Is it appropriate for Reebok and Nike to pull Vicks contracts pending his investigation? Isnt he innocent until proven guilty? I mean,..as a dog owner, i am appalled at the accusations, but he deserves a trial. It will be OJ revisited. Just watch.
2007-07-27 16:28:53 · 15 answers · asked by kajun 5 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
and by OJ revisited I meant, IN MY OPINION, the guilty/innocent issue will go right down the race line.
2007-07-27 16:47:34 · update #1
he's making nike and reebok look bad. if you represent a company, you can't do anything that can stain the company name. nike and reebok are smart business companies. they don't want their names to be associated with a criminal. smart..
2007-07-27 16:53:50 · answer #1 · answered by Cheat Sum 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Innocent until proven guilty is for the courtroom, these corporations are not putting Vick behind bars they are simply protecting their image. His civil rights do not include the right to have a major contract with Reebok or Nike. The charges against him are for something no decent human being would ever contemplate doing and whether he is guilty or not it did happen on his property and that is why these corporations want to put as much distance between them and Vick as they possibly can.
2007-07-28 00:04:30 · answer #2 · answered by Marty H 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are dealing with businesses who have a lot of money riding on this. Even the perception of guilt can be very damaging to their business. I feel it is completely appropriate for Reebok and Nike to make this move. If the public perceives Vick as guilty (which is the case) having him promote your product is not exactly a positive way to market your product.
2007-07-27 23:50:52 · answer #3 · answered by msi_cord 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My guess is there was something in the contract stating they will pull the contract if the they feel the person is now a less favorable image in the public..
I think Pepsi did the same with Micheal Jackson and with Madonna when everyone flipped out over one of her videos
2007-07-28 12:06:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
For some reason he has been brought up on these charges. I feel that it is right for these companies to pull his contracts. They have their images to uphold and they have to do what they feel is best for their companies. If he is proven innocent, then the contract(s) can be revisited.
2007-07-28 20:35:14 · answer #5 · answered by tim O 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nike paid $$ to Vick sell sneakers. He ruined his image and now can't sell sneakers for them.
"It's Business - It's not personal" ... from Godfather I.
OJ was not found guilty in the criminal case but found guilty in the civil case...
2007-07-27 23:37:29 · answer #6 · answered by PAPA N 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When dealing with business, it has nothing to do with what is fair, but what makes sense financially. They pulled his contract because the bad press of going on would have cost them $$$$$$.
2007-07-27 23:35:58 · answer #7 · answered by blibityblabity 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yep. By the way, how much does Vick weigh? How many times has he gotten a haircut? Who is his favorite actor? What is his favorite movie? How many cars does he have? What is his favorite car? How many houses does he have? Where will he go on vacation? How many cousins does he have? How much money does Vick spend on shoes in a year? What restaraunt will Vick eat at next? When will Vick eat his next meal? How many fingers does Michael Vick have? Damn, sick and tired of seeing these damn Vick questions. Can't even answer a decent football question, everybody's postin' these dumb vick questions.
2007-07-27 23:38:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
He's quilty, and Reebok and Nike did the right thing
2007-07-28 00:19:19 · answer #9 · answered by Izzy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO!!! Mike Vick is AWESOME!! Hes what makes the NFL fun..i think its stupid cuz a lot of money will be lost...like i only watch football for mike vick cuz hes sweet..
2007-07-28 00:02:08 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