Not yet Ocho Cinco

[FiddySicks]

The way i hear it now, is that it's not the NFL, it's Reebok.

See, Reebok makes not only the official jerseys for the NFL, but they make many, many jerseys for sale to the public.

"Well, duh, Kinger, tell us something we don't know..."

Stay with me, class.

Now, Reebok has a way of protecting themselves from sudden number, and i guess now, name changes. If a player wants to suddenly change his number (or name), he must compensate Reebok for all of the jerseys they have produced. According to Reebok, Chad would owe the company $4.8 Million if he wanted his name change to be put on the back of his jersey immediatly. Otherwise, he will have to wait until next season. This has a history as well. a few seasons ago a Broncos player (can't remember the name) wanted to suddenly change his number. Reebok told him the same thing.

He decided not to change his number.

Well if that's really the case they better ship off all 100,000 jerseys to Ocho Cinco's doorstep. Either way they're gonna make compensation off of those shirts, most likely around 60% or so. For them to ask him to reimburse them and then STILL sell his old shirts would be straight up robbery.

[JQK]

I think people are misplacing their anger at the NFL. The NFL has recognized his name, as have the Bengals. I do believe it is Reebok holding this up.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

Initially, people didn't want Chad Ocho Cinco to have his own name on his jersey because he was an attention-seeker, egoist, and, I don't know, somehow ruining the game with his antics.

Then they didn't want Chac Ocho Cinco to have his own name on his jersey due to some sort of compassion for Reebok. Come on now, when has this board EVER sided with Reebok? On anything? Many people now taking Reebok's side -- or at least accepting it as legitimate -- are the same people who wanted to burn down the whole company after they added piping to the Oilers sweater and changed the hemline.

There's something else at play here, and I don't know if it's a race thing, control issues, or inability to accept that people want to do things you may be uncomfortable or disproving of. Reebok throwing a fit over this, to me, is insane. They can write their inventory off as a loss, and sell the products at a discount, or give them away to developing countries. Those jerseys still have some sort of value somewhere, and Reebok knows it. The NFL (and the NFLPA!) rolling over for this says bad things about how they cheat their players.

And one more point -- spare me the slippery slope argument. Your name is your name and many people don't want to go through the hassles of changing it. It's not an easy process, and perhaps if it were, more people would have done so. But I'm sure Snoop Dogg signs his checks Calvin Brodus and is happy to do so. I think Chad Ocho Cinco is very much an exception.

[CubsFanBudMan]

I think people are misplacing their anger at the NFL. The NFL has recognized his name, as have the Bengals. I do believe it is Reebok holding this up.

Yes, but if that's truly the case, shouldn't the NFL be able to tell Reebok what its players can/can't do instead of vice versa? I think that's why there's the sense that the NFL is allowing it, since their "real" position is well known (and was justified until he legally changed his name).

[Gothamite]

I think people are misplacing their anger at the NFL. The NFL has recognized his name, as have the Bengals. I do believe it is Reebok holding this up.

Yes, but if that's truly the case, shouldn't the NFL be able to tell Reebok what its players can/can't do instead of vice versa? I think that's why there's the sense that the NFL is allowing it, since their "real" position is well known (and was justified until he legally changed his name).

Not if that's what the contract says.

The NFL might have the upper hand in originally determining what goes into the contract, but once it's signed they've lost that leverage.

The rest is, I think, just conspiracy theory. Obviously they don't like Chad's clownishness in general, but they've accepted this one specifically. I highly doubt that the NFL is playing passive-aggressive games with him.

[pagan696]

shouldn't it be "ochenta cinco" (eighty-five), instead of "ocho cinco" (eight five)?

[JQK]

shouldn't it be "ochenta cinco" (eighty-five), instead of "ocho cinco" (eight five)?

Being a former football player, i know for a fact that most, if not all football players address each other by their numbers, and when it is a dual number, as in Chad's case, they call that player by the individual numbers, not the whole.

Example: 23 would be referred to as "Two Three", 96 would be referred to as "Nine Six", etc, etc.....

[CubsFanBudMan]

I think people are misplacing their anger at the NFL. The NFL has recognized his name, as have the Bengals. I do believe it is Reebok holding this up.

