stuckincincy Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 I don't think either of them did anything unethical. Terry and Joe, I want you to lend your services to a commercial endeavor which will result in major economic benefit to me, the NFL, and to a number of other participants. It involves using you as a spokesperson for abrief entertainment stint. Stevie Wonder, Aretha Franklin, Mick Jagger and a whole bunch of people are being paid to also lend their services. The Steelers and Seahawks are being paid to lend their services. Commerical advertisers are oaying millions for 30 second spots. You will be on camera for something less than a 30 second spot. Joe...I want you to come from California, stay in Detroit for a day or two in the middle of winter, dress up and participate in a commercial event by parading out on national tv...and I'm not going to pay you for it...because you OWE us. 596399[/snapback] Perhaps I haven't clearly explained my point. This is a business based on emotion. Some things in life are not based on the bottom line. Numerous folks throughout the years hold that...that endeavor is not always about "pay"... Here are some words of expression... CONFUCIUS 551-479 B.C. "The superior man understands what is right; the inferior man understands what will sell. The superior man loves his soul; the inferior man loves his property. The superior man always remembers how he was punished for his mistakes; the inferior man always remembers what presents he got. The superior man is liberal toward others' opinions, but does not completely agree with them; the inferior man completely agrees with others' opinions, but is not liberal toward them. The superior man is firm, but does not fight; he mixes easily with others, but does not form cliques."
N.Y. Orangeman Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 I might be wrong, but I thought that I heard on Mike and Mike that Bradshaw was at the game. 596407[/snapback] I thought I heard that he was in town during the week, then left for the game. If you are correct with Bradshaw being in town, I'd agree wholeheartedly with you.
tennesseeboy Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 Perhaps I haven't clearly explained my point. This is a business based on emotion. Some things in life are not based on the bottom line. Numerous folks throughout the years hold that...that endeavor is not always about "pay"... Here are some words of expression... CONFUCIUS 551-479 B.C. "The superior man understands what is right; the inferior man understands what will sell. The superior man loves his soul; the inferior man loves his property. The superior man always remembers how he was punished for his mistakes; the inferior man always remembers what presents he got. The superior man is liberal toward others' opinions, but does not completely agree with them; the inferior man completely agrees with others' opinions, but is not liberal toward them. The superior man is firm, but does not fight; he mixes easily with others, but does not form cliques." 596412[/snapback] I agree that the superior man is liberal!
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 6, 2006 Author Posted February 6, 2006 And what was with Franco Harris waving the "terrible towel"...Very tacky. I do understand his pride though... He was given a gift (Immaculate Reception) by the refs too! Who was the defensive player on the losing team during a SB (think it was the Colts-Dallas game)... Was that Chuck Howely [sP]? You will never see that happen again!
stuckincincy Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 I agree that the superior man is liberal! 596423[/snapback] Not willing to mount a defense, eh?
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 6, 2006 Author Posted February 6, 2006 I agree that the superior man is liberal! 596423[/snapback] Now he (StuckInCincy) expects us all to be pillars of moral strength... Go figure! But, then again Cincy... I will let you pass, because you are the only one that is consistent with their conservative ideolgy. I would expect nothing less from you... Do you think you can make an appearence at my son's Catholic school?
Acantha Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 The NFL IS a buisness. And Joe Montana should never be considered for any type of "honor" again. And if he is, he should have to pay to be a part of it. At this point, no one will miss him.
stuckincincy Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 Now he (StuckInCincy) expects us all to be pillars of moral strength... Go figure! But, then again Cincy... I will let you pass, because you are the only one that is consistent with their conservative ideolgy. I would expect nothing less from you... Do you think you can make an appearence at my son's Catholic school? 596434[/snapback] Your concern for me and your attendant, unsolicited redemption is something that I treasure. Getting approval from EII would make any man beam with pride.
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 6, 2006 Author Posted February 6, 2006 Your concern for me and your attendant, unsolicited redemption is something that I treasure. Getting a pass from EII would make any man beam with pride. 596457[/snapback] I said: "I will let YOU pass"... I don't know what is worse, my choice of words or my "pass"ivity.
stuckincincy Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 I said: "I will let YOU pass"... I don't know what is worse, my choice of words or my "pass"ivity. 596461[/snapback] Now, don't backpeddle...
