The thought of key players dropping out of the union

[khensu]

Quote: Originally Posted by NMSU

Nope. To sell their likeness to another company, they would have to drop from the union. If they dropped from the union, they couldn't be in Madden. So, to get this to happen, you would need Sega to pony up enough money to make it worthwhile for the player to quit the union. That would take a lot of money, considering that the player would be ineligible for a pension, as well as all the other protections and services that the union provides.

correct me if i'm wrong, but every employee is afforded the right to participate in a retirement program of a company irregardless of thier union status...I'm just questioning the legality of such an arrangement...and before you bite my head off, i'm just asking the question....

[CheckMate]

Quote: Originally Posted by NMSU

You have no concept of the business world, nor what it takes to get the BIGGEST star in football to endorse the SECOND BEST football game. Sega payed a heck of a lot more than $50,000 to get TO's mug on their game, you can be sure of that. Hell, TO majored in merchandising in college. He, better than anyone else, knows what his face on the cover is worth. And if you really think that you can get a star to "take some pictures, do a commercial or two, etc" for 50 grand, you are intensely naive. Leave business to the grownups and those of us who have business educations, mkay?

Did I hit a sore spot? Go cuddle with your business education for a while, you'll feel better.

[pietasterp]

Quote: Originally Posted by rmacteague

Are people on this site really that delusional? Right, a player is going to give up all of his union rights which have been fought for over the last 30 years which include the following: -- salary negotations leverage -- retirement plan privledges -- legal representation/protection All for a football videogame.... Right........

You don't have to drop out of the union and forfeit all benefits/perks. Any player at any time can just not sign the NFLPA licensing agreement, without ramifications or forfeiture of PA rights/privleges. LaVarr Arrington did so not two years ago. Barry Bonds continues to do so. As did MJ for years, as has been pointed out. All were/are still members of their respective players' unions, they just didn't sign the licensing agreements.

BTW, there's no way in hell anyone would do that over this issue...NFL players, much like 3rd graders, all only want to play what everyone else is playing/what's most popular or hyped. That's why they're all Madden fans.

[Lester206]

don't most NFL players like Madden more anyway? don't they all play Madden durin training camps and stuff?

[NovaStar]

Quote: Originally Posted by NMSU

I "got it" the first time. You're just wrong and naive. ESPN football is the 2nd best football game out there. It just is. These guys grew up on Madden, Madden is what they play. Didn't you see the special on MTV last night? They don't have NFL2K5 Bowls at the Super Bowl. They don't play the ESPN games. Madden is THE game.

Obviously you didn't get it, how long as espn been second to ea? Since it has existed. Well, why then did T.O put his face on the box ,if it is like you said the second fiddle? And why did Warren Sapp put his face on it if is second fiddle and no pro's play the game? Your statement makes no sense. Bottomline, from a monetary standpoint VC if is chose to and if it is economically feasible could pay Big Ben Roths or T.O or whoever to endorse their game if legally possible. This would help the sales of any game they chose to produce. Where did you get your economic degree from again?

If ea had your opinion we wouldn't be having this discussion because they wouldn't have pulled the b*itch move. Obviously your precious ea thought more of Espn than you and your great business mind did.

[NMSU]

Quote: Originally Posted by CheckMate

Did I hit a sore spot? Go cuddle with your business education for a while, you'll feel better.

Yeah, you hit a sore spot. I can't stand uneducated people talking about subjects that I have been educated in.

[NMSU]

Quote: Originally Posted by NovaStar

Obviously you didn't get it, how long as espn been second to ea? Since it has existed. Well, why then did T.O put his face on the box ,if it is like you said the second fiddle? And why did Warren Sapp put his face on it if is second fiddle and no pro's play the game? Your statement makes no sense. Bottomline, from a monetary standpoint VC if is chose to and if it is economically feasible could pay Big Ben Roths or T.O or whoever to endorse their game if legally possible. This would help the sales of any game they chose to produce. Where did you get your economic degree from again? If ea had your opinion we wouldn't be having this discussion because they wouldn't have pulled the b*itch move. Obviously your precious ea thought more of Espn than you and your great business mind did.

Money. To answer everything you asked, money.

Why did TO and Sapp put their faces on the game? Money. Same reason Manning put his on Rivals. It was money.

Bad games buy licenses all the time. It doesn't mean that those players, actors, groups, etc. like the game at all. Someone presents them with a contract and a boatload of money, and they sign.

And you ask where I got my degree from (trust me, it's from a school that you would have no chance of being admitted to), yet you have zero concept of how business works. You ask why TO wouldn't sign to endorse a non-NFL game...well...Sega wouldn't offer them because it's not economically feasible. The difference in sales due to the endorsement would not offset the cost of signing the player to endorse it. And they couldn't offer enough money to entice the player into leaving the union.

And no, MJ wasn't non-union, he had a special deal where he owned his likeness. The NBA and NBAPA went along with it because none of them would have made anywhere near as much money without him because of the exposure he brought to the game.

And yes, EA and I are of the same opinion here. ESPN tried to undercut EA by selling their games for $20. EA matched, but ESPN took some of their market, not because their game was better (it wasn't), but because it was cheaper. So they bought the exclusive license so that they wouldn't have to sell their games at $30 anymore. Great move.

[Rocky]

Quote: Originally Posted by NMSU

Nope. To sell their likeness to another company, they would have to drop from the union. If they dropped from the union, they couldn't be in Madden. So, to get this to happen, you would need Sega to pony up enough money to make it worthwhile for the player to quit the union. That would take a lot of money, considering that the player would be ineligible for a pension, as well as all the other protections and services that the union provides.

If that's the case, that's a straight up jack. If I'm a NFL player, I'm asking "Why don't I have control over myself." The NFL union is SUPPOSED to provide benefits whether a player wants to sell his likeness or not. I don't think that's the case. A player could sell itself to another game(like Griffey) and still be apart of the union, he just would also have to be in Madden too.