- Messages
- 79,281
- Reaction score
- 45,652
Gene Upshaw, executive director of the NFL Players Association, met with USA TODAY reporters and editors Thursday and discussed a wide range of issues, including negotiations with the league for an extension of the collective bargaining agreement with players. Excerpts from the conversation:
Gene Upshaw is negotiating with the NFL for an extension of the collective bargaining agreement.
By Khue Bui for USA TODAY
Q: Were you surprised by (Commissioner Paul) Tagliabue's response to the Terrell Owens commercial before Monday's game?
A: I was in his office at the time, and he (Tagliabue) looked at it, and, God, he was really upset. He knew nothing about it. But the Eagles had to know everything about it. To do that type of spot in the locker room in a uniform, there's no way they didn't know.
Q: Do players have the right to say, "No, I don't want to do this?"
A: Yes. Believe me, I don't know if (Owens) was the first choice to do this, but if they went to other guys I'm sure some of them said, 'No, I don't want to do that, I don't want to be portrayed in that light.'
Q: Isn't it hypocritical, the NFL's stance on this, given the Coors ad and stuff that goes on in some of those commercials?
A: Obviously when you see those type of ads ... the twins and all of that, it's not anyone on a team, in a uniform, in the locker room doing those types of ads. That's completely different. You have to draw a line there. Especially with everything that happened during the Super Bowl. You'd think everyone would have learned, but that obviously didn't occur. When you look at the beer ads and when you look at the stadiums and what they're trying to do to generate revenues, it does look like a double standard. But there's certain things you can control and others you can't control.
Q: How do you feel about T.O. in general?
A: With him it seems that each week you don't know what the next thing is going to be. You just know it's going to be something. And because he gets in the end zone, there's no doubt he has talent, so he's able to stretch it a lot more than most. Like they say, you don't want him to celebrate, then keep him out of the end zone. ... As a player and what he does on the field and for his teammates, there's no question he helps them.
Q: At that last owner's meeting, you were kind of forceful in your comments about where an agreement should go and what revenues should go into the salary pool. The owners countered that you were not taking costs into account. Are you also making an argument for some of the lower-revenue clubs when it comes to the league's revenue-sharing issue?
A: We see the revenue-sharing, and I like to call it cost-shifting. When you say revenue sharing among the owners, it's like you just grew three heads. ... But we're in a situation where 37% of the revenues are unshared, and that's grown from 30% in 1994. That's just going to get bigger. What that really means when you have a salary cap is that No. 1, we're able to control your No. 1 expense. So if we control that with a salary cap and a benefit, severance or pension, and if you're Dan Snyder or one of the higher-revenue clubs, to go buy that one benefit, it probably cost him 67 cents, where it cost a lower-revenue club $2. So they get the discount. I am considering the costs. They don't want to take into account all the inter-company transactions that go on.
Q: Do the owners have to come to an agreement among themselves on revenue sharing before they can come to an agreement with you?
A: In many ways, we think we almost have to force them to agree. You've got a bunch of haves. But they never want to talk about appreciation ... and there are all kinds of ways you can use that appreciation. And when you have all this cash revenue each year, you can pay off your debt a lot sooner.
Q: How would you like to redefine the defined gross revenue for the next collective bargaining agreement?
A: All football revenues should be used to determine how much the players get. It's all the revenues that players generate in totality. It's not just luxury boxes. It's that 37% out there. We share some of that already, but all of the revenue should be accounted for to reach one percentage (to designate for salaries). We don't share in it to the extent that we think we should. In other words, we want more.
Q: What are some of the other issues you feel need to be addressed?
A: It makes no sense why we have the injured reserve rules that we have, where we put a guy on IR in preseason, he gets well, and we can't bring him back. Or they keep a spot for him on the roster that can be used for someone else. I think that gets to the quality of the game. That's the same thing with the 53-man roster. We pay 53 guys, we suit up 47.
Q: Are there things you'd like to do as a union to limit how many days players are required to spend with their teams during the offseason?
A: At the beginning of the year, you guys were writing about it — we were all looking at the injuries. Why so many injuries? Obviously, we look at it at the end of the season and not during the season, when you can't tell if it's a trend. We looked at it all kinds of ways, by position, by types of injuries. When you talk to the players, they say there's so much required during the offseason that their bodies cannot actually heal. I was talking to Troy Vincent about it. He said that in Buffalo, although they don't have anybody on IR, they have a lot of guys who have been hurt since April. Kevin Mawae made the same point. Guys have been hurt in the offseason program, and it continues through the year.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2004-11-18-upshaw-interview_x.htm
Gene Upshaw is negotiating with the NFL for an extension of the collective bargaining agreement.
