Packers, NFL Trying To Have It Both Ways
The Packers have locked their players out - unless they need them for marketing purposes.
By PackerAaron
When the Packers initially announced this year's edition of what they call their "Tailgate Tour", the team indicated that, for the first time since the inception of the series, no current players would be on hand, presumably due to the ongoing labor dispute. The Packers did line up members of the '96 Super Bowl team.
Now, word comes from the Packers that Matt Flynn, Desmond Bishop and Josh Sitton will be joining the Tailgate Tour after all. The fact that they are locked out? A mere technicality.
It seems the NFL has made exceptions for charity events that support communities, according to the Packers.
So...let me get this straight.
The NFL has locked out the players. They are in the midst of a lock. out. But players can appear on the league's broadcast network and can merrily traipse around the Wisconsin countryside in a bus with the CEO of the company that is part of the entity that is in the process of locking them out. (That's right - Mark Murphy is on the trip!) All in the name of "charity".
The premise of the Tailgate Tour, when it started, was that there are a massive number of families around Wisconsin that will never get to Green Bay and/or Lambeau to see a game and to generally take in the NFL experience. It's a great idea - one that was going to take a bit of a hit with only retired players on board. (I mean, at this point, who HASN'T met a Packer from the '96 Championship season...)
You can't have it both ways guys. Either the players are locked out or they aren't. This just reeks of a horrible double standard. "Sorry guys, you're locked out...unless, of course, we need you for marketing purposes."
It's great that the Tour raises money for five different charities in five different cities. But it's disingenuous of the league and the Packers to pick and choose how they want to be associated, or NOT associated, with their players in the midst of a "lock out".
The lockout is as much of a farce as the union's decertification.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Comments (31)
April 05, 2011 at 04:43 pm
tragic comedy at its best!
April 05, 2011 at 04:49 pm
I feel like the ones who should be most offended by this are the players. If the players agree to show up, it seems like a non-issue to me; as you say, helping charities is good. Building the brand and goodwill helps players and owners in the long run (well, if players get the "upside" that they want in a new CBA). If anything, it is nice to be reassured that underneath all the rhetoric at the top, players and organizations (at least some) see the negotiations and the lock out as business decisions.
April 05, 2011 at 05:32 pm
I agree with this.
The players also get publicity out of it.
April 08, 2011 at 08:28 am
+1
April 05, 2011 at 05:03 pm
IF THEY ARE ALLOWING THIS THEN THEY NEED TO HAVE FAN FEST THIS YR TOO!!! I'VE GONE TO THE LAST TWO WITH MY BROTHER AND DECIDED TO MAKE IT A TRADITION AND GO EVERY YR FROM HERE ON OUT, ONLY TO HAVE THEM CANCEL IT THE YEAR THEY WIN THE SUPER BOWL!!!????!!!!??? THEY SAID IT WAS CANCELED IN ORDER TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS, BUT ANYONE WHO'S EVER GONE KNOWS THAT'S A BUNCH OF BULL! COME ON PACKERS! MAKE FAN FEST HAPPEN IF YOU ARE GOING TO ALLOW THE TAILGATE TOUR.
April 05, 2011 at 05:28 pm
Fan Fest was canceled because the attendance was down the past couple of years. The Packers are going to try to tweak the event to make it more inviting to fans. I think that's a good idea. It was getting stale.
April 05, 2011 at 08:11 pm
I CAN SHOUT LOUDER THAN YOU!!!!
April 05, 2011 at 08:40 pm
Whenever someone inexplicably writes in all caps, I can't help but read it like Will Ferrell's voice immodulation...
http://vimeo.com/1913104
April 05, 2011 at 05:15 pm
Completely agree with you, Flikery.
April 05, 2011 at 05:16 pm
The Straw Man is back!
April 05, 2011 at 05:24 pm
I said the NFL was doing the same thing when they said they were inviting players to the draft. The players are only locked out if it suits the owners needs. Eventually they will be locked out except for the film room. Then they will be locked out except for workouts. Then except practices. It's ridiculous. The value of the franchises has gone through the roof. The owners can afford to let the players have their share of the revenues and stop his charade they call a lockout.
April 05, 2011 at 05:30 pm
"(I mean, at this point, who HASN'T met a Packer from the '96 Championship season...)"
/raises hand
//suggests for a Green Bay Packers world tour, starting in Brazil.
April 05, 2011 at 05:34 pm
With a layover in Idaho!
April 05, 2011 at 05:53 pm
and Australia.
April 05, 2011 at 06:14 pm
Charity work and participation in it should always come before differences/conflicts.
If there is a MEDIEVIL THEME to it,then please JOUST away and be quick about it.
April 05, 2011 at 07:27 pm
Aaron, I'm interested to see your response to the comment from 'Flikery'.
