FanDuel - WFBC

February 06, 2006

Most Valuable Players Wanted More Valuable Paycheck: Four MVPs were missing during last night's Super Bowl pre-game ceremony: the late Harvey Martin, an Australia-vacationing Jake Scott, and quarterbacks Terry Bradshaw and Joe Montana, both of whom reportedly wanted more money.

posted by Big D Alexander to football at 07:36 AM - 69 comments

This is ridiculous. What's the matter Joe? Pissed because players are making more money now than you did back in the day? Or are you afraid that you would be razzed for that awful commercial you just did if you showed up? I'm sorry. Some of the MVP's that showed up never made good money, and showed up anyway. No class whatsoever... and Bradshaw is an ass - always has been, always will be. He sucks on TV, and we all know the "immaculate reception" should have never happened anyway. In all fairness, for a sport that needs to do better in remembering it's former stars, I thought the MVP pregame spot was fantastic.

posted by The Gangstinator at 07:48 AM on February 06

Big D, who made money off the pre-game ceremonies? I don't see how being a "good guy" is connected to helping line the NFL's pockets. Showing up in exchange for some free perks and the chance to make some appearance fees is a sign of class? If there was some kind of greater good money-going-to-victims-of-Hurricane-Katrina thing going on here, then I might have to eat my words. But the article didn't mention that.

posted by Amateur at 07:50 AM on February 06

My quotes of "no class" and "good guy" were based on something I thought I saw in the original link by Big D, but perhaps it was a mirage. Did the text of the FPP change?

posted by Amateur at 08:00 AM on February 06

When the Super Bowl was in Jacksonville last year, you could see that the hype's a good chance for former football players to bask in the glory, enjoy the camaraderie of their fellows and make some money. Bringing all of the MVPs back this year was a nice gesture that should make money for each of them. I hadn't seen Randy White in years. I'm disappointed Montana and Bradshaw skipped it, because it was a chance to honor the other MVPs in addition to themselves. Besides, how does Bradshaw pass up a chance to go out before a crowd at a Steelers Super Bowl? Yeesh.

posted by rcade at 08:05 AM on February 06

I think $100,000 is a little much, but I also think $1,000 is not that much, especially when the NFL is a cash cow.

posted by Turbo at 08:24 AM on February 06

I'm a die hard 49ers fan and to find out why Joe didn't show up to the Super Bowl XL with all the MVP'S that really hurt.As for Bradshaw he sucks on TV and he suck as a football player.....

posted by kjones at 08:26 AM on February 06

As for Bradshaw he sucks on TV and he suck as a football player..... If by "suck as a football player," you mean, "he's got four Super Bowl rings, two Super Bowl Most Valuable Player trophies, and I'm an idiot," then you're very astute.

posted by The_Black_Hand at 08:45 AM on February 06

ole skin head is still one of the best.

posted by ski2 at 08:57 AM on February 06

I was wondering where Montana and Bradshaw were. And hearing this...I"m so utterly disappointed in BOTH of them. Be class acts gentlemen, not class dumbasses...that was a cock move by BOTH men...BOTH of them. I'd vow to NEVER watch the FOX pregame show again if I actually LIKED the CBS one.

posted by chemwizBsquared at 09:13 AM on February 06

Im just tired of all these athletes demanding more money everyday. Unfortunatley because of agents as in the T.O. case they have ruined sports and it will never be the same. It will always be a money hungry business that has taken away from the sport. The only sport that is pure is Golf and Tennis because they work for every penny they earn. But, I wish these athletes would change places with the average people for just a week to see what its like to live off of $400 dollars a week and then see how they feel.

posted by smb871 at 09:26 AM on February 06

But, I wish these athletes would change places with the average people for just a week to see what its like to live off of $400 dollars a week and then see how they feel. Amen. It was in bad taste that Montana and Bradshaw didn't show up, and from what I've read and heard, both were in Detroit the week before the game. Come on, Terry! This was Pittsburgh playing in the Super Bowl! So much for burying the hatchet three years ago.

posted by Rino23 at 09:41 AM on February 06

I get so tired of the selfish athlete mantra repeated over and over again. They played hard when they played and have the permanent aches and pains to prove it. It is long after their playing days, do they owe the NFL in perpetuity for the "opportunity" to play? They were two of the best QBs to play the game and, as fans, we were lucky enough to get to watch them. They don't owe anybody anything now. And, if they can make more in appearance fees by going to a private party instead, why begrudge them? Perhaps, the fans are the ones being selfish?

posted by bperk at 09:46 AM on February 06

Im just tired of all these athletes demanding more money everyday. Unfortunatley because of agents as in the T.O. case they have ruined sports and it will never be the same. Sweet fancy Moses...how come Owens gets mentioned in EVERY football thread? As for asking for money, I see nothing wrong with it. The people that complain about athletes demanding more money had better not be the same that complain to their friends/family that their own company is ripping them off. The only sport that is pure is Golf and Tennis because they work for every penny they earn. I find that pretty funny considering it was all over the sports news this weekend that Tiger Woods got $3million just for showing up at a tournament. But, I wish these athletes would change places with the average people for just a week to see what its like to live off of $400 dollars a week and then see how they feel. I always laugh at this sort of statement. Everyone assumes that every athlete's career is one of money and easy living. Ask one of those journeymen linemen who won't be able to walk properly when they are 35 years old after only playing in the NFL for 3 years, who has no discernable career waiting for him now that he's done playing. Some how he is going to have to support himself and his family on the $450,000 he made (after taxes) for the next 40 years of his life. I'll bet you they'd trade in their "glory" life for a regular one now...

posted by grum@work at 09:46 AM on February 06

The former MVP's weren't there to honor someone else. They were the ones being honored. If two guys (for whatever their reasons) chose not to go and take their bows, what's to get upset about? I think their reasons were trite, but that's their business - not mine.

posted by drevl at 09:47 AM on February 06

Montana appeared in the trippy Dr. Seuss ad.

posted by kirkaracha at 09:54 AM on February 06

I couldn't believe there was no Bradshaw either. I think that given the Steelers were playing in the Superbowl, he pretty much could have guaranteed that he'd make all the money he needed in appearance fees. It almost seems like there must be more to it. Not that I care.

posted by fabulon7 at 10:34 AM on February 06

If the definition of "Being an ass" means having 4 Super Bowl rings,2 MVPs & a very sucessful career on T.V., then I am sure that "many" NFL Quarterbacks would love to be classified with Terry! I too was disappointed not to see "Bradshaw" but as an adult I know that people do have lives beyond Football! The real focus needs to be about the game and how much class that the Seahawks had in losing! They played a great game and proved that they belonged! Besides how many of you tell Steelers fans that they are "Living in the past!" when they talked about their last Super Bowl Win but now want to talk about the past and disrespect Bradshaw? Grow up, life is full of disappointments! Go Steelers!

posted by steelerchooks at 10:50 AM on February 06

An invitation for a paid appearance was declined because the individuals thought the amount was enough. What is the big deal? These MVPs are not obligated to take you down memory lane. Also, I'm sure there is no chance the NFL and ABC were trying to exploit them to line their own pockets, lol.

posted by panteeze at 10:58 AM on February 06

Montana appeared in the trippy Dr. Seuss ad. I had the sound off and was busy in another room, but I saw bits and pieces of it. Could someone please explain what was going on there? Was that the introduction to the Super Bowl, or an advertisement?

posted by grum@work at 11:04 AM on February 06

But, I wish these athletes would change places with the average people for just a week to see what its like to live off of $400 dollars a week and then see how they feel so why stop there. Why don't you, for just a week, try to get by on welfare and food stamps so you can see what it's like to live in the ghettos? It's all a matter of perspective. You think they get paid ungodly money for the work they do and there are undoubtedly some people who think you get paid way to much for the work that you do. By the way the money they get is very short (avg NFL running back career is less than 4 years), their lives are cut short because of it (i saw a tv special where for every year a person plays nfl football it cuts off x years from their life expectancy), and even with a shorter life it's a much more miserable life (for someone who played 15 years with no real injuries, my body is now starting to fall apart needing multiple shoulder and knee surgeries...and i never played pro-ball). they get paid a lot of money, but that money is short lived in most occasions and has to last them the rest of their lives since they've dedicated their whole lives to it and rarely have anything else to fall back he only sport that is pure is Golf and Tennis because they work for every penny they earn. that has to be the funniest statment I've ever read and someone who's obviously never played a sport like football to understand what they put into it. Golf? Come on. 60 year old men put in the type of work it needs to excel at it! LOL. A 13 year old girl can put in the effort and excel at it!