By Khue Bui for USA TODAY
Q: Were you surprised by (Commissioner Paul) Tagliabue's response to the Terrell Owens commercial before Monday's game?
A: I was in his office at the time, and he (Tagliabue) looked at it, and, God, he was really upset. He knew nothing about it. But the Eagles had to know everything about it. To do that type of spot in the locker room in a uniform, there's no way they didn't know.
Q: Do players have the right to say, "No, I don't want to do this?"
A: Yes. Believe me, I don't know if (Owens) was the first choice to do this, but if they went to other guys I'm sure some of them said, 'No, I don't want to do that, I don't want to be portrayed in that light.'
Q: Isn't it hypocritical, the NFL's stance on this, given the Coors ad and stuff that goes on in some of those commercials?
A: Obviously when you see those type of ads ... the twins and all of that, it's not anyone on a team, in a uniform, in the locker room doing those types of ads. That's completely different. You have to draw a line there. Especially with everything that happened during the Super Bowl. You'd think everyone would have learned, but that obviously didn't occur. When you look at the beer ads and when you look at the stadiums and what they're trying to do to generate revenues, it does look like a double standard. But there's certain things you can control and others you can't control.
Q: How do you feel about T.O. in general?
A: With him it seems that each week you don't know what the next thing is going to be. You just know it's going to be something. And because he gets in the end zone, there's no doubt he has talent, so he's able to stretch it a lot more than most. Like they say, you don't want him to celebrate, then keep him out of the end zone. ... As a player and what he does on the field and for his teammates, there's no question he helps them.
Q: At that last owner's meeting, you were kind of forceful in your comments about where an agreement should go and what revenues should go into the salary pool. The owners countered that you were not taking costs into account. Are you also making an argument for some of the lower-revenue clubs when it comes to the league's revenue-sharing issue?
A: We see the revenue-sharing, and I like to call it cost-shifting. When you say revenue sharing among the owners, it's like you just grew three heads. ... But we're in a situation where 37% of the revenues are unshared, and that's grown from 30% in 1994. That's just going to get bigger. What that really means when you have a salary cap is that No. 1, we're able to control your No. 1 expense. So if we control that with a salary cap and a benefit, severance or pension, and if you're Dan Snyder or one of the higher-revenue clubs, to go buy that one benefit, it probably cost him 67 cents, where it cost a lower-revenue club $2. So they get the discount. I am considering the costs. They don't want to take into account all the inter-company transactions that go on.
Q: Do the owners have to come to an agreement among themselves on revenue sharing before they can come to an agreement with you?
A: In many ways, we think we almost have to force them to agree. You've got a bunch of haves. But they never want to talk about appreciation ... and there are all kinds of ways you can use that appreciation. And when you have all this cash revenue each year, you can pay off your debt a lot sooner.
Q: How would you like to redefine the defined gross revenue for the next collective bargaining agreement?
A: All football revenues should be used to determine how much the players get. It's all the revenues that players generate in totality. It's not just luxury boxes. It's that 37% out there. We share some of that already, but all of the revenue should be accounted for to reach one percentage (to designate for salaries). We don't share in it to the extent that we think we should. In other words, we want more.
Q: What are some of the other issues you feel need to be addressed?
A: It makes no sense why we have the injured reserve rules that we have, where we put a guy on IR in preseason, he gets well, and we can't bring him back. Or they keep a spot for him on the roster that can be used for someone else. I think that gets to the quality of the game. That's the same thing with the 53-man roster. We pay 53 guys, we suit up 47.
Q: Are there things you'd like to do as a union to limit how many days players are required to spend with their teams during the offseason?
A: At the beginning of the year, you guys were writing about it — we were all looking at the injuries. Why so many injuries? Obviously, we look at it at the end of the season and not during the season, when you can't tell if it's a trend. We looked at it all kinds of ways, by position, by types of injuries. When you talk to the players, they say there's so much required during the offseason that their bodies cannot actually heal. I was talking to Troy Vincent about it. He said that in Buffalo, although they don't have anybody on IR, they have a lot of guys who have been hurt since April. Kevin Mawae made the same point. Guys have been hurt in the offseason program, and it continues through the year.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2004-11-18-upshaw-interview_x.htm