GregR_2
Footballguy
Did a search and didn't see a thread on this.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_...?urn=nfl,106605
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_...?urn=nfl,106605
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Chad Johnson's name change (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter GregR_2
- Start date
Neil Beaufort Zod
Footballguy
Doesn't really make sense to me. He's not asking them to make new jerseys. He's using his legal name on his game jersey. he didn't ask them to make anything; he just allows his name to be used via the NFLPA. Well, that's not his name anymore.
BusterTBronco
Footballguy
Reebok has a stockpile of 100,000 Chad Johnson jerseys? That cannot possibly be true.
Ted Lange as your Bartender
Footballguy
I can't believe how shortsighted Reebok or the league is that they don't think they can recoup this $4M "loss" through immediate sales of Ocho Cinco jerseys, which I have to believe would be pretty popular.
Last edited by a moderator:
whole-show
Footballguy
This is exactly right....If the NFL or Reebok wants to use this an excuse then I want them to buy back the jerseys I have bought that they have either changed the logos on or the player is no longer with the team. I will take a new ADP jersey for my old Culpepper jersey. Thanks NFL and Reebok this is going to save me a ton of money.It'd be interesting if he fought this.
I'd like to see him have a jersey made with his Cinco name on it, wear it to the game, and see if the NFL tells him he has to take it off or fines him.
A bit extreme but-If you went to some corporate meeting and had to wear a name tag that said your name was someone else's how would you feel?
I don't remember Hakeem Akeem Olajuwon having any probs, granted first name isn't on jerseys but it is on other products. Same with Chris Jackson becoming some name I can't spell. Domanick Davis/Williams for the Texans.
Maybe someday Chad Johnson jerseys will be worth more as they don't make em' anymore
I'd like to see him have a jersey made with his Cinco name on it, wear it to the game, and see if the NFL tells him he has to take it off or fines him.
A bit extreme but-If you went to some corporate meeting and had to wear a name tag that said your name was someone else's how would you feel?
I don't remember Hakeem Akeem Olajuwon having any probs, granted first name isn't on jerseys but it is on other products. Same with Chris Jackson becoming some name I can't spell. Domanick Davis/Williams for the Texans.
Maybe someday Chad Johnson jerseys will be worth more as they don't make em' anymore
footballnerd
Footballguy
The NFL forcing Ocho Cinco to pay $4M to have his jersey changed is straight BS. When a player gets traded, the teams involved nor the player don't have to pay for all the excess jerseys that won't sell. When a player changes his name to a Muslim name, AKA Kareem, they dont gotta pay for the excess jerseys. And you know there is nothing in the contracts about name changes. The NFL should respect the name, as stupid as the whole thing is. Chad should have a legal dispute if the fine him.
North
Footballguy
I have to side with Chad on this. What the NFL and Reebok is doing doesn't make sense. Let me ask you this, if a player must buy back a jersey if he changes his number or name, what happens if a player is traded? Who buys back the jerseys then? What did Reebok do with all the Giant Shockey jerseys that were on shelves? Nothing, they end up selling them for cost (you can find them on any discount rack) and eat the profit. It's ridiculous to try to prevent someone from doing something legal by threatening them with this.
Also found it funny that they let out how much it costs Reebok to make these jerseys and how much they sell them for. They state it costs $49 to make a jersey, yet they're sold for $100+ dollars in the store. I think they can afford to buy back the jerseys themselves. The main problem with Reebok is they are too short sighted, if he does change his name the C Johnson jerseys will sell b/c some will consider them collectors items.
Also found it funny that they let out how much it costs Reebok to make these jerseys and how much they sell them for. They state it costs $49 to make a jersey, yet they're sold for $100+ dollars in the store. I think they can afford to buy back the jerseys themselves. The main problem with Reebok is they are too short sighted, if he does change his name the C Johnson jerseys will sell b/c some will consider them collectors items.
Last edited by a moderator:
footballnerd
Footballguy
They also aren't considering the monstrous number of Ocho Cinco Jersey's they can capitalize on if they put them out while the name is hot. Those excess CJ Jerseys are toast. What if Ocho decides not to comply, they are just going to sit on the shelves collecting dust when they can be blowing out the stores with Ocho Cinco jerseys. Big mistake on Reeboks part, but I'm thinking the NFL is forcing them to do in spite of want Chad is trying to do.
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
[scooter]
Footballguy
If Johnson had converted to Islam there's NO WAY the NFL would have tried this stunt.