posted by bdaddy at 11:05 AM on February 06

"I always laugh at this sort of statement. Everyone assumes that every athlete's career is one of money and easy living. Ask one of those journeymen linemen who won't be able to walk properly when they are 35 years old after only playing in the NFL for 3 years, who has no discernable career waiting for him now that he's done playing. Some how he is going to have to support himself and his family on the $450,000 he made (after taxes) for the next 40 years of his life." poor guy, I say we start an NFL awareness program, "feed our hungry players" Maybe they can take half of my 50k a year, and put clothes on their backs...the Average Salary on the Lowest paying Team in the NFL (chargers) is 453000 a year...I make that about every 8 years...so no offense, but if I can find a way to survive on what I make, there is no reason why they can't. It's not how much you make, it's how much you keep...no one forces them to live a lavish lifestyle, I choose to save money by living in a one bedroom apartment, with a car that does 0 to 60 occasionally. And also there is nothing stopping these players from getting a degree while they are in college, or taking classes in the off season so that they can have a discernable career when they are done playing.

posted by miller at 11:16 AM on February 06

there is nothing stopping these players from getting a degree while they are in college As a 40K guy who was never good enough to get a sports scholarship I have to agree. I actually had to work at piss ant jobs all 7 days a week and get 4 hrs of sleep each night to pay for my education. I don't feel the least bit sorry for these athletes who wasted thier chance for a free education.

posted by njsk8r20 at 11:28 AM on February 06

I go back and forth on the issues this situation involves. With regards to any individual holding out for what they think they can get, that's totally up to them. If it doesn't mean enough for Bradshaw OR Montana to find a reason to be there, then I'm glad they weren't around. I see WAY more of Terry Bradshaw then I ever wanted to see in my life, and Montana has always seemed like he thinks he's some sort of god. As for "How much money is enough," who really knows? Any individual involved with pro sports in this day and age lives in a world of over-inflated worth. The one thing I don't give a damn about, however, is the idea that just because these guys come out of the game they choose to play with aches, pains, etc. that we owe them some sort of gratitude. It's all about career choices, and live with your choice or change it. Some of these guys who played several years ago made money when the cost of living was much, much lower, so if they did make wise decisions with the decent salaries they made, they shouldn't be living on canned soup. Not many human beings can retire in their early-mid thirties, regardless of their profession.

posted by dyams at 11:35 AM on February 06

poor guy, I say we start an NFL awareness program, "feed our hungry players" Maybe they can take half of my 50k a year, and put clothes on their backs...the Average Salary on the Lowest paying Team in the NFL (chargers) is 453000 a year...I make that about every 8 years...so no offense, but if I can find a way to survive on what I make, there is no reason why they can't. It's not how much you make, it's how much you keep...no one forces them to live a lavish lifestyle, I choose to save money by living in a one bedroom apartment, with a car that does 0 to 60 occasionally. And also there is nothing stopping these players from getting a degree while they are in college, or taking classes in the off season so that they can have a discernable career when they are done playing. So you make about 56k a year. There is some mom making 10k supporting 5 kids in harlem that could make the same comment to you when you ask for a raise from your boss because your now having to do the work of Joe in accounting. Next time you ask for a raise just remember that mom saying "oh, I guess we should start a program for him". Come on, you should get rid of your aparment...you can get by on less than that. you can live in an effeciency instead of a 1 beadroom aparment. After all, it's not about the "lavish lifestyle". What do you need a car for? The bus can take you everyone you need to go. It's all a matter of perspective, of which you have none.

posted by bdaddy at 11:35 AM on February 06

Jesus but this discussion has gone off the rails. Nobody's saying you should "feel the least bit sorry" for Joe Montana and Terry Bradshaw. Let's refocus. Complete the following sentence: "Montana and Bradshaw should have gone to the ceremonies, dammit, because they owe it to __________." Because I still don't get it. I'm with panteeze on this one.

