Thursday, February 11, 2016

Goodell praises Vick's progress, said QB had "no intention" of attending parties

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said Michael Vick had "no intention" of attending the Super Bowl parties being promoted under his name and praised Vick's progress this year.

Goodell praises Vick's progress, said QB had "no intention" of attending parties


NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said today he has spoken to Michael Vick three times in the past two weeks and that the Eagles quarterback had "no intention" of attending the Super Bowl parties being promoted under his name.

"He has said that on numerous occasions people have been using his name," Goodell said, clearly implying that it was done without Vick's permission.

Goodell also praised Vick's progress off the field this year.

"We're looking for success stories ... he paid a significant price, and now he's doing the right thing."

More coverage
POLL: Where will Riley Cooper end up?
Download FREE Philly Sports Now app for iPhone!
FORUMS: Could Nick Foles return?
Latest NFL odds
SHOP: Eagles Training Camp sportswear

Goodell, meeting with reporters in Texas, was asked about the dispute over whether or not teams can use the franchise tag to keep star players -- such as Vick -- even with the collective bargaining agreement set to expire.

He didn't have much reassurance for teams, such as the Eagles, who are likely to use the tag.

Goodell said he expects that if NFL Players Association thinks the franchise tag can't be used, that they would challenge "through the normal process."

That likely means taking the issue to the NFL's special master, or including the use of the tag in the ongoing CBA give-and-take. The NFL has said teams can still use the tag, even with the CBA expiring. The NFLPA disputes that.

If the tag is somehow invalidated, the Eagles lose one tool for keeping Vick in green. Working in their favor, though, is that if there is no resolution and a lockout begins, Vick won't be able to sign anywhere else once his contract expires anyway. Expect the issue to become a part of the ongoing bargaining.

It seems unlikely that the tag will go away entirely and that the Eagles would be denied a player protection tool that has long existed, but until the deal is finalized, the situation adds just one more nagging question to an offseason with many already.

Download our NEW iPhone/Android app for even more Birds coverage, including app-exclusive videos and analysis. Get it here. On sale now for just $0.99!

We encourage respectful comments but reserve the right to delete anything that doesn't contribute to an engaging dialogue.
Help us moderate this thread by flagging comments that violate our guidelines.

Comment policy: comments are intended to be civil, friendly conversations. Please treat other participants with respect and in a way that you would want to be treated. You are responsible for what you say. And please, stay on topic. If you see an objectionable post, please report it to us using the "Report Abuse" option.

Please note that comments are monitored by staff. We reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable. Personal attacks, especially on other participants, are not permitted. We reserve the right to permanently block any user who violates these terms and conditions.

Additionally comments that are long, have multiple paragraph breaks, include code, or include hyperlinks may not be posted.

Read 0 comments
comments powered by Disqus
About this blog
Birds' Eye View is the Inquirer's blog covering all things Philadelphia Eagles and the NFL.

Jeff McLane Staff Writer
Zach Berman Staff Writer
Latest Videos:
Also on
letter icon Newsletter