April 05, 2011 at 08:45 pm
Agree with flikery and and Tarynfor 12.
Aaron, I understand the angle you're coming from, as though the Packers organization are picking and choosing when they are in the midst of a lockout.
However, two things really need to be pointed out.
1) The Packers are the only team in the league who don't have that money-grubbing owner, and who can with complete sincerity say they are only concerned with making sure a new cba/financial model for the NFL is a sustainable model, nothing more, nothing less. This puts them in a situation where they won't have an issue with the players getting a bigger cut- so long as it truly isn't detrimental to the Packers ability to exist. They are in a position where they are expected to back up the rest of the private owners of the other 31 clubs, yet they clearly do not share the same agenda as the other 31. Yes, Mark Murphy is in a high role in the affair. But he is merely a mouthpiece for the owners at large.
2) As the others pointed out, there is good will in this equation. People rant and rave about setting differences aside and working together for a greater good all the time in various arenas- rants that are almost always unanswered. Yes, I understand that the Packers- and the Players involved, are all "getting something" out of this. But ultimately, they ARE raising money for charities, as well as sating fans' appetites for interaction. How can we fault them for that?
...If the NFLPA, eeeer, strike that, the the Players' Legal Council isn't advising the players to stay away from this, I see no reason for any of us to yell "foul" on the Packers.
April 05, 2011 at 11:42 pm
+1
April 05, 2011 at 10:32 pm
I hate all this crap and find it all very boring. Sorry to comment - I'll be back when we are able to discuss football.
PackerAaron
April 05, 2011 at 11:48 pm
Feel free to chime in on the Rodgers/Starr/Favre thread. CBA free! :)
April 05, 2011 at 11:29 pm
As others have said, its for charity so at least in this case the double standard is alright with me
April 05, 2011 at 11:29 pm
IMO, the GB Packers should ALWAYS set the standard for pleasing their fans and supporting charities. To me it's a point of pride that every year we win the Click for Cans contest, e.g. These are the type things that endear the fans to the team. Priceless!!
April 06, 2011 at 03:09 am
The other day, I was jogging down US 41 north toward GB & happen to run across AR ...... We both could only nod, "You know, the lockout."
Later in the day I went to Kwik-Trip to buy a quart of milk ..... Ran across CM3 .... He was obviously trying to pilfer a six-pack ...... I was going to report him to security but ...... "You know, the lockout."
Later in the evening, I was grilling-out on my deck & MM saw me from his deck .... Usually he'll come over & make a few off-color comments about TT .... Not that evening ..... "You know, the lockout."
Tailgate Tour ??? ..... No way ..... "You know, the lockout."
April 06, 2011 at 07:35 am
I'm glad they can get together from a charitable standpoint and I do think that Green Bay is the only team that could pull it off successfully because of their unique "community-owned" status. But I (like Aaron) just don't understand the double standard by the NFL. If the owners locked out the players and the player's union has decertified, then why do they allow the players on the NFL network? Why does the NFLPA (once removed) allow the NFL to use it's members? Why is there still a draft? That's the one thing that boggles my mind, if there is no football why is there still a draft?
My guess is that the draft is the one thing that keeps most fans from manifesting their anger about this situation toward either party. We have something to look forward to and it's not too far away.
Neither the NFL nor the NFLPA (once removed) wants to piss off the fans to the extent that the fans force the issue.
Maybe we should . . .
PackerAaron
April 06, 2011 at 10:29 am
"That’s the one thing that boggles my mind, if there is no football why is there still a draft?" The reason the draft is going forward is because it was the last actionable item in the former CBA. Both sides agreed to it and are bound to complete it.
April 06, 2011 at 02:10 pm
Confusion cleared. Thanks Aaron.
April 06, 2011 at 07:44 am
What is more frustrating, the NFL lockout or if the Federal Gov't shuts down?
April 06, 2011 at 08:52 am
Either is equally frustrating since they both could have the world if they just acted like adults.
April 06, 2011 at 09:04 am
these tailgate tours are charity by day, college town pub crawl by night.
Nick Barnett had then-backup Aaron Rodgers on top of the bar pouring shots in chickie's mouthsies in Eau Claire.
April 06, 2011 at 06:27 pm
If the players don't like it, don't go.
If the players and league are both cool with it... where's the problem?
"The lockout is as much of a farce as the union's decertification." I know you typed it, but once you really believe it, something like this shouldn't get stuck in your craw. It are what it are.
GBP 4 LIFE
April 07, 2011 at 02:14 pm
You raise a great issue, but in my mind what needs to happen is for the fans to not show up at tailgate tour stops. Then neither the owners nor the players get what they want. Fans can still donate to charity, just not via the Packers. When owners and players see signs that fans are voting with their pocketbooks, then conduct will change. Until then, they are pigs at the trough