| 0 |
Subject: Bryant Gumbel's Comments
Posted by: Pancho Villa
- [366352418] Mon, Aug 21, 2006, 21:55
Will the NFL Network endorse censorship, as Bryant Gumbel exercises some free speech?
link
"Before he cleans out his office," Gumbel said. "Have Paul Tagliabue show you where he keeps Gene Upshaw's leash. By making the docile head of the players union his personal pet, your predecessor has kept the peace without giving players the kind of guarantees other pros take for granted. Try to make sure no one competent ever replaces Upshaw on your watch."
Does the NFL really just want lapdogs who tow the company line? How boring.
|
| 1 | Motley Crue
ID: 2192327
Mon, Aug 21, 2006, 22:01
|
I was just reading about this at PFT.com
NFL TO HUMBLE GUMBEL?
The Associated Press reports that outgoing NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue said on Monday that incoming Commish Roger Goodell and NFL Network chief Steve Bornstein will discuss after September 1 remarks recently made by Bryant Gumbel on his HBO show. Implicit in Tagliabue's comments is the possibility that Gumbel might be nudged out of his new job as play-by-play announcer for the NFL Network's slate of eight regular-season games.
Gumbel's gaffe? He publicly took a shot at the NFL and the NFL Players Association.
In closing remarks from last Tuesday's show that were aimed at Goodell, Gumbel said: "Before he cleans out his office, have Paul Tagliabue show you where he keeps Gene Upshaw's leash. By making the docile head of the players union his personal pet, your predecessor has kept the peace without giving players the kind of guarantees other pros take for granted. Try to make sure no one competent ever replaces Upshaw on your watch."
Gumbel also advised Goodell to "keep a close eye on the ugly owners' split that surfaced last March" and to "[g]ently remind those millionaires who gave you the job that they are already making obscene amounts of money."
Said Tagliabue in response: "What Gumbel said about Gene Upshaw and our owners is about as irresponsible as anything I've heard in a long time."
Our view? Gumbel's words are more ignorant than irresponsible.
If anything, the perception of late has been that Tagliabue was wearing the collar, and that Upshaw possessed the pooper-scooper. After all, the union successfully changed the formula for funding the salary cap by expanding significantly the universe of revenues that will be used to determine the team-by-team spending limit. The union also pumped up the salary floor, which in some cities is more important than the salary cap, since a low floor permits teams like the Cardinals to enhance their profit margin by keeping player costs to a minimum. And there's a strong sense that the union stuck it to the NFL as to the non-economic terms, such as the restriction of bonus forfeitures and the elimination of the ability of teams to pay a troublemaker to stay home.
Also, Upshaw's primary flaw (as we see it) hasn't been that he's allowed himself to be pushed around by the NFL, but that he has given high-profile agents like Tom Condon (who coincidentally represents Upshaw) far too much influence over the manner in which the NFLPA does its business. As a general proposition, the rank-and-file players would love to get rid of the lottery prizes paid to the first handful of guys drafted each year, since those windfalls to unproven players can otherwise go to veterans who have scratched and clawed a career in pro football. But because the agents who routinely represent one of more of those Powerball winners don't want to give up their cut of deals that are worth multiple millions of dollars, the union pretends that it's not an issue.
Likewise, the union never has pushed for fully-guaranteed player contracts, which are now prevalent in all other major league sports. Why not? In our view, the high-end agents realize that guaranteed contracts would result in less cap space for those huge signing bonuses. Plus, guaranteed salaries would wipe out the bogus back end numbers that appear in many superstar contracts, and that the agents then use as bait for the next wave of potential top-ten draft picks.
Gumbel's comments also are stoopid because he has taken a reckless hip shot at the 32 people who each own a piece of the network for which he'll be working. Don't get us wrong on this. Gumbel's willingness to say what he thinks reflects a high degree of integrity, and his desire to stir things up is a rarity in a media populated by so many folks who are afraid to tell the truth. However, saying what you think has as much value as the bark of a teacup poodle if what you're saying is incorrect.
Sure, all of the owners are making money. But if the extra millions in unshared money earned by the big-market teams are going to drive up the salary cap for the franchise that can't and never will realize that kind of revenue, the imbalance could eventually impact the on-field level of competitiveness. That's why the issue is so important, despite the fact that the folks who'll be most affected by its resolution will continue to be filthy rich.
You'd think that Gumbel would be smart enough to figure that out. He surely thinks that he is.
There's a difference, then, between "telling it like it is" and "spouting off about issues you don't fully understand." In our belief, the courage to be candid should be rooted in a confidence that the criticisms offered are correct.
So in Gumbel's case, his biggest sin wasn't speaking his mind. It was allowing his mind to be made up based on an inaccurate assessment of the available facts.
I think Florio's right to an extent. Gumbel needs to research this situation more so that he understands all of the nuances. I think it's a bit of a simplistic view he has.
|
| 2 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Mon, Aug 21, 2006, 23:12
|
Bryant has balls. Wish more were like him.
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|