RayFinkle Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 No problem Chad, just cut us a check for half a million.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DancesWithTatonka Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 There have been no concrete developments in the ongoing saga of Chad Ochocinco since the NFL stepped in on Sunday and prevented the receiver formerly known as Chad Johnson from wearing a jersey sporting his new legal surname. The issue is the NFL’s contractual commitment to Reebok, and whether Johnson will pay the production costs for the unsold inventory of “C. Johnson” jerseys. Geoff Hobson of Bengals.com suggests that, for a player of Johnson’s stature, the number will be in range of $500,000. In 2007, Raiders receiver Jerry Porter was told that he couldn’t change his number from 84 to 81 without forking over $210,000 to cover the costs of unsold jerseys. Last week, rookie linebacker Keith Rivers bought the unsold inventory of jerseys with his prior number (58) so that he could change to his desired number, 55. We’re still amazed by the fact that the NFL has allowed one of its partners to contractually foist these expenses onto the league and its players. Then again, since the ultimate bill is paid by the players, maybe the league didn’t really care. One group about which no one seems to care are the folks who bought the jerseys that become worthless. Though Reebok got its money back for the Keith Rivers jerseys bearing a number that he’s no longer wearing, that kid in Georgetown who used his paper route money to buy a “Rivers 58″ is now screwed. In Johnson’s case, the irony is that his offseason antics surely prompted sales of his jersey to drop, meaning that there are more of the unsold items in stock than there would have been if he’d not launched a relentless campaign to be traded. So now the question is whether the notoriously cheap Chad Johnson will fork over the money necessary to become Chad Ocho Cinco. Meanwhile, we doubt that the supply of jerseys bearing his former name will be shrinking. HAHAHAHAHAHA!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murra Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 I was wondering why his jersey had not changed. That must be why we don't see London Fletcher-Baker jerseys for sale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Yeah, as they said a guy last year was told the same thing but he opted to keep his old number. Ocho Dinko!! I'm surprised that either he or his agent didn't know about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDD Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 No wonder Marvin Lewis refers to him as "Ocho Psycho" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Is Reebok stupid? They'll sell more Ocho Cinco jerseys than C. Johnson jerseys, and how much does it cost them to change the nameplates? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleTheWagons Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 One more sign that the NFL has become more business than sport. A player can't change his name, or even the number on the back of his jersey, without permission from a sponsor? I'm not a big fan of Chad whatever, but he legally changed his name and should be allowed to wear his surname on the back of his jersey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clownments22 Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Is Reebok stupid? They'll sell more Ocho Cinco jerseys than C. Johnson jerseys, and how much does it cost them to change the nameplates? Smartest dude on the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 I was wondering why his jersey had not changed. That must be why we don't see London Fletcher-Baker jerseys for sale. It's hard to fit London Fletcher-Baker Oppenheim and Taft on the back of a jersey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 I was wondering why his jersey had not changed. That must be why we don't see London Fletcher-Baker jerseys for sale. Maurice Jones changed his name, and jersey, to Maurice Jones-Drew. I never heard a work about that being a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloridaSnow Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Could someone who is familiar with legal matters explain if the NFL and Reebok can really to do this if push comes to shove. I'm probably wrong, but a person's name, even though it is simply being displayed on the back of a jersey, doesn't seem like something Reebok or the NFL has any control over. I know there is a history of precedence with players changing their jersey numbers, but there is a major difference between a name and a jersey number. Again, I might be wrong, but Johnson could probably force the issue with a lawsuit if he really wants to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Could someone who is familiar with legal matters explain if the NFL and Reebok can really to do this if push comes to shove. I'm probably wrong, but a person's name, even though it is simply being displayed on the back of a jersey, doesn't seem like something Reebok or the NFL has any control over. I know there is a history of precedence with players changing their jersey numbers, but there is a major difference between a name and a jersey number. Again, I might be wrong, but Johnson could probably force the issue with a lawsuit if he really wants to do so. It's most likely covered in some form in the CBA. The entire business is governed by that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lets_go_bills Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 This is so ridiculous. Poor Chad just can't catch a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 It's in the deal the NFLPA signed. Why should Reebok eat $500,000 in old Johnson jersey's? I can't believe that nobody on his staff didn't know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 The thing that really annoys me about this is that ocho cinco means 8 - 5.......Not 85. I'm not sure how to pronounce that, but it's definitely different. He couldn't even get that right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 The thing that really annoys me about this is that ocho cinco means 8 - 5.......Not 85. I'm not sure how to pronounce that, but it's definitely different. He couldn't even get that right. You're right. It's spelled out; ochenta y cinco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 You're right. It's spelled out; ochenta y cinco. To Chad's credit... Why is it wrong to say 8 - 5? Why does one have to say eighty-five? When I use the VHF (marine band) radio... I don't say: "Switch and answer channel fourteen, channel fourteen." Instead I say: "Switch and answer channel 1 - 4, channel 1 - 4." IMO, preference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Is Reebok stupid? They'll sell more Ocho Cinco jerseys than C. Johnson jerseys, and how much does it cost them to change the nameplates? Depends on whether you're including the cost of shipping them back to China or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernMan Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 No problem Chad, just cut us a check for half a million.... Side note: It's difficult for me to have any sympathy for a player holding out for more money when we hear of NFL players casually forking out over $200k to change his jersey number. How many hours of physical labor and/or mental stress do each of you have endure to pocket $210,000, take home, or over $300k, gross? That's AT LEAST 6 years worth of work (at $50k/year) for the average fan - just to change a jersey number. Think about it. Six years of your job = a modification to a uniform for some spoiled athlete. I don't want to ever again hear that "I'm just looking out for my family" shiite. I love the sport of football, and particularly Bills football, but geez, what kind of monster have we created? These are probably the same don't know the value of a dollar idiots who'll be in the mission soup line 15 years from now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Could someone who is familiar with legal matters explain if the NFL and Reebok can really to do this if push comes to shove. I'm probably wrong, but a person's name, even though it is simply being displayed on the back of a jersey, doesn't seem like something Reebok or the NFL has any control over. I know there is a history of precedence with players changing their jersey numbers, but there is a major difference between a name and a jersey number. Again, I might be wrong, but Johnson could probably force the issue with a lawsuit if he really wants to do so. I think the problem is that if you allow it, egomaniac a-holes like Johnson would be changing their name/number every two weeks just for the hell of it. Players and the names on their jerseys don't exist in a vacuum. These guys are making millions of dollars because the league has been able to successfully market its players and franchises to the public. If you screw around with those names and numbers, you put the connection between players and fans at risk. Legally, I presume it's either stated in the players contract or incorporated by reference to the union contract with Rebook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts