THE WATERCOOLER:
Are you surprised that no NFL team has signed Michael Vick yet?

BERNIE MIKLASZ:
Yes. It’s a mercenary business and most NFL teams would do anything to win a game. There are a lot of players with police rap sheets running around NFL fields, getting paid. If you look around the NFL, there aren’t many No. 2 quarterbacks that I’d put in the category of “impressive.” Vick can play. The problem is, teams are afraid of the backlash and the potential for disruption. But once Vick does his “60 Minutes” mea culpa, increased his involvement with pro-animal groups and starts to remake his image to win public support, the fear of political incorrectness will subside.

JIM THOMAS:
No. It hasn’t really been that long since Vick was given his green light of sorts from Commissioner Roger Goodell. Given the amount of attention and potential disruption that signing Vick would bring to a team and a training camp, it makes sense that clubs wouldn’t rush into signing him. Besides, he may not be cleared for regular-season play until October.

BILL COATS:
Not really, for a couple of reasons. First, there’s the obvious PR dilemma. Second, there’s the fact that Vick’s skills are somewhat of an anomaly and don’t fit very well with what most NFL teams are trying to do on offense. That said, I still expect some team to take a chance on Vick. Might not happen till the regular season starts, though, and injuries begin to become an issue.

THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: Cleveland Browns wide receiver Donte Stallworth was sentenced to 30 days in jail earlier this week following his guilty plea to DUI manslaughter in the death of a pedestrian. It was a controversial ruling that drew much criticism as many felt it too lenient. However, on Thursday NFL commissioner Roger Goodell stepped up and suspended Stallworth from the league indefinitely, without pay. Does it surprise you that Goodell’s punishment seems more severe than that of the legal system?

BRYAN BURWELL
No it doesn’t. In much the same way that the legal system issued a punishment that legally was in accordance with previous sentences to cooperative first-time offenders who admitted guilt and made amends to the aggrieved family, Goodell issued a suspension that was consistent with players who broke the law and were convicted.

JEFF GORDON
Roger Goodell is the law-and-order commissioner so, no, this wasn’t a surprise at all. He is trying to clean up the league’s image. A LOT of players have had legal problems on his watch and he has punished them aggressively. This was a high-profile case, so Stallworth has a tough road ahead with Goodell. I believe the commissioner is grandstanding, to an extent, by coming down so hard on players. But there is nothing wrong with holding highly paid pro athletes accountable for their misdeeds.

KATHLEEN NELSON
Can’t say I’m surprised. If Goodell initially gave Pacman Jones a one-year suspension and Chris Henry an eight-game suspension, an indefinite leave in a manslaughter case would seem in line. I don’t think you can extrapolate to say that Goodell was compensating for the court’s decision, but I do think you can see that he’s trying to remain consistent in his strict personal conduct policy.

REID LAYMANCE
This commissioner has been consistent in sending a strong message on player conduct off the field. It will be interesting if a player wants to step up and challenge the league in court.

ROGER HENSLEY
I wasn’t surprised by Goodell’s swift and stern punishment, but I thought it appropriate. Thirty days in jail seems a small price to pay in an ordeal that cost a man his life. Yes, Stallworth cooperated with the police from the beginning, yes he has already agreed to some sort of compensation package with the aggrieved family, and yes, he’ll do 1,000 hours of community service … is that enough? Goodell’s suspension likely will leave the Browns with little recourse but to cut Stallworth from the team, and not being able to play Sundays (and collect a paycheck) likely will be the the greatest punishment for Stallworth.

MORE ON STALLWORTH

One columnist from the Cleveland Plain Dealer says that lost in the news of Stallworth’s most recent transgression is the fact that he was already in the league’s substance abuse program. Terry Pluto says it’s good to ban Stallworth from the league for a year, but he’d like to see him out of Cleveland for good. Check out his thoughts here.

THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: Do you believe Michael Vick should be reinstated and allowed to play football again in the NFL? And, do you think you’ll ever see Vick again as a starting quarterback in the league?

BILL COATS
If I were NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, I’d keep Vick out for another year, just to see if he “gets it” after he returns to the real world. Even then, Vick would be only 30, so I wouldn’t be surprised if he got another shot at starting in the NFL.

JEFF GORDON
Michael Vick should absolutely be reinstated. He paid a heavy price for his crime. He has paid a much heavier price than, say, Leonard Little paid for taking a person’s life in a drunk-driving crash. As for the quarterback part, the suddenly popularity of the “Wildcat” formation could give him new life. He may lack the polish to be a top 10 NFL quarterback in the traditional sense, but he could be devastating as a “Wildcat” quarterback. He is still in his athletic prime, so I expect that he could regain football conditioning easily enough.

KATHLEEN NELSON
I’m the biggest dog lover on the staff. My screen saver is a picture of My Guy Spud, wrapping his long pink tongue all the way around his black Lab snout. It’s lovely. So, the thought of setting one dog against another doesn’t even compute with me. How could anyone find pleasure or thrills in that? The authorities nailed Vick but good.

However, he’s done his time, so you have to forgive. Denying him a second chance would be rather stiff-necked and close-minded.

The answer to the second part of the question is totally up to Vick. He wasn’t a prototypical quarterback to begin with, and his skills have deteriorated. It’s hard to imagine him as a starting quarterback, but if he gets himself in shape and stays out of trouble, some team will give him a chance. Maybe he’ll be a backup; maybe he’ll be a gimmick-play guy. I wouldn’t be surprised to see him on the field again, albeit sporadically.

REID LAYMANCE
When the U.S. government deems that Vick has payed his debt to society, the NFL shouldn’t prevent him from rejoining the league. And if he still has the skills, a team should give him the chance. If you look at some of the QBs around the league, it would certainly seem that Vick, even with time away from the game, has enough to compete.

DAN O’NEILL
I believe if I was producing the “Dog Whisperer” with Cesar Millan, I would be on the phone with Vick’s agent right now, trying to get him on the show. That said, I think Vick should be reinstated. He has served his debt to society. He made a horrible choice, got nailed for it and paid the price. I have no doubt there will be an NFL team willing to sign him and, given the sorry state of quarterbacking in the league, I would not be shocked to see a team try him at quarterback.
Who would be more entertaining to watch, Marc Bulger or Michael Vick?

STU DURANDO
I’ve thought all along that he would be allowed to return to the league after he served his sentence and appeared to have his life straightened out. When he has things in order, give him another shot. If Leonard Little could get a second chance, Michael Vick should. And as difficult a time as some teams have finding a good quarterback, this guy is just too talented not to be starting again at some point.