posted by Amateur at 11:35 AM on February 06

Right on

posted by miller at 11:37 AM on February 06

there is nothing stopping these players from getting a degree while they are in college As a 40K guy who was never good enough to get a sports scholarship I have to agree. I actually had to work at piss ant jobs all 7 days a week and get 4 hrs of sleep each night to pay for my education. I don't feel the least bit sorry for these athletes who wasted thier chance for a free education. As a former 1-AA football player, let me fill you in with my typical day 6-8 - scheduled workout 8-12 - classes/studying 12-1 - lunch 1-3 - gamefile study 3-5 - practice 5-6 - dinner 6-7 - "free time" 7-9 - gamefilm study 9-12 - study for your classes/homework/etc. later-rinse-repeat. This is for small 1-AA school...I can't imagine how much time the major DI schools like USC put in given the millions that are riding on each game. And you wonder why athletes major in ballroom dancing or flunk out. You pick the easy classes because you know you can't juggle a real schedule around the demands of the program (with a few exceptions of brilliant athletes who actually do manage it).

posted by bdaddy at 11:41 AM on February 06

The original post is NOT what I said. I don't know how it got changed. I just posted this link because I was tired, like other posters, of multimillionaire athletes demanding more money for appearances and autos and etc. Yes, they would be making more money for the league, but the league sure made them a lot of money as well.

posted by Big D Alexander at 11:47 AM on February 06

So you make about 56k a year. There is some mom making 10k supporting 5 kids in harlem that could make the same comment to you when you ask for a raise from your boss because your now having to do the work of Joe in accounting. Next time you ask for a raise just remember that mom saying "oh, I guess we should start a program for him". Come on, you should get rid of your aparment...you can get by on less than that. you can live in an effeciency instead of a 1 beadroom aparment. After all, it's not about the "lavish lifestyle". What do you need a car for? The bus can take you everyone you need to go. It's all a matter of perspective, of which you have none. Im not arguing with that fact at all. I am not asking for more money I am not saying poor me, I am say I CHOOSE to live in an apartment and I CHOOSE to drive a car. I consider myself very wealthy, and very fortunate for whatever opportunities that I have had. My point is I don't want to hear them complaining about not getting enough money when there are people out there who have alot less then them, and are making it work. It's a GREED PERSPECTIVE and I do see it, I grew up in a dirty, broke ass neighborhood, with parents who had to work 2 and 3 jobs just to put food on the table, and they to this day consider themselves fortunate to have a house, and work so don't lecture me on perspective because nobody in this forum has a truly "hard life", because at 11:00 in the morning, on a monday we are sitting at computers arguing about sports

posted by miller at 11:49 AM on February 06

I don't know -- reading some of this awful grammar is making me think I have a hard life. These fellows are grown men and as such are perfectly welcome to not attend these sorts of things for whatever reason they choose. It is interesting that both Bradshaw and Montana thought they had the hammer in negotiating and instead, the NFL declined and the event went on without them. I have a little knowledge of what Montana commands for an appearance at an event, and $100K isn't out of line, at least not in his mind. However, with the list of perks the former MVPs were given and the chance to earn cash through NFL-approved appearances: The former MVPs were guaranteed $1,000 for incidental expenses while in Detroit. The NFL also provided each former Super Bowl MVP with two first-class airplane tickets, a hotel room, a Cadillac for the weekend, two tickets to the game, two tickets to the Friday night commissioner's party, two tickets to a Saturday night party and two tickets to a Sunday tailgate party. There also were opportunities for paid appearances arranged by the NFL. ... it's hard not to wonder what was so important that Joe and Terry couldn't show up. Oh well, more attention for Bart Starr.

posted by wfrazerjr at 12:15 PM on February 06

My point is I don't want to hear them complaining about not getting enough money when there are people out there who have alot less then them so you never have nor never will ask for a raise? Since any money you ask for will undoubtedly be alot more than what other people out there are making, right? That's really what it boils down to. A guy that you consider has a lot of money has asked for a fixed fee to do a job. You think he should do it for free since he already has so much money. My argument simply was, couldn't the same argument be made about you if, for example, your boss asked you to work every weekend in February and you say "I will for time and a half" or "if you give me a nice bonus". Some other, poorer person, could say you're being "greedy" and would be greatful just to make the 50k/year. That's the perspective I'm refering to.

