Skip to content

Eagles pull Michael Vick from ESPN interview

vick

Once again, Michael Vick has failed to honor a commitment.

Vick was scheduled to appear today on ESPN First Take, which is being filmed in front of a live audience at ESPN the Weekend at Disney’s Hollywood Studios. But near the end of the show, First Take host Dana Jacobson said Vick wouldn’t be coming.

“We have some bad news,” Jacobson said, speaking both to the assembled fans at ESPN the Weekend and the viewers at home. “We were supposed to have an interview with Michael Vick, we’ve been telling you about it, and sadly the Eagles actually pulled the interview, is what I’m being told. In all honesty, we were looking forward to talking to Michael about what has been a turnaround season for him and what has been a rough few years and getting to some other stuff.”

With that, the fans in attendance booed. Jacobson’s co-host Jay Crawford said, “We’ve been Oprah’d,” a reference to Vick pulling out of an interview with Oprah Winfrey last month.

Jacobson’s phrasing was interesting. She said, “The Eagles actually pulled the interview.” When Vick pulled out of the interview with Winfrey, it was clear that the Eagles didn’t want him to do the interview, even though everyone tried to spin the decision as Vick’s alone. Jacobson didn’t hide the fact that the Eagles were the ones who canceled this interview.

But it’s hard to understand why the Eagles would tell one of their players to bail on a commitment to ESPN, a company that’s preparing to pay the NFL roughly $1.5 billion a year, which translates to about $47 million a year to the Eagles. The money ESPN pays to the NFL for Monday Night Football doesn’t necessarily purchase better access for ESPN, but in general NFL teams like to maintain good relationships with ESPN. Apparently the Eagles think shielding Vick from questions is worth potentially angering the league’s biggest business partner.

This is at least the third recent instance of Vick bailing on a commitment, including the Oprah interview and the failure to show up to a charity event this week. For all the talk that Vick is a changed man since getting out of prison, it sure doesn’t seem like he’s become a man of his word.

UPDATE: The Eagles say the Maxwell Club booked Vick on ESPN without his or the team’s consent, and the team calls the claim that they pulled Vick off ESPN “ridiculous.”

Permalink 57 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Philadelphia Eagles, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors
57 Responses to “Eagles pull Michael Vick from ESPN interview”
  1. chatham10 says: Mar 4, 2011 12:13 PM

    I remember everybody sick and tired of hearing from and about Brett Favre, I’m now sick and tired of hearing about Vick who still has not accomplished a thing outside of getting a job when he got out of prison.

  2. smfowler says: Mar 4, 2011 12:14 PM

    Cue the Michael Vick apologist and trolls.

  3. iced107 says: Mar 4, 2011 12:15 PM

    “For all the talk that Vick is a changed man since getting out of prison, it sure doesn’t seem like he’s become a man of his word.”

    ————————————————-

    Does the phrase “You can polish a turd but its still a turd” ring any bells?

  4. chapnastier says: Mar 4, 2011 12:19 PM

    Until I hear something that says Vick actually had something to do with this then I blame the Eagles for this screw up. Of course the fact that they continue to shield him from any media appearance that might actually throw something other than slow pitch softball type questions, it begs the question as to how much faith they have in him as a person.

  5. vicktator says: Mar 4, 2011 12:19 PM

    MDS, the bieber of sports writers, you are trying to stir the pot, we understand that you do not like vick, but posting 3 vick articles a day makes you seem kinda obsessed, vick couldnt go to the bathroom without you posting an article about why that means he hasnt changed

  6. seanmmartin says: Mar 4, 2011 12:19 PM

    Are the Eagles hiding something wrong with his physical appearance?

  7. dgforreal says: Mar 4, 2011 12:20 PM

    Meh, nothing wrong with wanting to be out of the spotlight for a change. Not like we haven’t been clubbed over the head with Vickcentric stuff all season long.

    Dudes made major strides, no need to parade him around anymore telling his story. Save that for a book or something, the NFL is facing a crisis that’s bigger than one player these days and I think it’s best that that remains the focus.

  8. nkasuku says: Mar 4, 2011 12:21 PM

    I think the last comment regarding Vick as a changed man is at best nonsensical, and at worst a cheap shot.

    The article goes to great lengths to lay blame at the feet of the Eagles for Vick’s failure to honor recent commitments. Yet, it closes with some intimation that Vick isn’t really a changed man, since he can’t keep his word. If this is all on the Eagles, than how does Vick bear any of the blame?

  9. mharenza says: Mar 4, 2011 12:21 PM

    Out of those three commitments, the only one that should be news worthy is failing to show up at a charity event. If anything, Vick should stop agreeing to do interviews with the media period. Obviously the Eagles do not want to expose him to certain questions more so than he already has been. Personally, I do not blame the Eagles at all particularly with the tools they have on that show. Seriously, when did Skip Bayless quit being a journalist and fall prey to stupid gimmicks?? ESPN is harder and harder to watch everyday. Although they revolutionized sports, they are single handedly ruining sports now.

  10. vdaigglesfan says: Mar 4, 2011 12:26 PM

    Bleep ESPN. The NFL will eventually ram NFL Network down the cable operators throats. Then they’ll go pay per view. All pro sports leagues will have their own networks and ESPN will then be the network for demolition derbies and lumberjack competitions.

    Eagles protecting an asset that everyone is waiting for an aha moment to then throw to the dogs. (Fill in umteenth outraged Vick comment here).

  11. chin35char says: Mar 4, 2011 12:26 PM

    According to Jeff McLane, he couldn’t do the interview because the Maxwell Awards are running late. Good reporting guys.

  12. imnice777 says: Mar 4, 2011 12:27 PM

    Ok PFT, so you say he “bailed on a commitment” …then you point out how it was the Eagles decision to pull him, then you claim he is “not a man of his word.” …seriously? What sense does that make? Maybe you should realize…if an NFL team doesn’t want their team leader and QB to do something, they aren’t going to risk their job for a little appearance and more than likely irrelevant questions that have nothing to do with football.

  13. midniterambler7 says: Mar 4, 2011 12:28 PM

    The way this has been going with Vick recently, he almost appears to be a man that is hiding something new. What has yet to be unturned with this individual?

  14. milburg2 says: Mar 4, 2011 12:28 PM

    I could care less about Vick but with that being said, if my boss, who pays me over a million dollars tells me to do something I’m going to do it. “Cancel an interview at the last second? Yes Sir!” “Don’t have anymore parties at Clubs? No problem!” “Go speak to neighborhood kids? If you say so.”

    Lets not pretend we wouldnt do the same thing if our bosses told us not to be somewhere. Save face and get on the bad side of my boss or be a flake and not risk my future big payday? Hmmm…

  15. nickynick04 says: Mar 4, 2011 12:31 PM

    Seriously who cares

  16. georgegabriel9 says: Mar 4, 2011 12:34 PM

    Why start an article with how Michael Vick himself failed to honor a commitment and then actually spend the entire article talking about how it was the Eagles that pulled him out of it, not Vick?

  17. realitypolice says: Mar 4, 2011 12:36 PM

    What are they afraid he’s going to say?

    I mean, I could see he and the team wanting to duck Oprah- because that looked like an animal lover ambush.

    But a live spot on First Take at ESPN the weekend? If any crowd in the world would be capable of lacking the perspective to see Vick as anything but a sports hero, it would be the fanboy mob that travels to Orlando every year to gawk at ESPN talking heads.

    You would think he would go out of his way to show up and soak in the adulation from that crowd.

  18. alltimeballa says: Mar 4, 2011 12:36 PM

    It is absolutely incredible to see what end you will go in order to take a story about The Eagles and make it about Mike Vick. I do understand that he is a “hot topic” but this is sensationalism at best and a non story as it relates to Mike Vick.

    Your own recap of the story said that the Eagles pulled Mike Vick from the interview. If Mike were to tell the Eagles to shove it and do the interview anyway, then the story would be about him thinking he’s above his team. You guys are quickly starting to rival Star magazine or the National Enquirer.

    I am sure that there is also a Cam Newton story that you can write as well…..gotta make sure to touch the nerve of all those who believe that pitbulls have more value than humans as well as those who don’t want to give a young man the same chance that they would want their sons to have.

    I am in no way an apologists for either of these men but it would be nice if you didn’t twist facts to generate a story.

  19. theRichardofCFT says: Mar 4, 2011 12:39 PM

    @MDS

    Two things

    1. You’re article states that…

    “Eagles pull Michael Vick from ESPN interview”

    2. Then your very first sentence is…

    “Once again, Michael Vick has failed to honor a commitment.”

    So was it Vick, as you like us to believe,or the Eagles who pulled the interview?

    @smfowler

    Vick plead guilty three years ago, let it go, it’s not healthy. Seems to me like you’re the one trolling.

  20. newagerocker says: Mar 4, 2011 12:39 PM

    I think The Eagles did the right thing. Why keep sending him out with a bulls-eye. Let him focus on football and talking to kids for a while. No sense of hanging him out to dry constantly, nothing good will come from it. And no, I’m not an apologist. I just think the team made the right decision.

  21. bdert says: Mar 4, 2011 12:39 PM

    The Eagles want their QB to focus on becoming a better football player…not be made a spectacle of…Savvy by them…

  22. virginiaiggle says: Mar 4, 2011 12:41 PM

    So you are telling me the Eagles’ mistreatment of ESPN will cause said network to show fewer Eagles games?

    Hahahahahahaha!

    ESPN will use this “story” to suck in you mediots for Sportscenter from now through September.

  23. wetpaperbag2 says: Mar 4, 2011 12:43 PM

    Speaking only on what was mentioned in this story, how is it that Vick “doesn’t seem like he’s become a man of his word”, when it was already cited that in BOTH TV interviews, the EAGLES pulled the plug?

    Look, I’m not an apologist for Vick, but geez…at least I can separate “public anger” from facts of the matter. I don’t like what Vick did to those dogs any more than anyone else, but in these last three cases of “interviews”, I can’t lay blame on two of them. (It’s still unclear as to WHO was responsible for Vick skipping the kids appearance) even the ESPN host/interviewer was noted as to KNOWING that the Eagles yanked the interview at the last minute. Heck, even the Oprah interview was ACTUALLY pulled by the Eagles too!

    I’m just calling it for what it is. It’s a shame folks try to make “stories” out of stuff like this and try to pin it on him when it’s clear he wasn’t to blame. Only convict a man of being guilty for what HE has done; not for what you would LIKE him to be guilty of.

  24. footballpoetry says: Mar 4, 2011 12:46 PM

    I hope “I’ve been Oprah’d” makes its way to contemporary slang.

  25. cereal blogger says: Mar 4, 2011 12:49 PM

    To quote Rick James….
    “Cocaine is one hell of a drug”

  26. enrgy2burn says: Mar 4, 2011 12:52 PM

    i can’t say i blame vick for the oprah or espn things other than to say he should stop overcommitting himself or check with his employer, if he’s going to allow them to pull the strings, before making such a committment. i wonder mostly why the eagles would pay a guy over $16M for the 2011 season when they can’t trust him to make his own decisions on which interviews to do or not do.

  27. edgy says: Mar 4, 2011 12:53 PM

    smfowler says: Mar 4, 2011 12:14 PM

    Cue the Michael Vick apologist and trolls.

    *********************

    Cue the racists….

    Frankly, I think that the Eagles are worried that they’ll let Skip Bayless do his usual hatchet job on him.

  28. laxer37 says: Mar 4, 2011 12:57 PM

    Not a Vick fan, but if his employer pulled him why is this story blaming Vick?

    If he was willing to do the interview then he held up his end of the agreement.

    Maybe some more information needed to be gathered before writing this story.

  29. deeowens11 says: Mar 4, 2011 12:58 PM

    nkasuku says: Mar 4, 2011 12:21 PM

    I think the last comment regarding Vick as a changed man is at best nonsensical, and at worst a cheap shot.

    The article goes to great lengths to lay blame at the feet of the Eagles for Vick’s failure to honor recent commitments. Yet, it closes with some intimation that Vick isn’t really a changed man, since he can’t keep his word. If this is all on the Eagles, than how does Vick bear any of the blame?

    *******************************************************

    I could not have stated my own feelings any more clearly than this reader did theirs! Great comment. I just feel stupid for allowing the writers on this site win. They know what they’re doing and how to generate readers/comments/

  30. lucky5927 says: Mar 4, 2011 12:59 PM

    We as a society need to make a decision. Either he is a guy who has completely rehabilitated his image and changed as a human being, or he is still (somewhat) the same guy and needs to be protected from interviews because he doesn’t know how to answer questions appropriately.

  31. goodjet says: Mar 4, 2011 12:59 PM

    Come on now, lay off him —- I mean the guys a hero — I mean he is a hero right — I mean he keeps getting these hero type awards right —- so that must mean he’s a hero right —- I mean after all he’s doing heroic things like not killing dogs and not burying dogs alive anymore and heroic stuff like that —- And he’s playing QB in the NFL and that makes you a hero —- All right so he can’t ever honor a commitment or anything but hey the guys very busy out there trying to save the world and that can be very draining —- Jeez, I sure know he’s my hero —- I mean my hero used to be my dad but now it’s Vick —- Oh Yeah

  32. laeaglefan says: Mar 4, 2011 12:59 PM

    It seems to me that if the Eagles don’t want Vick to do any interviews they should just tell him so, instead of making it look like he bailed on his commitments.
    Someone should be taking Joe Banner to task for this, not blaming Mike Vick, who is just doing what his employer is telling him to do (or to NOT do, as the case may be).

  33. Deb says: Mar 4, 2011 1:00 PM

    If the Eagles are canceling his interviews, it’s unfair to tag him for failing to meet commitments. But why have the Eagles suddenly become so protective? They let him do several interviews during the season. And if the Eagles don’t want him doing these interviews, why do his people keep scheduling them? At best, it’s sloppy PR. At worst, they’re making people wonder if they’re trying to cover up something.

  34. savocabol1 says: Mar 4, 2011 1:01 PM

    ESPN will still pay billions of dollars no matter how many athletes spurn them. Their defense is outing the reason in public.

  35. medialovesthecowboys says: Mar 4, 2011 1:02 PM

    “But it’s hard to understand why the Eagles would tell one of their players to bail on a commitment to ESPN, a company that’s preparing to pay the NFL roughly $1.5 billion a year, which translates to about $47 million a year to the Eagles.”

    ——————————————————

    You neglect to recognize that BSPN needs the NFL way more than the NFL needs them. The Blowhards will pay that 1.5Bil whether Mike shows up or not.

  36. jfluke65 says: Mar 4, 2011 1:04 PM

    At some point, the circus has to end. Why not now? Just because some in the media think he should be doing interviews? lol. That’s nothing but self-serving thinking on the part of the press.

  37. lawyermalloy says: Mar 4, 2011 1:12 PM

    I thought the team was NOT supposed to have any contact with the players?

  38. broncsfan says: Mar 4, 2011 1:15 PM

    Something tells me ESPN won’t retaliate against the Eagles for that one time their filler of a morning show had to get by without a scheduled interview. If ESPN had planned to make any headlines out of it, they would have at least slotted it for a Sportscenter segment.

    All that aside, Vick should probably either stop agreeing to interviews or ignore the Eagles’ micromanaging.

  39. bhindenemylines says: Mar 4, 2011 1:27 PM

    On one hand I can see why the eagles want to keep him sheltered from the media; don’t want to take any risks with having their $18 million investment blow up in their face.

    But on the other hand, they knew what they were getting when they signed him. Are they really going to keep such a tight leash on him for the rest of his career in philly? What they are effectively saying to him is “Play football, cash your check, when you’re not on the field shut up and stay in your home”.

    Yes, that might be the right attitude, he is a grown man, not a child. At some point he has to live his life.

  40. duanethomas says: Mar 4, 2011 1:30 PM

    Another Vick non-story. Throughout the story you go on about how The Eagles made him pull-out. Then at the end you show your anti-Vick bias once again, with that last line. This is becoming pathetic and you are losing credibilty by spinning every Vick story as a negative against him. So this weekend there will be 4 more stories about Vick, NOT keeping his word…Its sad.

  41. hedleykow says: Mar 4, 2011 1:31 PM

    Let’s review. 2010 Monday night football, first play goes for 88 yards to WR Jackson for a touchdown. Mr. Vick shows up when it counts. Bank it, baby!

  42. dfeltz says: Mar 4, 2011 1:32 PM

    ESPN asks Vick to come on, Vick agrees. Eagles say no and Vick bails. Both are clearly to blame. This is a Vick issues because HE AGREED. Moving forward, Mikey should just seek permission to do interviews before committing.

  43. weezilgirl says: Mar 4, 2011 1:33 PM

    Hmmmmmmmmmmm. Let’s see..what DID MV DO that is getting him all of this unwanted attention?

    Hmmmmmmmmmmmm. OH, YEAH, I remember now.

    No wonder his “football fillies” don’t want him drawing anymore attention to himself than he has already.

  44. jmt8251 says: Mar 4, 2011 1:35 PM

    It amazing that just because these people said Mike was going to be on the show this writer jumped on it and never looked to see if it was true I was watching the show when they said Vick would be in their Disney Studios today and I knew that was not true because he is in Atlantic City with Andy Reed and Ron Jawarski for the Bell Awards and there are pics showing that on the internet they are doing the pre-award press for tonight anyone who really is aware knew this and I am not a reporter. So either Espn was lying about his whereabouts or they were trying to get a interview over the phone which is always risky. So how is that Vick’s fault? You bigots need to get off his case. This is something they said he did not say he was going to be on first take oh but of course if a white person says something then it has to be true what a bunch of losers. You don’t like the man but you can’t wait to hear what he is saying and doing get your facts straight and research before you right a article.

  45. choice1329 says: Mar 4, 2011 1:45 PM

    I watched the entire show this morning, FirstTake throughout the show announced that Vick was there and would give this interview with them, they even went as far as to show clips of Vick in the past season games. Right until the last minute they were saying he was there, which of course wasn’t true, because Vick is in Atlantic City. It definitely sounds like FirstTake made this screw up not Vick.

  46. bunjy96 says: Mar 4, 2011 1:54 PM

    Maybe Vick should clear any interviews with the front office BEFORE he agrees to them.

    Obviously Vick hasn’t gotten the message yet.

    Maybe someone needs to smack him up the side of the head with a baseball bat to get his attention.

  47. thhalejr says: Mar 4, 2011 1:55 PM

    Referencing the other article on this site, finds that, possibly, Vick nor the Eagles had anything to do with the scheduling of this interview. However, the bigots on the site haven’t commented once on that article or even tried to understand that Michael Vick doesn’t seem to be making commitments for Michael Vick. Others, even outside the Eagles’ organization, appear to be making unilateral decisions concerning his time, with no knowledge of the events being made known to the person until the last minute.

    Most people realize the motives of the writers and commenters on sites like these. No one can change closed minds, and Michael Vick owes not one person anything other than holding up his bargain of doing the “next right thing” in his life. That’s what he appears to be doing, much to the chagrin of many, but there are those of us who realize the degenerative motives of the bigots who will never accept him, no matter his accomplishments.

  48. MannaFromKevin says: Mar 4, 2011 1:59 PM

    Haters gonna hate.

    I’m not even taking a position here on the love/hate Vick debate. Just reading this article objectively., it’s obvious people are just looking for him to make a mistake. Where did Vick do something wrong in this situation? Even if the Eagles did pull him, as this article suggests, how does that become Vick’s fault?

    How do you open this article with, “Once again, Michael Vick has failed to honor a commitment.” It’s not like he promised some little boy suffering from cancer a visit and then didn’t make good. Oh poor ESPN! Boo hoo!

    Nice journalism, asshat.

  49. turk2875 says: Mar 4, 2011 2:05 PM

    ok, for real, what else can you ask Vick at this point to have an interview with him. he’s done hundreds of interviews since getting out and its all the same.

    “do you feel any regret?”

    “what would you change if you can go back?”

    “how often do you think about the dogs?”

    blah, blah, blah

    and its always the same answers. so i dont blame the Eagles or Vick for pulling out, cause quite frankly, its all the same corny questions and answers.

    Vick is, one day, going to snap with all these questions and scream “(bleep) those DAMN DOGS!!!” and i wouldn’t mind that

  50. enrgy2burn says: Mar 4, 2011 2:35 PM

    choice1329 says:
    Mar 4, 2011 1:45 PM
    Right until the last minute they were saying he was there, which of course wasn’t true, because Vick is in Atlantic City. It definitely sounds like FirstTake made this screw up not Vick.
    ————————————————–

    @choice1329 – and Vick was in Virginia when he failed to show up to the charity event (as the organizers anxiously awaited his non-arrival). i guess it was their fault he didn’t show up. i believe that where there is smoke there is fire and vick has had his name attached to alot of things that he has failed to follow through on in the last month or so (super bowl party, oprah, charity event, espn…). it tells me that he says yes to appease people and then makes excuses on how it isn’t his fault… that to me is the same Mike Vick as pre-incrceration… it’s always someone else’s fault!!!

    I can’t understand why the eagles want this guy around!

  51. Robert says: Mar 4, 2011 2:52 PM

    To quote Pee Wee Herman……………….

    “I ment to do that!”

  52. electstat says: Mar 4, 2011 2:54 PM

    Do they really think that Vick not attending an interview is going to hurt the relationship between ESPN and the NFL? Really? The NFL has much bigger issues to deal with than ESPN. If ESPN doesn’t want to be in business with the NFL I’m sure there are a few other stations more than at the ready.

  53. bcalvinmdiv says: Mar 4, 2011 3:20 PM

    It seems to me tnat everyone is wanting to interview Vick so that they can treat him like he owes them an explanation or they want to chastise him like he’s 5. He’s not 5 nor does he owe anyone an explanation. If I were him, I wouldn’t do any interviews until I was good and ready. However, I agree that he shouldn’t make commitments he’s not sure he will keep. It makes him look unreliable and that ‘s not a good rep to have.

  54. victorious67 says: Mar 4, 2011 3:31 PM

    How many times does he has to repeat the same story over and over again let it GO….

  55. kinggw says: Mar 4, 2011 8:27 PM

    So Vick misses an interview at the behest of his employer, the people who pay him, and he has done something wrong?

    How about you get off his dick and print a real story? I swear Vick must have banged this guy’s sister or something.

  56. critterkiller33 says: Mar 5, 2011 6:38 AM

    Just send him back to jail….he is guilty of something!

  57. suzanne1957 says: Mar 5, 2011 8:41 PM

    Hold on, hold on. News flash: Mike Vick knew nothing about this interview, until it was over. But even if he did, SO WHAT?! It was media interview, not a job interview, not a football meeting, not a meeting at his kid’s school. Let’s give the guy a break. We don’t need to know everytime he changes his mind about something, or his schedule changes.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!