Discussion in 'The National Football League' started by ChampionTexan, Sep 10, 2008.
Wonder if Chad saw this one coming.
Easy way out of this... Mr. Ocho just has to push hard for a trade next year...... new team, new jersey, someone else eats the bill for the old Bengals jerseys...(but he better hope that #85 is available on the new team)
a terribly unfunny gag just got a little funnier
That just made my day.
Imagine Chad's face when he opened that letter informing him of this. Definitely brought a smile to my face reading it.
Mucho Dumbo is more like it!
That's a funny twist to this story.
That's awesome! What an asshat!
Now....Who was it that said it was a nice business move?
I certainly see the humor in this but somehow I bet the NFL isn't being even handed. Do they make players pay for jerseys when they leave as free agents? Are they going to make Devin Hester wear a WR jersey and pay for the DB ones? Do the players make an extra penny when one of their jerseys sells? Is this actually in their contracts at all?
Obviously someone is trying to screw him...
What about players who make trade demands....why aren't they paying for unsold jerseys ?
It's a sexist rule anyways.
How in the world do you get sexism out of this.
How often does a prominent player change his name or number? If it is a rule and it is not enforced often if ever, I am sure it is there to protect the NFL and Reebok from losing lots of money.
Just a guess, but it may be mandatory language included in all player contracts per the CBA. In terms of free agency, when a contract expires, the requirement to buy-back jerseys would also expire. Besides, when they leave as a FA, Reebok has a chance to anticipate the change, and reduce/eliminate production of the old jersey until the player re-signs or signs elsewhere.
A trade/mandatory change of number is not in the players control, and as a result, I would guess it's not subject to the same contract language.
As to players benefitting financially from their jersey sales - from the same article
Edit: Just a wild guess, but I'm thinking that if he didn't profit from jersey sales, the change to Ochocinco would never have taken place.
I'm just gonna call 'im Chad What's-His-Face.
We should start a class action lawsuit and get our money back, plus pain and suffering for the Tony Boselli jerseys. The guy didn't even play.
I would say for the Carr jerseys too, but those were still able to be used with the purchase of duct tape.
I think that if guy changes his name legally, he shouldn't be on the hook for the jerseys that Reebok made. After all, it was their decision to go ahead and make 170000 of them in the first place.
Somewhere Isaac Curtis is laughing his ass off.
If he signed a contract saying he would reimburse the cost (and I'm assuming he did based on the content of the article), why should a voluntary (albeit legal) name change relieve him of that obligation?
Separate names with a comma.