Aussie Cowboy
Footballguy
GregR_2
Footballguy
It seemed so to me too. But, I did some googling, and maybe not. According to this article, between April 2005 and December of 2007, the Packers pro shop at Lambeau field sold 51,500 Brett Favre jerseys.That's not how many Favre jerseys were sold total during those 2.5 years. That's how many were sold by that one store (albeit the "official" store).
Factor in how many Favre jerseys were sold online, through sporting goods stores, department stores, and then the unsold stock... it may still seem like 100,000 is a lot, but it no longer seems remotely unbelievable to me.
GregR_2
Footballguy
I doubt the leagues had any issues with the reasons for any of those other name changes you mentioned. Definitely not the issues the NFL may have with COC's name change.Assuming this report from CNBC is correct, I have no problem believing the NFL is fitting their response to the particulars of this situation.And frankly I have no problem with it, either.
BusterTBronco
Footballguy
Yes, the Packers pro shop at Lambeau may have sold 51,500 Brett Favre jerseys but I can guarantee they didn't have 50,000 of them sitting in inventory in the back room.
Neil Beaufort Zod
Footballguy
I'd be surprised if it cost $10 to make one of those jerseys. I think they're factoring in the licensing, which should either be a fixed cost or based on what they sell.
Iwannabeacowboybaby!
Footballguy
LOL, 100,00 jersey's in reserve. Kind of reminds me of making copies at the copier and you press the wrong button and you don't know how to turn the darn thing off.You wanted 10 and all of a sudden you have 100 shooting out and you're in panic mode trying to figure it out.
Someone at Reebok it the wrong button. They wanted 10,000 jersey's made, they hit the button to start and went for a coffee break. When they came back, they realized there were 100,000 sitting there
mad sweeney
Footballguy
First of all, none of us know the language of the contract between the NFLPA and Reebok and the NFL. Until those details are known all these judgements on the NFL's strongarm tactics are highly suspect. THe union and Johnson both have lawyers, if this isn't on the up and up I'm sure both teams would be easily able to counter it.
Secondly which fans exactly are going to rush out and buy the OC jersey? The ones he repeatedly tried to get himself traded away from all offseason? The ones he said were tired of his shenanigans and blamed him for the underachieving team, a team so sad they rehired Henry? How many proud Bengal fans are going to go drop $85 on some publicity stunt for Johnson's ego when he's already loudly tried to split from the team?
I'm hardly ever one to side with corporate giants but I think many of you are overestimating the amount of interest in buying a joke player's joke jersey from a joke team.
Secondly which fans exactly are going to rush out and buy the OC jersey? The ones he repeatedly tried to get himself traded away from all offseason? The ones he said were tired of his shenanigans and blamed him for the underachieving team, a team so sad they rehired Henry? How many proud Bengal fans are going to go drop $85 on some publicity stunt for Johnson's ego when he's already loudly tried to split from the team?
I'm hardly ever one to side with corporate giants but I think many of you are overestimating the amount of interest in buying a joke player's joke jersey from a joke team.
North
Footballguy
B-I-N-G-O and bingo was his name'o.
gump
Footballguy
- Judging by the $40 quoted value, they must be referring to the "repli-thentic" tackle-twill jersey...the middle of the 3 that Reebok produces. These jerseys would take weeks to produce, so Rbk must take an inventory stance to allow retailers to book less up front and chase. As mentioned, there certainly could be an agreement with the NFL to give some relief if they take this inventory stance for the retailers and get stuck with some...and they would differentiate between getting stuck by this instance or getting stuck by a trade.
- This $40 price by the way is the cost to Rbk...with production costs, corporate loads, and NFL royalties all combined.
- There is 0% chance Reebok is sitting on 100,000 "first quality" "repli-thentic" jerseys. Maybe they have some left over older inventory and they are combing numbers from these, the repli-thentics, authentics, and their lower-end screen-printed version. Reebok should be responsible for any screen-printed inventory though...as this is designed as an "at once" replen option for retailers to chase with.
- This $40 price by the way is the cost to Rbk...with production costs, corporate loads, and NFL royalties all combined.
