We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Michael Vick signs new sponsorship contract with Nike

Harry Longshanks

Harry Longshanks

ILikeBigPutts&ICannotLie
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
12,044
Reaction score
101
Location
Home on the Range
I just don't understand this from a business or moral perspective. :bad:

Philadelphia Eagles' Michael Vick signs new sponsorship contract with Nike - ESPN

Boooo Nike. Boooooo.

Vick, Nike sign new deal

NEW YORK -- Michael Vick is back with Nike two years after the company severed ties over the quarterback's involvement in a dogfighting ring.

"Mike has a long-standing, great relationship with Nike, and he looks forward to continuing that relationship," his agent, Joel Segal, said Wednesday.

Segal would not reveal terms of the agreement. Nike did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The deal was announced during a panel discussion at the Sports Sponsorship Symposium by Michael Principe, the managing director of BEST, the agency that represents Vick.

The endorsement is the latest step forward for Vick as he seeks to rehabilitate his career and his image after serving 18 months in federal prison. On Sunday, Vick played his first regular-season game since December 2006.

"It is quite evident that athletes that run afoul of the law are by no means relegated to obscurity when it comes to pitching products," said David Carter, a professor of sports marketing at the University of Southern California.

Vick signed with the Philadelphia Eagles on Aug. 13. NFL commissioner Roger Goodell gave him his full reinstatement Sept. 3, saying he could return to the field in Week 3.

Vick participated in 11 plays, accounting for 30 total yards, in the Eagles' 34-14 win over the Kansas City Chiefs, as Philadelphia tries to use him in a variety of ways as a backup.

Nike, which signed Vick as a rookie in 2001, terminated his contract in August 2007 after the Atlanta Falcons star filed a plea agreement admitting his involvement in the dogfighting ring. At the time, Nike called cruelty to animals "inhumane, abhorrent and unacceptable" and halted release of his fifth signature shoe, the Air Zoom Vick V.

Back when Vick first signed with the Eagles, Carter had said he was "too toxic for most companies to even consider taking a chance on him." What's changed? As Carter noted Wednesday, there has been little backlash to the quarterback's return to the NFL.

Protests have been limited, and the Eagles' sponsors have stood by them. That experience could make companies less wary about adding Vick as an endorser, though the biggest determinant might be no different from any other athlete: how well he performs on the field.

Retailer Dick's Sporting Goods said earlier this month that it wasn't carrying Vick's Eagles jersey in any of its 300 stores as a business decision.

But Paul Swangard, managing director of the Warsaw Sports Marketing Center at University of Oregon, isn't surprised that Nike re-established its relationship with Vick.

"Nike has a history of supporting athletes. I think they are supporting an athlete who still garners attention," said Paul Swangard, managing director of the Warsaw Sports Marketing Center at University of Oregon. "This is about Michael Vick as the athlete not Michael Vick the prisoner. ... When he is inside the lines of the field he is an exciting football player and that's what a brand like Nike can tap into."

Vick signed a $1.6 million deal with the Eagles, with a team option for the second year at $5.2 million. He was once a corporate star -- holding multimillion dollar deals to market everything from sneakers to sports drinks. But those millions are long gone.

In July, Vick filed for bankruptcy protection while serving his sentence, saying he owed between $10 million and $50 million to creditors.

To Carter, Nike likely made a calculated business decision that the benefit of sales tied to Vick outweighed any potential public outrage.

Vick must still have some selling power if the company is getting behind him, he said. "Nobody understands their consumer and has their finger on the pulse of their consumer like Nike does."
Click to expand...
 
Wow, makes me think a little different about Nike.
 
Exactly.

They won't be seeing any more of my support for a while. I disapprove of Vick's very existence...
 
Me too G-Man. I own a lot of Nike stuff, but I won't be purchasing any more in the future. And as soon as I can locate an email address, I'll be letting them know. Any of their athletes who have an email address available will also be receiving a (polite) note from me saying how disappointed I am in Nike.
 
Harry Longshanks said:
Me too G-Man. I own a lot of Nike stuff, but I won't be purchasing any more in the future.
Click to expand...

Exactly and I was leaning towards the VR irons this year plus I have a ton of their golf shirts. If this is true they wont be seeing any more of money.
 
Sounds like a plan, gentlemen.

No more sunshine and lollipops, I guess.
 
I'm with you guys. As much as I like Nike's clothing, shoes, and equipment I won't be spending any more money their way anytime soon.