posted by bdaddy at 12:19 PM on February 06

My brother-in-law lived next door in Northern Virginia to the parents of a well-known Washington Redskins player from the '80s. If people knew the prescription regimen the guy's on every day, the physical ailments he endures and how bad they're likely to get, they wouldn't be so quick to envy these athletes. Playing human pinball at full tilt with 350-pound behemoths takes an unbelievable toll.

posted by rcade at 12:20 PM on February 06

Big D Alexander wrote: The original post is NOT what I said. I don't know how it got changed. I just posted this link because blah blah blah multimillionaire athletes blah blah blah. Yeah, I saw what Big D wrote, and the revised version is a lot better, so congratulations to the editor. However, the changes went well beyond a little bit of editorial polish. Does that kind of wholesale revision happen very often?

posted by Amateur at 12:25 PM on February 06

I had the sound off and was busy in another room, but I saw bits and pieces of it. Could someone please explain what was going on there? Was that the introduction to the Super Bowl, or an advertisement? it was the intro to the game , instead of hank williams rockin , it had harrison ford doing a reading of a nursery ryhme , spoof of dr. suess

posted by trrron at 12:35 PM on February 06

Yeah, I saw what Big D wrote, and the revised version is a lot better, so congratulations to the editor. Sorry I'm not a proffesional writer like all of you. I'm just a lowly "lab rat" at a cement plant who likes to sneak a peek at Sportsfilter when I can and throw in my two cents worth sometimes. So thanks editor for making Amateurs experience much more enjoyable!

posted by Big D Alexander at 12:38 PM on February 06

Alright, alright, I'll stop being mean. Good on you for supplying the the front page post, Big D. My first comment was in response to your text, not the revised version, as I noted. (and you misspelled 'professional')

posted by Amateur at 12:46 PM on February 06

"Montana and Bradshaw should have gone to the ceremonies, dammit, because they owe it to __________." themselves. It was a ceremony for the MVP's. For some reason they thought they were above the rest. The are alive and on this side of the planet so the only excuse they had was greed. Hell, they should have known how not showing up was going to make them look bad.

posted by njsk8r20 at 12:48 PM on February 06

okay before I get started, let me say I am a broncos man. NOW the game was rigged, proof you say, was I the only one that saw that the players posing with the trophy during the game were steelers, was I the only one that thought the officials blew too many calls going pittsburg's way just my opinion but you be the judge

posted by SWORDSMANXL at 12:52 PM on February 06

Sorry for the error. Like I said, I'm sneaking a peek so no time for spell checks!

posted by Big D Alexander at 12:53 PM on February 06

The only reason I posted this "front page post" was because I knew it would be a highly debated topic like it has become.

posted by Big D Alexander at 12:54 PM on February 06

so you never have nor never will ask for a raise? Since any money you ask for will undoubtedly be alot more than what other people out there are making, right? That's really what it boils down to. A guy that you consider has a lot of money has asked for a fixed fee to do a job. You think he should do it for free since he already has so much money. My argument simply was, couldn't the same argument be made about you if, for example, your boss asked you to work every weekend in February and you say "I will for time and a half" or "if you give me a nice bonus". Some other, poorer person, could say you're being "greedy" and would be greatful just to make the 50k/year. That's the perspective I'm refering to. Now your just being ignorant

posted by miller at 12:57 PM on February 06

by the way, I never have asked for a raise, and no I never will. I agreed to work for a set amount, and I do. If they give me a raise or a bonus based on performance then I will accept it, but I will not request/demand it

posted by miller at 12:59 PM on February 06

Then, miller, you are a fool. Because, the guy next door is doing the same work, he is going to ask for a raise, and he is going to get it. Then, you are going to be getting less money for doing the same work. I want to make as much money as my employer is willing to pay me for doing my job. If profits are going to be made, I want a share of them. I am not working at my job as a humanitarian for the greater good of mankind -- I am doing it to make a living and support for my family. I have no false sense of loyalty to my employer -- if times got tough, I have no doubt that they would do what they needed to do to make their profits (even if that included layoffs). That is not what greed is, that is just keeping a realistic idea of my worth as an employee. The same goes for an ex- football player. If you are getting offered an appearance fee during the Super Bowl, and one offer is much greater than the other, it is foolish to take the low one so that someone else (the NFL) can make lots of money off of you.

posted by bperk at 01:40 PM on February 06

I'm just a lowly "lab rat" at a cement plant who likes to sneak a peek at Sportsfilter when I can and throw in my two cents worth sometimes. So thanks editor for making Amateurs experience much more enjoyable! I wasn't trying to make you look bad with the edit of the post. It was a great link but you didn't put much in the headline or the description, so I beefed it up.

posted by rcade at 02:12 PM on February 06

Then, miller, you are a fool. Because, the guy next door is doing the same work, he is going to ask for a raise, and he is going to get it. Then, you are going to be getting less money for doing the same work. I want to make as much money as my employer is willing to pay me for doing my job. If profits are going to be made, I want a share of them. I am not working at my job as a humanitarian for the greater good of mankind -- I am doing it to make a living and support for my family. I have no false sense of loyalty to my employer -- if times got tough, I have no doubt that they would do what they needed to do to make their profits (even if that included layoffs). That is not what greed is, that is just keeping a realistic idea of my worth as an employee. The same goes for an ex- football player. If you are getting offered an appearance fee during the Super Bowl, and one offer is much greater than the other, it is foolish to take the low one so that someone else (the NFL) can make lots of money off of you You consider me a fool, I consider myself lucky. I currently have more than I need, and I am content. I don't care if somebody is doing half the work, and getting paid double. If I tell somebody I will work for X amount then I will work for X amount, they can give me a raise if they like, but I don't need it, that is not where my focus is. I understand that a company will not treat me with the same loyalty, and they might lay me off anway, and I am fine with that, it is out of my hands anyway. As for the MVP hall of famers asking for more money...they have the right to just as I have the right to not ask, but I still think it is greedy. They do not need the extra money.

posted by miller at 02:12 PM on February 06

They got paid $1000, got 2 tickets to the game, free airfare, free accomdations and God knows what else. Sell the tickets along with every thing else and make up the money that way. Just show up.

posted by dbt302 at 02:16 PM on February 06

I agree with Grum. Why is Owens always the one we mention when we're talking about holdouts. He's not the only one (By far)

posted by autzenrocker123 at 02:27 PM on February 06

I heard that the reason Montana wasn't there was because his son was playing in a basketball tournament. How DARE he put his son first instead of taking yet another trip down memory lane.

posted by meanjorge at 02:49 PM on February 06

I heard that the reason Montana wasn't there was because his son was playing in a basketball tournament. How DARE he put his son first instead of taking yet another trip down memory lane I have no problem with not going, if they don't want to go, or if they have other priorities that's fine. But to hold out for more money is shady

posted by miller at 02:53 PM on February 06

If you are getting offered an appearance fee during the Super Bowl, and one offer is much greater than the other, it is foolish to take the low one so that someone else (the NFL) can make lots of money off of you. Great point, bperk.

posted by Hugh Janus at 03:08 PM on February 06

It's sad that TO will now play for a contenda, not a team like the Texans. It's amazing that Terry is in every pregame show, but was not in Motown. Lynn Swann skipped out on his campaign to be there. Also, Miami will host SB #10 for them in 3 years. In we had gotten the Sb here in L.A. after we lost the teams, we would have hosted 11 by now. They really need to bring it here, team or no team. The NBA and Sin City are a great example.

posted by Joe88 at 03:11 PM on February 06

Miller, are you saying the NFL is not a for-profit enterprise? Because that's the only way I'd agree that Montana and Bradshaw should have taken what was offered. When you were hired at your current job, or any previous one, did you always accept the first salary offered or was there an occasion when you felt the offer wasn't high enough to meet your estimation of effort involved and spending needs? What if the job was at, say, a hospital, university or pharmaceutical company where your work would contribute, in some small or large way, to the greater good but they just couldn't pay you enough (in your opinion), would you take the job anyway? But let's say Montana did have the son's tournament, I'm guessing that Terry Bradshaw was possibly being carefully not to show up his bosses at Fox.