- There is 0% chance Reebok is sitting on 100,000 "first quality" "repli-thentic" jerseys. Maybe they have some left over older inventory and they are combing numbers from these, the repli-thentics, authentics, and their lower-end screen-printed version. Reebok should be responsible for any screen-printed inventory though...as this is designed as an "at once" replen option for retailers to chase with.
gump
Footballguy
Reebok is on the hook for all Champ product...which is why they only bring in a certain number of caps total, decided well before the champ is determined. If the Chargers win the SB...Reebok is sitting on a bunch of caps. If the Packers win the SB...Reebok is actually short of the demand and only gives retailers a portion of their order.Tees are a different story. Reebok, along with VF (the other NFL manufacturer), DON'T produce tees in advance. It is an amazing process that requires hundreds of thousands of units of tees to be produced within hours...but that is not done until the winner is determined...so no inventory there.
gump
Footballguy
I've clarified...there is an agreement between the NFLPA, the player, and the NFL that the player will be responsible for 100% of the cost of goods for player-specific product if that player changes their name or number.
The 100,000 units Reebok quotes is everything with Chad's previous name & number on it...authentics, repli-thentic, screened jerseys, player tees, womens product, youth product, etc.
Chad will be paying.
The 100,000 units Reebok quotes is everything with Chad's previous name & number on it...authentics, repli-thentic, screened jerseys, player tees, womens product, youth product, etc.
Chad will be paying.
Jason Wood
Zoo York
I agree that this screams of posturing in order to keep the name change from happening. While I'm not a fan of the name change per se, I do think Johnson is being railroaded here with some "creative" accounting as to the real impact of this move. Let's think about this logically, when a player gets traded does Reebok demand compensation from the league and the player? Does the NFL owe money to Reebok for all those Jason Taylor Dolphins jerseys and Brett Favre Packers jerseys? It's just silly.
fatness
Footballguy
Why should it be up to the NFL to guarantee the profits of companies selling NFL gear? And if the NFL wants to do that, why don't they guarantee it out of the owners' pockets instead of forcing the costs on the players?
On-the -field performance also affects how well jerseys sell. The next step will be penalizing players financially for having a bad year, causing a drop in sales of their jerseys.
On-the -field performance also affects how well jerseys sell. The next step will be penalizing players financially for having a bad year, causing a drop in sales of their jerseys.
gump
Footballguy
Jason - please read my post above. There is an agreement in place...that agreement does not include trades or other instances in which the player has no control.I do think the 100,000 units is highly questionable though.
GregR_2
Footballguy
I'd say gump cleared this up pretty well.If the owners cause the back stock to be invalidated, (i.e. a trade), the player isn't made to pay, it's the team who was responsible.
If it was the player and not the team that caused the change, however, then it's the player's dime if he wants that stock replaced.
Jason Wood
Zoo York
Thanks gump, I missed that before posting.
I still think Chad could fight this if he wanted. How a financial deal between the NFL and Reebok could prevent Chad from legally changing his name is beyond me. Again, I can see if Reebok wants to not print new jerseys that say "Ocho Cinco" [even though I suspect they would sell boatloads], I can't fathom how they can/are preventing Chad from changing his OWN ACTUAL jersey.
ChromeWeasel
Footballguy
Look, the Union obviously agreed to this clause. Once that's negotiated with a union I don't want to hear anyone complaining about it. This isnt a working class guy we're talking about who has to make ends meet. This is a union of multi-millionaires. They set up a system that makes every player rich. Every few years the union makes a big stink about things and re-settles on a new contract. Once the contract is signed, I expect the players to abide by those agreements without complaints to the public. If they have a problem they need to take it up with their union. They are the ones who negotiated the contract. It doesnt belong in the public's ear at all.Now that we know the facts, any complaints about this should be directed at the players union, and not at the NFL.Thanks gump, I missed that before posting.
GregR_2
Footballguy
It isn't preventing Chad Johnson from legally changing his name. It's stopping him from changing HIS JERSEY unless he's willing to pay the resulting costs of it since he's the one who caused it to need to be changed.I'd have to imagine the CBA or some other agreement would have to be in place for the NFL to be able to sell merchandise that uses player names on it in the first place. I'd also have to assume if the NFL and Reebok are able to do this, then its in that contract the players signed that they are responsible for costs incurred by their choosing to change their name or number.Thanks gump, I missed that before posting.I still think Chad could fight this if he wanted. How a financial deal between the NFL and Reebok could prevent Chad from legally changing his name is beyond me. Again, I can see if Reebok wants to not print new jerseys that say "Ocho Cinco" [even though I suspect they would sell boatloads], I can't fathom how they can/are preventing Chad from changing his OWN ACTUAL jersey.