Gives me more reason to try out some new lines. :at-wits-end:
 
I couldn't find an email address for Nike Golf, but I found this on the Nike Store site:

E-mail Us

I have used it before for product questions and I have received responses, so I know they monitor it.
 
I have sent this link to Nike PR for them to see. I am going to keep my thoughts out of this thread, but I do think that each company should see what consumers are thinking. Im not sure which way I am on this topic
 
As much as some of us think this is poor move on Nike's part, Michael Vick still has appeal with some members of society. Nike is looking to sell their products to that part of our society, who still think Vick is a reformed hero of sorts. This ESPN article points that out. Hopefully a huge enough percentage of folks will b*tch enough about this decision, that Nike will distance themselves from it. However more than likely the contracts have already been signed, and there is no way out for them. It's just a plain, old marketing decision folks. I myself have not been a fan of Nike for various reasons, and I am also sure they have not missed any of my money at all.

And of course there is the other side of the coin that says Vick has paid his debt to society, and all that should be for given.

Now if other athlete's on Nike's payroll (fat chance) were to tell Nike to pack sand, who don't want to be associated with Vick, that might make a difference in their decision.
 
I'm not afraid to chime in, Vick is scum & deserves nothing. I too own quite a bit of Nike apparel, won't however buy another piece since the bottom line is my purchases would basically be giving Vick $$.

Vick shouldn't have gotten another shot at the NFL much less Nike.
 
Tough crowd here. For me, this news has no effect whatsoever whether I buy Nike products or not.
 
I have never purchased anything Nike for myself. Ever. Good reason to continue that practice. My daughter and wife have had a number of pairs of Nike shoes. I'll be chiming in on that, too. A mention of the dog fighting should seal that deal with the both of them.

Kevin
 
D-Rock said:
Tough crowd here. For me, this news has no effect whatsoever whether I buy Nike products or not.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Vick made a mistake. He paid for it, and is now getting a 2nd chance.

However, I'm not sure why Nike would do this as Vick hasn't even proved himself as a good football player yet.
 
I'm not a Michael Vick fan. I don't know much about his career, etc. I do know he committed a loathsome crime that resulted in the deaths of innocent animals and was found guilty. He admitted his guilt and apologized publicly. He deserved prison time for his actions and served the amount of time that the law dictates he serve.

Having paid his debt, I think he deserves to make a living. His talents lie in football, and he earned a place on a professional football team which helped him secure an endorsement from Nike.

No one is saying what he did was OK. What does it say about US - if after a criminal admits his guilt, apologizes for the criime, serves the time the law says he must serve - if we deny him from using his God-given talents to earn a living?

:flame suit on:
 
bonknhead said:
I'm not a Michael Vick fan. I don't know much about his career, etc. I do know he committed a loathsome crime that resulted in the deaths of innocent animals and was found guilty. He admitted his guilt and apologized publicly. He deserved prison time for his actions and served the amount of time that the law dictates he serve.

Having paid his debt, I think he deserves to make a living. His talents lie in football, and he earned a place on a professional football team which helped him secure an endorsement from Nike.

No one is saying what he did was OK. What does it say about US - if after a criminal admits his guilt, apologizes for the criime, serves the time the law says he must serve - if we deny him from using his God-given talents to earn a living?

:flame suit on:
Click to expand...


Great post. EXACTLY how I feel.
 
bonknhead said:
He admitted his guilt and apologized publicly. He deserved prison time for his actions and served the amount of time that the law dictates he serve.


No one is saying what he did was OK. What does it say about US - if after a criminal admits his guilt, apologizes for the criime, serves the time the law says he must serve - if we deny him from using his God-given talents to earn a living?

:flame suit on:
Click to expand...

He apologized because it was required, does anyone think this clown didn't know killing dogs was morally wrong? Serving a sentence doesn't absolve him of guilt nor does it make him a good man. Anyone can pay lip service, however Vikc has proved what a despicable human he truly is. As they say actions speak louder than words. How many convicts supposedly "find god" while in prison? It's because they think it will help shorten their sentences.

It's the same with Vick & his bs apologies, he doesn't mean it & only does it because it's the only way he can back to being a millionaire.

As far as using his god given talents, who cares? He used his god given talented hands to murder defenseless dogs. Typical street thug who doesn't deserve any forgiveness.
 