posted by billsaysthis at 03:20 PM on February 06

Lynn Swann skipped out on his campaign to be there. No, I think he went there BECAUSE of his campaign. Getting paid to appear on national television, being broadcast to probably 95% of your constituents? You can't ask for a better moment as a politician.

posted by grum@work at 03:21 PM on February 06

Wow...I am a lifelong Niner fan and this is just pathetic. Joe wanted more money to be honored? I mean, he's rich beyond belief already, what's his problem. Of course, having been a lifelong Niner fan I do remember the nastiness Joe showed when Steve Young was moving into his position in the early 90s. So being a complete a-hole isn't totally out of character for him. That's just too bad though that Joe couldn't see the bigger picture and participated in the ceremony. Also, Bradshaw's not off the hook here either. That guy is as rich or richer than Montana. Oh well, like the saying goes: It's ALWAYS about the money.

posted by donnnnychris at 03:34 PM on February 06

You consider me a fool, I consider myself lucky. I currently have more than I need, and I am content. I don't care if somebody is doing half the work, and getting paid double. If I tell somebody I will work for X amount then I will work for X amount, they can give me a raise if they like, but I don't need it, that is not where my focus is. I understand that a company will not treat me with the same loyalty, and they might lay me off anway, and I am fine with that, it is out of my hands anyway. As for the MVP hall of famers asking for more money...they have the right to just as I have the right to not ask, but I still think it is greedy. They do not need the extra money. Okay, you feel like you have all the money you need, but how does that translate into judging whether or not Bradshaw or Montana have all the money they need? Do you also get to decide when everyone else reaches the "greed" mark? I don't think some of us would ever reach the point of having all the money we need. Because even when (if ever) I reach enough to take care of my child and her future (don't even get me started on the rate of inflation on a college education), then I still want the money that I can get. That way I get to decide where that "extra" money goes and not the NFL owners or whoever. Let me pick the worthy causes instead of lining someone else's pockets. I don't consider that greedy either.

posted by bperk at 03:37 PM on February 06

The NFL is definitely not a non-profit organization. If I get offered a job, yes I take it, I have never Bartered or argued for more money. I have enough money to pay my bills, and save up some that is all I need, I would not hold out for more money...if I didn't feel I was making enough I would re-assess my bills and figure out what is essential and what I can do without...as far as the MVP standpoints they don't need the money, if they did need it, they would have taken the 1000 anyway. I always find it shady when people with plenty of money, keep holding out for more, it proves that you can never be satisfied...

posted by miller at 03:37 PM on February 06

Okay, you feel like you have all the money you need, but how does that translate into judging whether or not Bradshaw or Montana have all the money they need? Do you also get to decide when everyone else reaches the "greed" mark? I don't think some of us would ever reach the point of having all the money we need. Because even when (if ever) I reach enough to take care of my child and her future (don't even get me started on the rate of inflation on a college education), then I still want the money that I can get. That way I get to decide where that "extra" money goes and not the NFL owners or whoever. Let me pick the worthy causes instead of lining someone else's pockets. I don't consider that greedy either. that gets into the whole sticky argument of how much does anybody really need...do you need the money to survive or to fit your lifestyle...and you will never feel like you have enough money, pro athletes are the perfect picture of that, there is always something that can go wrong and something that can cost all your cash You are always going to feel like you need just a little bit more... even if you have billions invested or in billions in a box in your yard, you will always feel the chance that you can lose it all...between inflation, theives, taxes, war and whatever else, there is no way to completely secure your future, which is why it is important to be content with what I have. Hold it with an open hand, easy come easy go, as long as I have enough to provide for the now, anything else is a "bonus" an above and beyond..., at the end of my life I doubt I will care how much money I had or didn't have...there are other things more important...And I am not qualified to judge anybody, all I can base my opinion on, is the facts that I have read in the news, and the news does make them look greedy, whether it is an accurate portrail is between them and the news, until I hear otherwise I will label it as an excesive desire for more than they need...aka-greed

posted by miller at 03:54 PM on February 06

Big D, Wanted to give you props for the link, and don't be offended by the Pantheon cleaning up your description. To use a cement analogy, you did your job by providing the foundation, man -- let the writers touch up the paint on the house if need be.