Yes, but if that's truly the case, shouldn't the NFL be able to tell Reebok what its players can/can't do instead of vice versa? I think that's why there's the sense that the NFL is allowing it, since their "real" position is well known (and was justified until he legally changed his name).

Not if that's what the contract says.

The NFL might have the upper hand in originally determining what goes into the contract, but once it's signed they've lost that leverage.

The rest is, I think, just conspiracy theory. Obviously they don't like Chad's clownishness in general, but they've accepted this one specifically. I highly doubt that the NFL is playing passive-aggressive games with him.

True, but, you'd think they'd just come out and say that rather than reference "financial obligations" and leave it open to speculation:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hGo5dk1...8fIDvAD9326AO81

(...which has added a Goodell quote I hadn't seen in earlier versions that seems to support the contract issue.)

At any rate, there are just as many Favre 4 jerseys out there -- did the Packers have to pay this fee because they traded him and were responsible for the jerseys becoming obsolete?

They ought to just make some nameplates available for an extra $10-$20. Easier than turning a Packers jersey into a Jets one.

[JQK]

I think people are misplacing their anger at the NFL. The NFL has recognized his name, as have the Bengals. I do believe it is Reebok holding this up.

Yes, but if that's truly the case, shouldn't the NFL be able to tell Reebok what its players can/can't do instead of vice versa? I think that's why there's the sense that the NFL is allowing it, since their "real" position is well known (and was justified until he legally changed his name).

Not if that's what the contract says.

The NFL might have the upper hand in originally determining what goes into the contract, but once it's signed they've lost that leverage.

The rest is, I think, just conspiracy theory. Obviously they don't like Chad's clownishness in general, but they've accepted this one specifically. I highly doubt that the NFL is playing passive-aggressive games with him.

True, but, you'd think they'd just come out and say that rather than reference "financial obligations" and leave it open to speculation:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hGo5dk1...8fIDvAD9326AO81

(...which has added a Goodell quote I hadn't seen in earlier versions that seems to support the contract issue.)

At any rate, there are just as many Favre 4 jerseys out there -- did the Packers have to pay this fee because they traded him and were responsible for the jerseys becoming obsolete?

They ought to just make some nameplates available for an extra $10-$20. Easier than turning a Packers jersey into a Jets one.

Favre's jersey's are #1 and #2 on the sales chart. Reebok is still making cash off of his Packers jersey.

Chad don't sell jerseys like Favre, but I'll bet anything that people will buy up "Ocho Cinco" jerseys just for the novelty of it all. That being said, i don't think anyone will buy a "C. Johnson" jersey once this all goes down. Reebok wants it's money.

Everyone here want's to think it's race, or massive NFL conspiracy.

It's not folks.

It's cash, as most things in life are. Cash.

[Harmening]

shouldn't it be "ochenta cinco" (eighty-five), instead of "ocho cinco" (eight five)?

If only I had a nickel for every time this question is asked.

[illwauk]

I think we are all missing what the NFL is trying to prevent. Unapproved commercialization. Imagine some company like Budweiser or Coca Cola or even www.BetUS.com paying a player a few millions to go to court and change his name. By allowing Chad Johnson to change his name to the silly Ocho Cinco, it just opens a Pandora's box. If they allow the Ocho Cinco, what is next ESPN, Faqu-all, or any other thing you can think of. The example given by ERay is based on a TV show so I doubt they writers really checked into the legality of such a thing. In America you can find a judge some were to agree to such a silly name change. I mean we do live in a country were 25 people named there kids Espn!

Again... this scenario falls way out of the jurisdiction of the NFL. It's also completely unlikely given that it's illegal to change your name to something that infringes on a copyright. So in order for a player to change his name to, say, Budweiser, Anhueiser-Busch would have to give them the green light, thereby giving up certian legal rights to their tradmark (which they would NEVER do).

The most the NFL has a right to do here is remove the names from the shirts... which honestly... I can live with. Not only would the jerseys look nicer, but Ocho Cinco would have an even bigger moral victory for forcing the league to do so.

Besides, if the NFL is worried that the players are such consumer whores that they would sell an identity they've held their entire lives for a couple million dollars, they have no one but themselves to blame. This current generation of players are the same guys that grew up in the 80's and 90's watching pro sports leagues whore themselves out to the highest bidder to get teens and pre-teens to watch their games and buy their merchandise. It's just another example of corporate amerikas "what's good for the goose is only good for the goose" mentality.

I disagree that it "falls way out of the jurisdiction of the NFL" , because the NFL is a private organization. They are the employer through the member clubs. Just like they can impose rules regarding personal conduct, they could also impose rules that regulate name changes. I will say you make a good point regarding AB, but what about a lesser dot com company that are just trying to make a splash. No one is forcing Chad Johnson to play in the NFL, and I would suspect he will eventually be able to have his jersey say "Ocho Cinco". How ever the league could state that only name changes based on religious beliefs would be accepted while a player is under contract. And that a player must give the same notice that teams give when proposing a uniform change.

If you can explain how the NFL holds rank over the federal government (which approved the name change), I'll gladly concede the argument. Until then, this is not even worth debating.

[Gothamite]

True enough.

[Survival79]

If you can explain how the NFL holds rank over the federal government (which approved the name change), I'll gladly concede the argument. Until then, this is not even worth debating.

The Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit of Florida approved the name change, not the federal government.

[JQK]

Illwauk... the NFL recognizes the name change.

...but to play devil's advocate here, the NFL is a private business. As a private business, they can set rules and codes of conduct and dress codes blah, blah, blah. The NFL could say, if they wanted to, that if you change your name to something ridiculous, it won't be put on a jersey, and they could do that. It's the same principle that allows company's to set dress codes and codes of conduct. Yu show up to the office with a facial tattoo, chances are you're going home looking for a new job.

All that said, it doesn't matter, because the NFL accepts and recognizes Chad's new name.

[illwauk]

If you can explain how the NFL holds rank over the federal government (which approved the name change), I'll gladly concede the argument. Until then, this is not even worth debating.

The Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit of Florida approved the name change, not the federal government.

As soon as I decided not to edit my post, I knew someone was gonna be a smart ass...

The reciprocity laws set by the federal government force a name change in one state to be recognized by the other 49.

Illwauk... the NFL recognizes the name change.

...but to play devil's advocate here, the NFL is a private business. As a private business, they can set rules and codes of conduct and dress codes blah, blah, blah. The NFL could say, if they wanted to, that if you change your name to something ridiculous, it won't be put on a jersey, and they could do that. It's the same principle that allows company's to set dress codes and codes of conduct. Yu show up to the office with a facial tattoo, chances are you're going home looking for a new job.

All that said, it doesn't matter, because the NFL accepts and recognizes Chad's new name.

At best, your scenario is a grey area (even the person with the facial tat could easily claim it's a religious thing). But can you honestly see a COMPETENT judge upholding a private businesses right to deny standard issue material (such as a name tag) based on nothing mote than their personal disapproval of a legal name?

[Gothamite]

At best, your scenario is a grey area (even the person with the facial tat could easily claim it's a religious thing). But can you honestly see a COMPETENT judge upholding a private businesses right to deny standard issue material (such as a name tag) based on nothing mote than their personal disapproval of a legal name?

Yes, provided the NFL could find justification for their actions within the CBA.

[illwauk]

If that is the case, then chalk it up to "what's right is not always legal and what's legal is not always right."

[JQK]

If that is the case, then chalk it up to "what's right is not always legal and what's legal is not always right."

God Bless America...

[Gothamite]

If that is the case, then chalk it up to "what's right is not always legal and what's legal is not always right."

Welcome to the wonderful world of contracts....

[Survival79]

If you can explain how the NFL holds rank over the federal government (which approved the name change), I'll gladly concede the argument. Until then, this is not even worth debating.

The Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit of Florida approved the name change, not the federal government.

As soon as I decided not to edit my post, I knew someone was gonna be a smart ass...

The reciprocity laws set by the federal government force a name change in one state to be recognized by the other 49.

I wasn't being a smart ass. The reciprocity laws don't change the fact that the federal government didn't approve the name change.