ExiledInIllinois Posted February 6, 2006 Author Posted February 6, 2006 Now, don't backpeddle... 596472[/snapback] Hey, I watch my back... Not my words.
Alaska Darin Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 Heaven forbid the "dripping with cash" NFL toss some ducketts at the people who got them there. How many of you would work for your current employer for free if you didn't have to?
Acantha Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 Heaven forbid the "dripping with cash" NFL toss some ducketts at the people who got them there. How many of you would work for your current employer for free if you didn't have to? 596558[/snapback] If my employer asked me to show my face, get cheered by millions, get VIP treatment everywhere I went, and be paid for it...I don't think I would negotiate. Not exactly a similar situation.
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...SPG9QH3GD91.DTL
CircleTheWagons Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 If my employer asked me to show my face, get cheered by millions, get VIP treatment everywhere I went, and be paid for it...I don't think I would negotiate. Not exactly a similar situation. 596560[/snapback] But isn't that what happens to Joe Montana every day anyway? What if your previous employer said come to work this Sunday and we'll give you $10? I'm suprised that some people still don't view professional sports simply as part of the entertainment business. Joe fulfilled his obligations to the league when he stopped playing and they stopped paying him. It sucks that he wasn't there, but why not blame the NFL for being to cheap to pay him?
Acantha Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 But isn't that what happens to Joe Montana every day anyway? What if your previous employer said come to work this Sunday and we'll give you $10? I'm suprised that some people still don't view professional sports simply as part of the entertainment business. Joe fulfilled his obligations to the league when he stopped playing and they stopped paying him. It sucks that he wasn't there, but why not blame the NFL for being to cheap to pay him? 596578[/snapback] It isn't the same thing at all. His equivalent of me going to work would be PLAYING in the Super Bowl. Suiting up, getting his butt kicked around the field, risking injury, etc... Would I go to work for next to nothing? No. Would I go to a celebration where I was treated like a champion and also got compensation? Absolutely. Now, he doesn't have to do the same thing I would. That's his choice. But as I said earlier, the NFL should learn it's lesson from this. They should no longer offer their support to Montana in ANY situation for free. Charge him any time he wants to use the NFL's name for anything! Simple enough.
CoachChuckDickerson Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 If my employer asked me to show my face, get cheered by millions, get VIP treatment everywhere I went, and be paid for it...I don't think I would negotiate. Not exactly a similar situation. 596560[/snapback] In todays day and age, time is money regardless of the situation.
Alaska Darin Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 It isn't the same thing at all. His equivalent of me going to work would be PLAYING in the Super Bowl. Suiting up, getting his butt kicked around the field, risking injury, etc...Would I go to work for next to nothing? No. Would I go to a celebration where I was treated like a champion and also got compensation? Absolutely. Now, he doesn't have to do the same thing I would. That's his choice. But as I said earlier, the NFL should learn it's lesson from this. They should no longer offer their support to Montana in ANY situation for free. Charge him any time he wants to use the NFL's name for anything! Simple enough. 596587[/snapback] Yeah, alienating a star who helped you get to the level you're at over .00001% of your annual revenue is really smart "big picture" business. Joe Montana doesn't need to go to the SB to get star treatment. He simply needs to go outside.
CircleTheWagons Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 It isn't the same thing at all. His equivalent of me going to work would be PLAYING in the Super Bowl. 596587[/snapback] I agree with everything you said except for this part - because in my mind it's all entertainment, how about if your old employer asked you to sit in meetings on Sunday for $10? If the NFL is pissed, exclude him from everything in the future, kick him out of the Hall of Fame, remove his records. They have the right to do all of that. It's an embarrasment for everyone involved that they couldn't come to an agreement, but I don't blame Montana more than I blame the NFL.
Acantha Posted February 6, 2006 Posted February 6, 2006 Yeah, alienating a star who helped you get to the level you're at over .00001% of your annual revenue is really smart "big picture" business. Joe Montana doesn't need to go to the SB to get star treatment. He simply needs to go outside. 596596[/snapback] And he would continue to get that treatment no matter what the NFL did. It would be for the point of it. And "alienating" Montana wouldn't hurt NFL in the sightest either. Hell, if they aren't worried about what last night's game is going to do to them, they sure as hell would have nothing to worry about with him. What the NFL and Montana "gain" from each other, while minimal, is a two way street. By turning them down for nothing but a bit of extra cash, Montana made it one way. Why bother with him?
Recommended Posts