OK, let's get real. Who's a WORSE guy. Barry Bonds or Mike Vick?

Question

IF both are found guilty... who is the guy really worth all of your hate and bile?

A man that ruined his own liver and entertained you (and other sports fans) for decades. Yes, he is surly and a social idiot, but at worst all he did was be rude to reporters.

OR

A guy that tortured, maimed, and brutally EXECUTED man's best friend? And worse... bet on it, profitted by it and ENJOYED it.

C'mon... get real. Who is the REAL Villain???

Answer 1

This is no contest. If both people are found to have committed the crimes they are accused of committing, then Vick is the worse of the two. Dogfighting is despicable, cowardly, and absolutely disgusting. Vick should rot in jail for as long as they can put him in for, especially since it appears that he's been in the activity for many years, this wasn't a one-time thing or even a recent thing. He FINANCED the thing.

Answer 2

Prefacing this with the fact that neither has been convicted of anything, though Vick has been indicted federally for his role in the dog fighting ring, I will assume, for the sake of argument that eventually both are found guilty of the allegations against them.

First, Barry Bonds is at the very least an antisocial individual who has not handled himself well with the media or with fans. On that score alone, he is considered a first-class jerk. If he has used a banned foreign substance to enhance his career, and this has allowed him to pass a truly good guy, Hank Aaron, for the career HR title, then he should be shunned by his sport.

However, the harm he has done is to a sport and himself. He has harmed the sport, like many others, by cheating. Yet, in the grand scheme of things, he has not physically harmed anyone or anything but himself.

As for Michael Vick, a federal indictment is damning in that a lot goes into returning a federal indictment that usually bodes badly for the accused. Unlike states or localities, the federal government can bring to bear enormous resources that often cancel out the high priced defense attorneys that I am sure Vick will hire to defend himself.

Further, the crime itself is so absolutely heinous and disgusting that, if convicted, Vick will (as well he should) face the scorn of millions of animal lovers across the nation. He will be a pariah to all those sponsors and the NFL itself. His name will, it ihas not already, become the face of Thug Celebrity.

In my mind, Michael Vick, if found guilty, is the worst case.

Answer 3

Both are jerks, there's no question about that. However, if you're looking for a "bigger" jerk, I think the prize goes to Micheal Vick.

Sure, Bonds may have used Performance Enhancing Drugs but at the time he allegedly used them, they weren't banned by the sport. He's a jerk to fans and he charges $50 for an autograph but he didn't do a major crime.

Vick on the other hand is accused of training animals of maiming and killing other animals. And if they lose, then he is accused of killing them for losing. If he is convicted, he should go to jail. If he is innocent, he is still a jerk for allowing it to happen on his own property. But since this is America, he should be treated as innocent until proven guilty.

It's still to early to completely answer this question.

Answer 4

if your talking about who is the worst guy like a player on his team, i would say barry bonds, becuase i really think that he has done steroids, because from the years 2000-2002 he has 49 homers in 2000, then 73 in 2001, then dropped down to 46 in 2002. thats a little suspisious, but anyway, when you lie to your team, and just the whole baseball league, that is not good sportsmanship. but if you are talking about personal and non team related, michael vick is the guy. he is a great football player and he really is underrated as a player, but he is a criminal and should go to jail for the max number of years (6). i still dont understand how people can fight dogs, and train them to be like that. how is that pleasure, seeing a dog die or get killed. unfortunatly animal cruleity terms are not pushed as hard as they should be. i think that people who do bad things to animals should be put away in prison for a long time. i heard the judge in this case is a no-nonsense judge and he doesnt care if your a star or wat. he should be put in jail for his whole life but that wont happen with the max penilty being 6 years

Answer 5

Vick of course. I agree with the poster who said that what Barry Bonds did hurt himself, that was HIS choice, but what Vick has done to helpless animals was done without their consent

He couldn't even handle a few boo's on the football field without acting like a heathen and giving the fans the finger, what do you think he would do if someone treated him the way he treated these animals? He'd fold and cry like the p***y he is---

He's a crybaby and a scumbag, and he should go to jail and never get out--

Answer 6

Barry Bonds is a saint compared to Mike Vick.

Answer 7

Micheal Vick

Answer 8

I think you pretty much answered your own question perfectly. Assuming both are guilty, Vick's actions are worse because what he did hurt other living things, where as Bonds hurt himself out of greed and selfishness to be a top athelete.

If steroids didn't have the side affects that they do, almost every (if not every) pro athelete would be taking them to achieve maximum performance.

Answer 9

Micheal Vick Because he's proven of Wrong doing , Bonds is proven Nothing wrong, I also say Bonds is Better to the fans then Vick.

Answer 10

Let me say this first, I do think that Vick did these things...however they are not yet proven nor are they facts so I think it's a little too early for this...wait for the trial to hear the evidence...pleanty of people are accused and walk away..doesn't mean they're innocent all of the time, but that's why we do have a court system.