I suppose if that isn't the case COC may have a good case, or even if it is in the contract he could try to challenge the contract. But I'd have to think the NFL would have agreements in place with the players, and wouldn't be able to take this stance if it wasn't in that contract, right?
Now how ******* cool would that be! I love Johnson. I hope he changes his name to halahu akbar ocho cinco, or something of the sort.If Johnson had converted to Islam there's NO WAY the NFL would have tried this stunt.
Phurfur
Footballguy
This is not the way I understood it at all. I read a different article and it implied he would have to pay to replace HIS game jerseys. It said nothing about the Jerseys for sale to the public. I tend to believe this because it makes sense. I do not have a link to this article it is just what I remember. I could be wrong.
GregR_2
Footballguy
The article I first saw was Yahoo referencing a CNBC article. I found the CNBC article. More details in it. Jerry Porter scrapped plans to do a number change because he'd have had to pay $210,00 to buy back the already-made jerseys:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/26610696/site/14081545
http://www.cnbc.com/id/26610696/site/14081545
Monday, 8 Sep 2008
No Ochocinco Reebok Jerseys For Chad?
Posted By
Cincinnati Bengals wide receiver Chad Johnson legally changed his name to Chad Ochocinco (note that it’s one word). But “Ochocinco” might not appear on his jersey for the rest of the year?
Here’s the deal.
Reebok, which makes the league’s jerseys, and licensees have to protect themselves from a player suddenly changing their number (it’s normally not a name), so they make them change whatever they need to change months before the season. Failure to do so means that a change likely won’t be made that season.
The sticking point is that for a receiver of Johnson’s caliber, there’s likely as much as 100,000 “C. Johnson” jerseys, not only in Reebok inventory, but in store shelves around the country.
If Johnson wanted to buy out all the jerseys, a source with knowledge of the situation said it would cost him the cost to make the jersey, which is roughly 60 percent of the retail price. That would be about $48 a jersey or $4.8 million if that 100,000 number is reality.
No player has ever bought out his jerseys like this. The closest a player has come to doing it was Oakland Raiders wide receiver Jerry Porter, who after the 2007 season wanted to wear No. 81 instead of No. 84. But when Porter was told he’d have to pay $210,000, he scrapped the plans. As it turns out, Porter is now with the Jacksonville Jaguars wearing No. 80.
The problem for Reebok is in the fact that the market isn’t exactly going to get better for the “C. Johnson” jerseys. After all, if Johnson is eventually going to become “Ochocinco” next year, why would anyone ever buy a “C. Johnson” now?
The fact that Ochocinco jerseys might not be available for the entire season is certainly boosting the black market for the jerseys.
footballnerd
Footballguy
kingmalaki
Footballguy
So Reebock basically wants other companies/jersey makers to be the ones to profit from "Ocho Cinco" jerseys?
Nike rules for a reason.........
Nike rules for a reason.........
Wreckincrew
Footballguy
But when you factor in that each child born in Wisconsin is issued a #4 jersey & a 12 pack of Milwaukee's Best Light with their birth certificate it really doesn't seem like that many.
gump
Footballguy
Reebok has the exclusive rights to NFL jerseys. Nike has zero NFL apparel rights, and would never bootleg product...not only because it's illegal, but also because they desperately want the NFL onfield rights in 2012.
TitusIII
Footballguy
If Chad really wants to fight this, and waste some dollars, he'll win...
In fact, the NFL would be scolded pretty harshly, but what do they care? It's a simple power trip...
If CJ wants to change his name, so be it, if the NFL(who is acting like a spoiled child in this instance) doesn't want to recongnize the change, so be it. CJ isn't the one who will come out of this with egg on face.
In fact, the NFL would be scolded pretty harshly, but what do they care? It's a simple power trip...
If CJ wants to change his name, so be it, if the NFL(who is acting like a spoiled child in this instance) doesn't want to recongnize the change, so be it. CJ isn't the one who will come out of this with egg on face.
Last edited by a moderator:
GregR_2
Footballguy
No. US laws and whatever contract Chad signed where he gave power to someone else to market merchandise with his name is what can compel him.
gump
Footballguy
NFL merch is a BILLION $$ industry. This is business.
FinHead
Footballguy
Wow... and this clown doesn't?
randall146
Footballguy
That's such a strange agreement. Isn't it the case that the players don't individually make money from their individual jerseys being sold, but instead the NLFPA gets a percentage of total merchandising and splits it up? If that's the case I could see the player's association having to pay replacement costs, but not the individual player.gump said:
Last edited by a moderator:
