WOW....I think the NFL might have it's priorities all wrong.....

[Giveemlove]

Ok RC and AZ, since you brought up the point of it all going to charity (I wasn't aware of that)....Start fining more often!

At least it isn't going in some big lug's pocket.

[rcsodak]

Ok RC and AZ, since you brought up the point of it all going to charity (I wasn't aware of that)....Start fining more often!

At least it isn't going in some big lug's pocket.

hahahaha....

...well, gem, some think we're one-in-the-same......I would be so lucky....haha


Sorry about doubling up on az's post....that's what I get for not reading the entire thread.

That'll learn me.

[Giveemlove]

hahahaha....

...well, gem, some think we're one-in-the-same......I would be so lucky....haha


Sorry about doubling up on az's post....that's what I get for not reading the entire thread.

That'll learn me.

I've noticed a flaw in being a Captain....it should give me the right to CP you even if I did just a few days ago.

[Davii]

I do find it pretty ridiculous that he was fine 5k earlier in the year for a helmet to helmet hit, you know, one in which he jeaporadized the career, if not life, of another man.

And fined 100k for wearing a hat with a different sponsor on it? Come on.
If that's now the fine for wearing an unapproved sponsor then the fines for on-field conduct need to go up accordingly.

[Ravage!!!]

I do find it pretty ridiculous that he was fine 5k earlier in the year for a helmet to helmet hit, you know, one in which he jeaporadized the career, if not life, of another man.

And fined 100k for wearing a hat with a different sponsor on it? Come on.
If that's now the fine for wearing an unapproved sponsor then the fines for on-field conduct need to go up accordingly.

But Urlacher KNEW he was going to be finded for wearing that wrong hat. I promise you, he KNEW it and he knew the fine he would get for it, and he chose to do it anyway. Considering the sponsor PAID him to wear that hat, then it makes SENSE to fine them for MORE money than an on-field contact violation, that was unintentional in the heat of play. The intentional and flagrant activities on the field, such as stomping on a guys head, gets bigger fines.

Trust me.... Urlacher came out JUST FINE with this penalty. He wasn't shocked by it, and he STILL made good money. Its no sweat off his brow.

[Davii]

But Urlacher KNEW he was going to be finded for wearing that wrong hat. I promise you, he KNEW it and he knew the fine he would get for it, and he chose to do it anyway. Considering the sponsor PAID him to wear that hat, then it makes SENSE to fine them for MORE money than an on-field contact violation, that was unintentional in the heat of play. The intentional and flagrant activities on the field, such as stomping on a guys head, gets bigger fines.

Trust me.... Urlacher came out JUST FINE with this penalty. He wasn't shocked by it, and he STILL made good money. Its no sweat off his brow.

I'm not saying it was any sweat off his brow. Personally I think they should have taken from him exactly what he made. He signed a contract with the NFL which he certainly was in breach of and the NFL could have sued and subpeonead Vitamin Water records to find out how much he was paid.

My point is that on the field flagrant violations that lead to fines and suspensions should be fined heavier, or just as heavy, as something along these lines.

How about that Titan D-lineman that stepped on old boy from Dallas making him get 30 stitches to the head? Remember his fine? 25k!

What was old boy from the Faiders fined for his knee to the groin? 25K!

Urlacher should be forced to forfeit all proceeds from his purposeful flaunting of regulations and his breach of contract should THEN be fined an additional 25k, and no more.

If he made 200k for wearing the hat and drinking the water then make him pay 200k to Gatorade and then fine him 25k.

The fine itself should not be more than egregious on field violations.

[Ravage!!!]

I'm not saying it was any sweat off his brow. Personally I think they should have take from him exactly what he made. He signed a contract with the NFL which he certainly was in breach of and the NFL could have sued and subpeonead Vitamin Water records to find out how much he was paid.

My point is that on the field flagrant violations that lead to fines and suspensions should be fined heavier, or just as heavy, as something along these lines.

How about that Titan D-lineman that stepped on old boy from Dallas making him get 30 stitches to the head? Remember his fine? 25k!

What was old boy from the Faiders fined for his knee to the groin? 25K!

Urlacher should be forced to forfeit all proceeds from his purposeful flaunting of regulations and his breach of contract should THEN be fined an additional 25k, and no more.

If he made 200k for wearing the hat and drinking the water then make him pay 200k to Gatorade and then fine him 25k.

The fine itself should not be more than egregious on field violations.

I couldn't disagree with you more. I do NOT think we need to start fining more, and making the fines bigger. Jeeez. Both those guys were suspended (or at least Haynesworth was), and I'm pretty sure when suspended like that, they weren't being paid.