There is a big difference between getting a second chance (btw, this is Vick's third or fourth or fifth chance - remember "Ron Mexico"? Remember failing his drug test while on bail? Remember his posse stealing a security guard's watch? Remember the water bottle with the secret compartment? Remember the fines for flipping off fans on national television?) and being sponsored by a company such as Nike.

When Nike sponsors someone, they put them out there as a role model. The tell us to "Be Like Mike" and "Just Do It." They implicitly condone the athlete's behavior. And they pay him handsomely.

Would you feel the same if he wasn't famous? If he was just some thug convicted of the same thing, would you hire him to work at your business if he walked off the street and applied for a job? Would you pay him to represent your company? The man tortured and murdered dogs - - for entertainment. (I won't even go into the research connecting the abuse of animals with sociopathic behavior towards people.)

He may deserve a second chance, but he doesn't deserve to be promoted and idolized - and promotion and idolization is what Nike does to sell product. And he especially doesn't deserve it so soon and before he has actually proven that he has reformed his life.
 
Harry Longshanks said:
There is a big difference between getting a second chance (btw, this is Vick's third or fourth or fifth chance - remember "Ron Mexico"? Remember failing his drug test while on bail? Remember his posse stealing a security guard's watch? Remember the water bottle with the secret compartment? Remember the fines for flipping off fans on national television?) and being sponsored by a company such as Nike.

When Nike sponsors someone, they put them out there as a role model. The tell us to "Be Like Mike" and "Just Do It." They implicitly condone the athlete's behavior. And they pay him handsomely.

Would you feel the same if he wasn't famous? If he was just some thug convicted of the same thing, would you hire him to work at your business if he walked off the street and applied for a job? Would you pay him to represent your company? The man tortured and murdered dogs - - for entertainment. (I won't even go into the research connecting the abuse of animals with sociopathic behavior towards people.)

He may deserve a second chance, but he doesn't deserve to be promoted and idolized - and promotion and idolization is what Nike does to sell product. And he especially doesn't deserve it so soon and before he has actually proven that he has reformed his life.
Click to expand...

Great post. EXACTLY how I feel.
 
dynarider said:
Great post. EXACTLY how I feel.
Click to expand...

:thumb:

We obviously feel differently about this, so we should just agree to disagree. I voiced my opinion and you've done likewise. :peace2:
 
bonknhead said:
:thumb:

We obviously feel differently about this, so we should just agree to disagree. I voiced my opinion and you've done likewise. :peace2:
Click to expand...

It's all good, we can have a discussion without anyone getting upset.
 
Nike would make dog fighting shoes if they thought there was money in it. They are signing Vick to market to those people who think he is a hero of some sort. Can't leave out the dog fighting demographic if you can sell a few pairs of shoes.

FTR, I think Vick has every right to play football. He served his time. However, if I owned a team I wouldn't hire him. Or any of the guys that beat women or have body guards that kill people.

Kevin
 
I don't know. I couldn't care less if Nike resigned Vick. I do understand the animosity towards Vick though.

If you want to get real with it, weve been buying Nike stuff all this time knowing full-well that they willingly allow sweatshops exploiting the less fortunate to produce their products for the sake of cutting costs and now we want to jump on a moral high horse because they give endorsement money to an animal abuser. That seems absurd to me.

Edit: I just want to clarify that I am not trying to call anyone out. I actually only came to this realization as I was typing. It really is something to reflect on for ALL of us.
 
Last edited:
Here are my thoughts on this and I will let it rest:

Nike and SEVERAL other companies use child labor or low waged workers to make their merchandise in foreign countries. If that doesn't seriously hinder you from buying their products, which I have to admit it doesn't mine because our government allows it and I couldn't shop if I did. On the other hand you have a man who let people fight and kill dogs, the Spainairds slaughter bulls in arenas, in central america they fight roosters, in vietnam they eat dogs. Do you see my reasoning a bit? I do not have anymore of a problem with Michael Vick who served his time. People will still buy his merchandise even though he did these things and thats why Nike signed him. I mean Ray Lewis was involved in a double homicide but people tend to forget that. I hope Vick really is a changed man because after losing everything and his pride, there isn't much more he can spare.

This video by the world's greatest band Radiohead shows all you need to know:

YouTube - Radiohead - All I Need (Official MTV Video)
 
Last edited:
I wonder what Tiger Woods' thought is on this sponcorship. Or if it makes him look any different? He has been a "role model" and Vick not only hasn't proven himself on the field, he hasn't in the public eye as a person either.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top