Fine. The Eagles would have signed Chairman Mao or Pol Pot if either met the physical requirements for playing.
I say give the guy a chance.
While there certainly is no legal impediment to Vick playing for the Eagles, there is also no legal impediment those of us that believe that Vick's type animal cruelty is unacceptable to shun the team, and to hope for nothing but the worst from it.
I still would like to know what criminal activity is actually looked down by the NFL. How many people or animals can someone kill and still be allowed to play?
I also have a feeling that if any non-football player was convicted of this type of crime, that said person wouldn't have it so easy in finding a job. Most employers, especially in this economy, will just toss out the application of anyone who commits a serious crime.
Well, maybe most HR types would do so. I've never committed a crime since I tried to sell an extra ticket for the last game of the 1969 World Series for the price printed on the ticket. But I cannot remember being asked if I had any sort of record since the early 80s (except maybe for security clearances, the last of which was also back in the 80s). Usually people call me because they know what I can do. No HR folks ever get involved. It's the same thing with Vick.
ML/NJ