But I don't think the fines on the field need to be bigger. The hard hitting is what makes this sport what it is. We have already seen the sport 'weaken' becaues players are worried about fines. We keep fining more money, then the sport might as well be flag football.

[Davii]

I couldn't disagree with you more. I do NOT think we need to start fining more, and making the fines bigger. Jeeez. Both those guys were suspended (or at least Haynesworth was), and I'm pretty sure when suspended like that, they weren't being paid.

But I don't think the fines on the field need to be bigger. The hard hitting is what makes this sport what it is. We have already seen the sport 'weaken' becaues players are worried about fines. We keep fining more money, then the sport might as well be flag football.

Notice the word egregious. The helmet to helmet hit was a little less than what i'm talking about. I'm talking about the stomp to the head when the play is dead, the knee to the groin when the play is dead, etc.

If you re-read the post I said I don't think an off field sponsor thing should be fined MORE than an on field one, especially one of an egregious nature.

The actual FINE for the wearing of the hat should be no MORE than the fines levied on the field. In addition, he should owe Gatorade, the official drink sponsor, the money he was paid while in breach of contract. Yes, this makes his penalty much stiffer than an on field violation, but this shouldn't count as a "fine" per se, only the 25k should.

IMO

[Ravage!!!]

Notice the word egregious. The helmet to helmet hit was a little less than what i'm talking about. I'm talking about the stomp to the head when the play is dead, the knee to the groin when the play is dead, etc.

If you re-read the post I said I don't think an off field sponsor thing should be fined MORE than an on field one, especially one of an egregious nature.

The actual FINE for the wearing of the hat should be no MORE than the fines levied on the field. In addition, he should owe Gatorade, the official drink sponsor, the money he was paid while in breach of contract. Yes, this makes his penalty much stiffer than an on field violation, but this shouldn't count as a "fine" per se, only the 25k should.

IMO

well, then you are getting into symantics. If you are forcing him to pay gatorade the money he earned, then isn't that in reality a fine? You are taking money from his pocket that he received and giving it out.

Plus, I think that it does give the players the choice. If they have a sponsor that is willing to not only give them money, but pay their fines, then you see what kind of person that player is. If the NFL finds it to be a problem with players wearing unauthorized sponsors at NFL events, then I'm sure you'll see them levying larger fines.

But I don't think the NFL wants to go through sueing the water company (or whatever company it was) to get their records to find out how much was paid in order to demand repayment from Urlacher. The NFL knows that the other companies have the right to offer amounts of money to players to wear something, and its up to the player to say yes/no and accept the fine.

Plus... I don't know if you can make Urlacher pay gatorade the money for breach of contract, when Urlacher himself wasn't under contract with gatorade. He was under contract with the NFL. So there is probably a written.. set... amount of money that would be fined to a player for wearing such gear, and thats how Urlacher knew what he would be fined, and how much he would have to pay out if he wore the hat. That is probably part of the NFLPA's contract with the NFL. It may always HAVE to have a pre-designated set amount rather than letting the NFL arbitrarily come up with fine amounts.

I'm betting, that if this continues to be a problem, they will then raise the fine for wearing unauthorized sponsors.

[Davii]

well, then you are getting into symantics. If you are forcing him to pay gatorade the money he earned, then isn't that in reality a fine? You are taking money from his pocket that he received and giving it out.

Plus, I think that it does give the players the choice. If they have a sponsor that is willing to not only give them money, but pay their fines, then you see what kind of person that player is. If the NFL finds it to be a problem with players wearing unauthorized sponsors at NFL events, then I'm sure you'll see them levying larger fines.

But I don't think the NFL wants to go through sueing the water company (or whatever company it was) to get their records to find out how much was paid in order to demand repayment from Urlacher. The NFL knows that the other companies have the right to offer amounts of money to players to wear something, and its up to the player to say yes/no and accept the fine.

Plus... I don't know if you can make Urlacher pay gatorade the money for breach of contract, when Urlacher himself wasn't under contract with gatorade. He was under contract with the NFL. So there is probably a written.. set... amount of money that would be fined to a player for wearing such gear, and thats how Urlacher knew what he would be fined, and how much he would have to pay out if he wore the hat. That is probably part of the NFLPA's contract with the NFL. It may always HAVE to have a pre-designated set amount rather than letting the NFL arbitrarily come up with fine amounts.

I'm betting, that if this continues to be a problem, they will then raise the fine for wearing unauthorized sponsors.

He's under contract to the NFL. The NFL has a contract with Gatorade. I guarantee that in the CBA, or specifically in players contracts, is legal language expressly prohibiting the wearing of unauthorized paraphanelia.