posted by wfrazerjr at 04:01 PM on February 06

bradshaw and montana may or may not have had good reasons for passing up the pregame show, but they chose to play footaball and they chose to play in the pros, unfortunately they have forgotten what a pro is and to whom he owes his good fortune to. The fans... not their talent. Archie Manning was better than both montana and bradshaw, but he played in a weak market and weaker fans. (the only player to be voted MVP and was from a loosing team) everything these players have they owe to the NFL and the players who came before and made the league.

posted by frankt111 at 04:13 PM on February 06

miller, I long to live in your utopian fantasy-land where cost-to-income ratios remain static over the course of a lifetime(s). Also, your aspirations in life are admirable; please send me your resume (I kid -- I'm sorry).

All joking aside, though, my personal feelings on this post are about as luke-warm as the game I watched and the beer I was drinking during it. Snooze.

Yeah, Big D, I had a FPP edited before because of general editorialization/snarkiness and I've seen others changed for just a lack of "meat". Thanks; the post was good.

posted by redsnare at 04:18 PM on February 06

"okay before I get started, let me say I am a broncos man. NOW the game was rigged, proof you say, was I the only one that saw that the players posing with the trophy during the game were steelers, " You must have been too drunk by the second half. The first half featured the Steelers posing with the trophy and the second half featured the Seahawks posing. Pay attention next time. Also since you are so observant, just which bad calls are you referring. The push off in the end zone was illegal. The receiver pushed off the defender to change direction, creating separation and that is why he got open and it was illegal. Too make maters worse he did it directly in front of the official. A non call in that situation would have been bad officiating. The TD by Rothlisberger was a TD even by replay. The ball broke the plane of the goaline although barely. It's still a touchdown. Even if you add 4 extra points to the Seahawks for the push off TD instead of the field goal they settled for. Even if you take 4 points away from the Steelers for Rothlisberger's TD had they had to settle for a field goal (of course the odds of making the quarter inch up on the next play are about 99.99999% sure, the Steelers won by 11 points. An eight point switch would not have changed the outcome.

posted by Atheist at 05:09 PM on February 06

Bradshaw and Montana are free to attend or not to attend as they see fit. Money is their business. I hate it when people begrudge the success of others. I will refrain from telling Joe Montana, and Terry Bradshaw how to manage their business until I can prove I can do a better job for myself.

posted by Atheist at 05:14 PM on February 06

People that say they owe to the fans to be there are just being selfish. If I do remember it correctly these guys gave us the best years of their lives.These guys are retired let them live there lives how they want to live it.

posted by urbighomie at 05:38 PM on February 06

It amazes me that some people feel the need to "attack" each other in a sports thread about professional players. No need to call anyone out on this, just read the thread. As for Montana and Bradshaw...unless or untill we have all the facts behind why they decided not to attend why judge. Sounds like more than just the money/perks to me.

posted by Folkways at 06:18 PM on February 06

Redsnare, yea i was pretty lukewarm on the game, spent most of it drinking scotch...

posted by miller at 08:14 PM on February 06

Say it ain't so Joe

posted by funeralguy61 at 10:17 AM on February 07

Montana, Bradshaw deny missing ceremony over $$

posted by justgary at 10:40 AM on February 07

Damn media blows EVERYTHING up out of proportion...and THIS is why we end up on tangents about greed and TO and the game. What we should be doing is saluting BOTH men for being family men. Montana's son should be proud of his father for skipping out on this event to see him play in an important basketball game. In this day and age, we should praise him for going to see his son. There's too much attacking of parents for not seeing their family. And honestly, Bradshaw probably would have gone to Detroit for FREE people (remember, he did PLAY for Pittsburgh) and his reception by that crowd would have been 5x bigger than Swanny's was...again, salute to those who choose to be with their family.

posted by chemwizBsquared at 12:49 PM on February 07

It is Montana's and Bradshaw's choice on whether to be there, and they in no way should be obligated to attend. Plus, they wouldn't have missed anything if they had just shown up for the last half of the game. Or maybe they would rather watch the comercials.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 02:06 PM on February 07

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.