BJ Sands Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3574151 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talon Lardner Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 Shoot, and I was looking forward to cheap C. Johnson jerseys. A shame, really, but I'm betting that this isn't a unique situation. Signature Eternally Under Construction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshawaggie Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 It was Reebok who put a stop to Ocho Cinco on the field, for now. @josh_j12 CFA- Fargo Bobcats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illwauk Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 Bull s**t!!Like they couldn't have informed him of this "financial obligation" when he changed his name so he could've had that taken care of. The NFL is just feeling salty because someone finally called their bluff and had the balls to stand up to their quasi-fascist policies. But entually they're gonna run out of excuses... the suits are just being petty and delaying the inevitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DG_ThenNowForever Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 Bull s**t!!Like they couldn't have informed him of this "financial obligation" when he changed his name so he could've had that taken care of. The NFL is just feeling salty because someone finally called their bluff and had the balls to stand up to their quasi-fascist policies. But entually they're gonna run out of excuses... the suits are just being petty and delaying the inevitable.His name is Chad Ocho Cinco, not Chad Johnson. There's no reasonable excuse that a man has to wear another man's name on his jersey. That's terrible. 1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said: and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santoleri3 Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 Yet the NFL WILL let you go online and drop $100 on a custom replica jersey, that you can put "OCHO CINCO" & "85" on... Courtesy chapeeko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkrdevil Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 I'm surprised the NFL went the Financial obligations route. I would have thought they would have gone with the "you signed your contract as Chad Johnson" route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herk Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 Could the NFL be any more vague on what these "financial obligations to reebok" are. At least have the balls to say what is truly going on. We all know the true reason has nothing to do with financial obligations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larrypep Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 Could the NFL be any more vague on what these "financial obligations to reebok" are. At least have the balls to say what is truly going on. We all know the true reason has nothing to do with financial obligations.Especially given this quote from Jackboot Football League: "He will wear the name Johnson on his jersey today and will be referred to as Chad Johnson on the official play-by-play sheet,"What the h-e-double-hockey-sticks does referring to him on play-by-play sheets under his former name have to do with Reebok jersey obligations? This is pure, unadulterated, power-play by the league. I'm sure if Ocho Cinco wanted to sue for the right to wear his legal surname on the back of his jersey, he could. Kind of reminds me of those from the 60s who continued to refer to Muhammad Ali as "Cassius Clay". His name is Chad Ocho Cinco. As ridiculous as people may think, he has legally changed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gosioux76 Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 Ocho Cinco isn't the only Bengal subject to these "financial obligations to Reebok." Rookie Keith Rivers wants to change his number from 58 to his college 55 now that the guy who had it before him got cut. But, according to SportingNews.com, Reebok wants him to buy their stock of #58 jerseys, an $11,000 value.Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eRay Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 The worst part is, think how much more $$$$ reebok will make off the new Ocho Cinco jerseys. They already made a killing off his popularity, now they are pretty much going to double up their earnings. I know it is probably a policy, but you would think the last person standing in OC's way would be reebok. They probably would have told him while he was in court, just so nothing like this happened. This is the NFL being the NFL. They have not changed his name anywhere on their site. Nothing, even though they have publicly said they they have "accepted" it. If it was a reebok problem the NFL would change Chad's on field jersey, but not sell that name on the back of any merchandise until Ocho Cinco bought up the rest of the Johnson jerseys. This, IMO, is clearly the NFL being stubborn and not accepting what somebody has legally done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DG_ThenNowForever Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 Ocho Cinco isn't the only Bengal subject to these "financial obligations to Reebok." Rookie Keith Rivers wants to change his number from 58 to his college 55 now that the guy who had it before him got cut. But, according to SportingNews.com, Reebok wants him to buy their stock of #58 jerseys, an $11,000 value.LinkAre those jerseys for actual games? Or jerseys for sale? At $250 each (authentic pricing), that's only 44 jerseys. Why are there 44 jerseys anyway? I'm confused as to why they'd have that amount or that value.And what about the cost of doing business? $11,000 is a pittance to Reebok. This and the Ocho Cinco fiaso look more like scare tactics than anything else. Hopefully someone smarter than me can explain more. 1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said: and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benpc21 Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 This sounds alot like when Kobe Brayant, Rasheed Wallace and Ron Artest all changed their numbers. They had to give the league and Reebok quite a bit of notice so they could stop producing the old numbers and sell off the old stock. We all know this is not a financial issue, thats the excuse, and at least for Reebok they do have prior situations where they have acted this way. Plus how hard is for them to put a new nameplate over the old and sell it, especially the screened on jerseys, just double name plate it and make some money. Sure that may be a bit unethical, but I wouldn't put it past reebok to do it to make some quick money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBear Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 I suppose as far as the NFL is concerned, they're still Lloyd Free, Lew Alcindor and Cassius Clay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmoothieX Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 Thank you Reebok for stepping and stopping an idiotic publicity stunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winters in buffalo Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 I'm surprised the NFL went the Financial obligations route. I would have thought they would have gone with the "you signed your contract as Chad Johnson" route.Yeah, but women sign contracts all the time, only to change their names after marriage or divorce. As far as I know they don't have to modify an existing contract, nor does a contract obligate them to keep their original names. I don't see why Chad Eight Five would be obligated either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Survival79 Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 He wore the new surname during pre-game. "If things have gone wrong, I'm talking to myself, and you've got a wet towel wrapped around your head." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CubsFanBudMan Posted September 7, 2008 Share Posted September 7, 2008 The Cowboys' Roy Williams changed his number this year and I remember thinking, wow there must be a surplus of 31 jerseys, cause during the pre-Romo/TO down years, RW was the centerpiece of the PR campaign, with his jersey by far being the easiest available in all colors and styles. But I never heard anything about him having to buy the extras. Same goes for Dolphins RB Karim Abdul-Jabbar when he was forced to switch. Sounds like sour grapes. The man changed his name, stunt or not. Let it go. Does the NFL intend to pay to have the GU 63 added to all existing jerseys? Doubt Reebok got advance notice on that one.The NFL's act is getting old. Ocho Cinco should wear it anyway and refuse to pay the fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Danimal Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 You guys pick some strange stuff to get worked up about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddball Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 This is pretty funny to me. For all the people who are worked up about the NFL/Reebok not letting him wear the asinine name on the back proving what a moron he really is. This also reminds me of the phrase NASCAR tells it's drivers when the get out of line, "Don't F up our show. You need us more than we need you." If Chad Johnson never played another down, people would forget him so quickly. Chad needs the NFL, otherwise he becomes a nobody, and attention whores need a place to get attention. He needs the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.