There's no need to sue Vitamin Water, again, I didn't suggest that. The NFL should sue Brian Urlacher and have Vitamin Water subpeonaed for the purpose of determining the amount of money involved.

IF the NFL plans to make a statement on this conduct that is the ONLY way to do it. If Urlacher made more than the 100k he was fined by the NFL then he still benefited. Vitamin Water definitely benefited and if it is lucrative for the players this will continue to be a problem. This must be dealt with, but not in terms of huge fines.

Any idea how much you would wind up fining players? How much does a 30 sec Super Bowl commercial cost? How long was Urlacher on TV? Now tell me realistically how much you think he was paid.

This is a LEGAL problem dealing with breach of contract. Not unsportsmanlike conduct or anything related to playing the game of football.

Yes, the NFL should also fine him in addition, but not more than a blatant, or egregious, on field penalty would deserve.

This is not semantics, it's handling things the right way the first time to ensure they don't get out of hand.

[Davii]

Not to mention that the official sponsor got screwed in the deal. If this type of behavior is allowed to continue it will erode the sponsorship deals the NFL is able to make.

Urlacher should be forced to make amends to Gatorade, and THEN fined. Gatorade paid millions of dollars to be the official sports drink only to have some other sports drink get advertising time courtesy of Urlacher.

Besides, Urlacher can write a fine off on his taxes as a charitable donation as all fines are given to charities.

This is a legal matter as it pertains to the actual sponsorship deal, and the breach of contract.

Last time I checked the NFL isn't a judiciary authority.

[broncosfanscott]

Urlacher is probably going to make even more from that vitamen water or whatever the name is because look how we are all taking about it as well as being all over ESPN. Now that's advertising. So the 100K is just small potatoes.

[broncolee]

OK....I'll say it one more time.

Don't mess with the money.

It doesn't make sense to say that the fine wasn't fair because players get fined a lot less for a helmet to helmet hit or for stomping on someone's head, or whatever else.

Most of the on field incidents that result in fines were not committed intentionally. Those that are, such as stomping on someone's head, result in suspensions which cost the players game checks in addition to any fine they get. Why would the NFL fine someone $100,000 for a helmet to helmet hit that was probably just the result of bad timing or poor tackling form. I think the fine just serves as a reminder that the player needs to be more careful when making a tackle or a block.

But, when you start messing with the money, you are going to find yourself in a lot more trouble. The NFL signs big contracts for sponsorships and the players undoubtedly sign paperwork stating that they will live up to certain agreements between the NFL and it's sponsors. Any player that violates those agreements is putting the NFL in jeopardy of losing a significant amount of money. When a player does that, the penalty has to fit the violation.

[sneakers]

Bears | Urlacher fined
Wed, 18 Apr 2007 12:32:16 -0700

The Associated Press reports Chicago Bears LB Brian Urlacher has been fined $100,000 by the NFL for wearing a hat promoting a sponsor not authorized by the league during media day at the Super Bowl.


Sorry, I know this isn't about the Bronco's, but I was especially upset when I read this. They fine Urlacher A HUNDRED GRAND for wearing the wrong damm hat?

I am pretty sure he could go out on the field on gamday wearing a helmet and a dress and not get fined that much.......

When players are doing things to deliberately try to hurt other players on the field and they get fined what, like 15K?

Seems very excessive, just goes to show that when it comes to their revenue, the NFL doesn't mess around. Injuring other players or acting a fool during a game in front of a national audience; that's ok, here's a little slap on the wrist, but not calling DADDY to make sure your hat is cool before you leave home, WATCH OUT!!!

I would fight to the end on this if I were Urlacher.......

I think that it is you who has it wrong. Think of it this way:

An employer has the right to have make any rules it wants (except illegal things) regarding its employees. And it is the employees responsibility to follow the rules layed out by his employer.

I am sure the place where you work has an employee handbook or manual regarding the things that are/aren't allowed.

So in some eyes, Urlacher was insubordinate towards his employer when he wore the silly hat.

[Jared]

While the fine might be excessive, given the amount charged for dangerous/dirty play in the past, the fact that he was fined is no problem for me.

I mean, seriously, all the players know EXACTLY what is allowed and what isn't in regards to gear.

So, unlike a hit, which may not be intentional, this clearly was.

Plus, it is unfair to compare this to fines levied for on the field action recently, because this current commissioner has not levied any on the field fines yet. If he only fines a player $10,000 for a very late hit out of bounds or something, then yes, this fine will be ridiculous by comparison.

However, if players are going to start losing a quarter to a half million or more for dirty or unsportmanlike play, then this will seem tame by comparison. Let wait and see what Goodell does in the regular season before definitively judging it as excessive.