the law. He paid his debt to society. Good for him that he still has the skill set to compete in the league and provide for his family. What message is he sending? If you break the law you will go to jail. If you are lucky you might get a second chance when you get out.

I believe the teams that allow them to play are sending a message to kids that you can be a total scumbag and still get your way. If anything, their talents are the biggest reason they SHOULDN'T be allowed to comeback. They are basically saying, "you did something most people would find unforgivable, but because you have a talent we will overlook it." Do you feel that's an appropriate role model for kids?

Are you suggesting that a convicted felon that has paid their debt to society not be permitted to work when they get out? What is acceptable work for a convicted felon that is no longer in prison? Are you suggesting a convicted felon that has paid his debt to society and has stayed clean cannot be a good role model for kids?

I don't think they should be working in a field where people look up to a good role model. I think the NFL should hold up that standard though, not a law. If they want to get a job where they aren't doing PR events, charity events and volunteering with sick people and children (as many athletes doing) after they kill animals or headbutt their wives and cut their heads open then sure.

I guess we will agree to disagree then. I believe in second chances. I know people that have been given second chances and I would have no problem with my children looking up to them.

With regards to Chad Johnson... He has been an excellent representative of the NFL in his career. As far as I know, he has not had legal issues in the past. One month after he marries a woman whose career requires drama he gets arrested for domestic violence? She said he head butted her. He said she ducked into him and they butted heads. He is so angry at her because she caught him buying a box of condoms? Come on.. I don't buy it. Sucks to be Chad.

Chad Johnson's arrest and release from the Dolphins has some talking about the behavior of professional athletes. Do you think teams should hold their players to some kind of "behavior standard"? Do you think releasing athletes who violate any policy on such a standard would lead to less thug behavior?

I believe they should be held to a standard...100%. I mean, I would probably lose my job if I got into the legal trouble of some of these players. Especially if I had to go to jail, I doubt my job would be waiting for me when I got out.

I was horrified that Michael Vick was able to play again. These people are looked up to by so many young klds, what kind of message are they sending them? We already have enough influence on kids to be thugs and it being glamorized by TV and music..

I don't have an issue with Michael Vick playing again. He broke the law. He paid his debt to society. Good for him that he still has the skill set to compete in the league and provide for his family. What message is he sending? If you break the law you will go to jail. If you are lucky you might get a second chance when you get out.

I believe the teams that allow them to play are sending a message to kids that you can be a total scumbag and still get your way. If anything, their talents are the biggest reason they SHOULDN'T be allowed to comeback. They are basically saying, "you did something most people would find unforgivable, but because you have a talent we will overlook it." Do you feel that's an appropriate role model for kids?

Are you suggesting that a convicted felon that has paid their debt to society not be permitted to work when they get out? What is acceptable work for a convicted felon that is no longer in prison? Are you suggesting a convicted felon that has paid his debt to society and has stayed clean cannot be a good role model for kids?

I don't think they should be working in a field where people look up to a good role model. I think the NFL should hold up that standard though, not a law. If they want to get a job where they aren't doing PR events, charity events and volunteering with sick people and children (as many athletes doing) after they kill animals or headbutt their wives and cut their heads open then sure.

I guess we will agree to disagree then. I believe in second chances. I know people that have been given second chances and I would have no problem with my children looking up to them.

With regards to Chad Johnson... He has been an excellent representative of the NFL in his career. As far as I know, he has not had legal issues in the past. One month after he marries a woman whose career requires drama he gets arrested for domestic violence? She said he head butted her. He said she ducked into him and they butted heads. He is so angry at her because she caught him buying a box of condoms? Come on.. I don't buy it. Sucks to be Chad.

Goes back to women having all the power and such :laugh: