Comments on: Vick sued for allegedly violating endorsement deal

By: bigbwoy000

bigbwoy000 — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:58:02 +0000

choice1329 says:
May 31, 2012 8:06 PM
tigrrrr says:
May 30, 2012 10:26 PM
vick is such a loser… cant wait till he is tossed
No tgrrr, you are the loser, you make sure you are on top of every article that is written about Michael Vick
————————————-
This from a guy that is on EVERY SITE on the internet where there is a Vick article giving people with a difference of opinion a hard time or calling them names.

With the way you support Vick on any & every site you can find, you either have to be a close personal friend, family or a creepy man crushed stalker.

What’s funny & even more creepy is how sticking up for Vick anywhere & everywhere on the internet apparently makes YOUR life better.

By: choice1329

choice1329 — Fri, 01 Jun 2012 00:06:55 +0000

tigrrrr says:
May 30, 2012 10:26 PM
vick is such a loser… cant wait till he is tossed

No tgrrr, you are the loser, you make sure you are on top of every article that is written about Michael Vick. Not only are you the loser, you are also the poor loser, which is the reason for your dislike of Vick, your comments says it all. You fool no one, not to mention no one cares what you think or how you feel, by now you should know that. Find a job loser, being mad at Vick is not going to make your life any better, and it certainly not going to affect his.

By: dcbassguy

dcbassguy — Thu, 31 May 2012 16:22:39 +0000

If Vick was advanced the money, and has “legal cause” to not fulfill the contract, he’ll be able to keep the money. I’m gonna guess that not many of you guys have ever read a contract, or understand how they work.

By: kappy32

kappy32 — Thu, 31 May 2012 08:18:40 +0000

Ron Mexico is starting to come out again. This guy was always a scumbag & that media blitz he did, saying he was a new person, was nothing more than a charade. A charade just like him ever being a top NFL QB.

By: ajpurp

ajpurp — Thu, 31 May 2012 04:41:58 +0000

It depends on the contact but no matter what there needs to be consideration given, which from the facts here, it appears Vick did not fulfill his end. Therefore, yes you are right he absolutely has good cause to sever terminate the contract, that however, under standard contract law, does not mean he gets to keep the consideration given in return for nothing. That would be ridiculous and simply is not the law, unless the contract was constructed in a way not in conformity with standard contract language and Vick was given, by use of different language, something along the lines of consideration on return for signing with the company or a retainer instead of an advance on future performance on the contract. If it is the latter, Vick will certainly not win, and there is no justifiable argument he can make if this type of standard contract was used.

By: tigrrrr

tigrrrr — Thu, 31 May 2012 02:26:31 +0000

vick is such a loser… cant wait till he is tossed

By: choice1329

choice1329 — Wed, 30 May 2012 23:21:19 +0000

I just wonder how some of you fools would feel had you actually purchased some of the fraudulent merchandise, more than likely you would have blamed that on Vick as well.

By: choice1329

choice1329 — Wed, 30 May 2012 23:16:50 +0000

Jarrod Oldridge has pleaded guilty to mail fraud, which gives Vick another reason to end the deal. He’s still on probation, and thus he can’t associate with known felons.

————————————————-
————————————————-

Do some research before you write articles he’s not on probation anymore.

By: choice1329

choice1329 — Wed, 30 May 2012 23:10:53 +0000

eagleswin says:
May 30, 2012 2:39 PM
bdawk20 says:
May 30, 2012 2:27 PM
I am pretty sure Vick is the right here…

————————————-

You do know that they paid Vick in advance and that all they want is the money they paid him (for services he did not render) back?

They are not looking for punitive damages, they just want their money returned
______________________________________________________________________

So I guess assuming from your comment, you sat in on contract negotiations, otherwise how do you know they paid Vick in advance, or how the contract was constructed.

By: choice1329

choice1329 — Wed, 30 May 2012 23:07:12 +0000

rcali says:
May 30, 2012 4:02 PM
I still don’t understand companies that want felons to endorse their stuff

___________________________________

Its not hard to understand they make money, and a lots of it, now do you understand.

By: choice1329

choice1329 — Wed, 30 May 2012 23:04:14 +0000

pftbillsfan says:
May 30, 2012 3:06 PM
what a joke this guy is. i dont care about his past, look at since hr hot out of prison. one shooting, 3 lawsuits, 5 skipped pre paid appearances, 1 mistakenly, and now another suing. Emulating??????

—————————————————————————————————-

Thw real joke is mf’s like you who follow him around on the internet making stupid comments, without knowing what the hell they are talking about. I’m sure you don’t care about his past, your real concern is the future and the million dollar contracts.

By: o0omorriso0o

o0omorriso0o — Wed, 30 May 2012 21:27:54 +0000

kingcarlbanks says: May 30, 2012 3:37 PM

He should be sued for impersonating a Quarterback. Eagles 8-8, fat Andy gets tossed and back in the cellar for iggles fans. Go Big Blue!

———————

So your only going off last year? Vick took the Eagles to a 10-6 record and a division championship the year before as a quarterback. And tbh New York (either team) is yet to beat Vick when he starts and finishes a game so I wouldn’t be talking bad on Vick till you prove you can beat him.

By: jam11163

jam11163 — Wed, 30 May 2012 20:09:50 +0000

first of all. i agree with vick. 2nd. where in this story does it say vick recieved a dime in advance. maby thier sueing for money they thought they would make on the items. i dont see mike giveing them a dime back.

By: packerfanfordecades

packerfanfordecades — Wed, 30 May 2012 20:03:13 +0000

The subject rests entirely on the details written in xteen pages of legal agreement.

I’m going to guess that Mike Vick is just following the advice of a competent attorney who probably knows the terms of the agreement backwards and forwards.

Who keeps the $100K is explained in that agreement. A piece of that $100K is going to be needed by Mike to pay his attorney to defend against what could well be a meritless lawsuit.
.

By: rcali

rcali — Wed, 30 May 2012 20:02:50 +0000

I still don’t understand companies that want felons to endorse their stuff.

By: OchentaYcinco

OchentaYcinco — Wed, 30 May 2012 19:50:31 +0000

It’s been a while since I sat through first-year contracts, so maybe Florio or one of the other attorneys floating around here could straighten me out, but I’m not sure that Oldridge is entitled to any sort of reimbursement here. It’s a perfectly reasonable position for Vick to take that Oldridge, by virtue of his criminal acts related to this business, forfeits any right to or expectation of performance by Vick. If I’m Vick’s counsel, I’m definitely arguing that requiring Vick to fulfill his portion of the contract would essentially require him to act in concert with Oldridge’s crimes, and of course no contract can compel the commission of a crime. It’s case of “idiot beware” if your business model depends on you not getting caught.

By: kingcarlbanks

kingcarlbanks — Wed, 30 May 2012 19:37:55 +0000

He should be sued for impersonating a Quarterback. Eagles 8-8, fat Andy gets tossed and back in the cellar for iggles fans. Go Big Blue!

By: tommyf15

tommyf15 — Wed, 30 May 2012 19:25:51 +0000

irishnativeson says: The league has it’s own investigative arm, NFL security. If they are in fact there to protect “the integrity of the game” why aren’t they vetting business deals that involve NFL memorabilia?

My guess is that they understand that players selling their own personal items does not harm “the integrity of the game” in any way, shape, or form.

By: CKL

CKL — Wed, 30 May 2012 19:23:38 +0000

eagleswin, I agree with you.
Vick is right to sever his relationship with the company but just from the information in the article, it sounds like he should pay them back any amount, perhaps prorated, for the amount of time after he severed the agreement.

By: oldschoolomen

oldschoolomen — Wed, 30 May 2012 19:16:40 +0000

what a joke this comment is. i dont care about english, look at mn cold he posts. one missing apostrophe, 3 capitalization errors, 5 other grammatical errors, 1 completely butchered, and now a random word followed by punctuation. Baracuda!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By: pftbillsfan

pftbillsfan — Wed, 30 May 2012 19:06:36 +0000

what a joke this guy is. i dont care about his past, look at since hr hot out of prison. one shooting, 3 lawsuits, 5 skipped pre paid appearances, 1 mistakenly, and now another suing. Emulating???????

By: irishnativeson

irishnativeson — Wed, 30 May 2012 18:49:27 +0000

The league has it’s own investigative arm, NFL security. If they are in fact there to protect “the integrity of the game” why aren’t they vetting business deals that involve NFL memorabilia?

By: eagleswin

eagleswin — Wed, 30 May 2012 18:39:03 +0000

bdawk20 says:
May 30, 2012 2:27 PM
I am pretty sure Vick is the right here…

————————————-

You do know that they paid Vick in advance and that all they want is the money they paid him (for services he did not render) back?

They are not looking for punitive damages, they just want their money returned.

By: bdawk20

bdawk20 — Wed, 30 May 2012 18:27:57 +0000

I am pretty sure Vick is the right here…

By: skolvikesskol

skolvikesskol — Wed, 30 May 2012 18:26:24 +0000

Is anybody looking out for this guy? Do any of these athletes have any ability to make good judgements regarding someone else’s character? Is there anybody who can sniff these guys out for them? They should know by now, when someone is a great salesman, who talks a good game, promises riches and kisses their bootys that they are up to no good!!!! They need to to start listening to the boring, nerdy, business minded guy, that can talk facts and figures, holds meetings in an office and not the bars and doesn’t have their lips locked on their posteriors.

By: tommyf15

tommyf15 — Wed, 30 May 2012 18:12:52 +0000

You know how the NFLPA is being villified for suing the NFL for collusion, and people here are calling them crybabies over it?

Or how Jonathan Vilma is a terrible person for suing Roger Goodell?

Somehow I don’t think those charges will be leveled against J.O. Sports Company on this thread. It’ll be OK to sue a player, but not the other way around.

By: catquick

catquick — Wed, 30 May 2012 18:12:07 +0000

Vick wins this

By: christopher525

christopher525 — Wed, 30 May 2012 18:08:06 +0000

Rare instance here, I’m actually on Vick’s side. Very odd feeling.

By: morgan420

morgan420 — Wed, 30 May 2012 18:00:35 +0000

sounds shady, and looks like vick has good leverage on them though.

By: drewbreeswants

drewbreeswants — Wed, 30 May 2012 18:00:26 +0000

Drew Brees wants an explanation