PDA

View Full Version : ]Ryan Clark goes to town on owners


mesaSteeler
03-15-2011, 08:15 PM
Ryan Clark goes to town on owners
Posted on: March 15, 2011 3:56 pm
http://eye-on-football.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/27916579

Posted by Andy Benoit

Adrian Peterson had some very harsh words about NFL owners on Tuesday, but Ryan Clark may have done him one better. The Steelers safety (and respected player rep) recently spoke with KDKA-FM.

Steelers Rapid Reporter Chuck Finder passed along some of the quotes.
In the interview, Clark took a shot at hereditary owners, including his own. “The difference between us and the owners is, my daddy didn’t give me this job. . . . When I leave this game, I can’t give my jersey to [son] Jordan and tell him to play,” he said. “There are going to be [the Giants’] Maras and Rooneys and all these guys forever who own these teams.”

He reiterated that the CBA is all about money. “We’re not going to play 18 games. That’s not even part of why we don’t have a CBA. You know if they get that money, they don’t care if we play 14 games. That CBA is not getting done because of the money.”

As for what he thinks about NFL lead negotiator Jeff Pash and the league’s proposal on Friday? “There were a lot of things that were brought to us ... it was just insane for us to think about taking. Pash actually just got on TV and lied [about financial statements and proposals]. I think it was extremely clever word play by an obviously deceitful man.”

Clark said he wanted to apologize to fans but couldn’t because the players were never even presented with a reasonable deal. “If there’s a way we can play football and not be a victim of robbery, we’ll be out there,” he said. “But we can’t make the owners come to us and give us a fair deal. It’s something that has to be negotiated; it’s going to take some time.”

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.

Atlanta Dan
03-15-2011, 08:23 PM
If Ryan Clark wants to lose the fans in Pittsburgh on this issue real quick trashing the Rooneys will get the job done

Ignorant statement by Clark - look for him to try to walk it back somehow but IMO the damage is done

mesaSteeler
03-15-2011, 08:34 PM
Agree, Very stupid thing for Clark to do.

PhantomJB93
03-15-2011, 09:11 PM
I got the impresison he was using the Rooneys just to prove that point about passing his job down than to thrash them in particular for the labor situation...they were obviously just one of the first ownership "families" that came to his mind.

I'm willing to bet the Rooneys are the only owners of the 32 teams willing to give the players a fair deal, though, the problem is they're outnumbered. I remember Dan saying he didn't care about the money and that he didn't want 18 games earlier this year.

BigRick
03-15-2011, 11:31 PM
I can understand his frustration. But why say this about one of the most respected and gracious owners in any proffeional sport. :banging:

austinfrench76
03-15-2011, 11:51 PM
I DON'T understand his frustration actually. He is not being "robbed" and this is not "slavery". If it is, I wouldn't mind being a slave or being robbed.

Stupid statements by Clark and Peterson. Millions of dollars being made, no matter what your argument. The owners are greedy too but these players are the ones sticking their feet in their mouths.

BigRick
03-16-2011, 12:05 AM
I DON'T understand his frustration actually. He is not being "robbed" and this is not "slavery". If it is, I wouldn't mind being a slave or being robbed.

Stupid statements by Clark and Peterson. Millions of dollars being made, no matter what your argument. The owners are greedy too but these players are the ones sticking their feet in their mouths.

Nobody said he was being robbed, as a matter of fact I thing that for the most part the players are paid damnned well. And a lot of them are over paid. But any time you have a labor dispute it can be very a frustrating situation no matter which side you are on. :tt03:

ricardisimo
03-16-2011, 02:02 AM
I don't see anything at all off-base about his comments. Not only is he spot-on in his assessment, but I think it shows quite a strong rhetorical flourish to make that particular point about - specifically - the Rooneys and the Maras. Because, of course, it only goes downhill from them, way downhill to the scum-suckers (or just plain weirdos) like Jerry Jones, Dan Snyder and Al Davis. We won't even get into the Bidwills and Browns.

Wallace108
03-16-2011, 02:19 AM
Nobody said he was being robbed

Clark said it himself ...

“If there’s a way we can play football and not be a victim of robbery, we’ll be out there,”

I don't see anything at all off-base about his comments. Not only is he spot-on in his assessment, but I think it shows quite a strong rhetorical flourish to make that particular point about - specifically - the Rooneys and the Maras.
The problem I have with Clark's comments is that he makes it sound like a father passing down the family business to his son (or other family members) is exclusive only to the NFL. It's quite common in a lot of businesses. In those cases where the family members are capable, the businesses continue to flourish. If they're not capable, then the businesses suffer.

Clark also made the point that he can't pass along his job to his son like the Rooney's have done. That's true. But Clark's son will have MANY opportunities in life that most of our children won't because we're not multimillionaire football players. That's life. There's always going to be someone more fortunate. And there's always going to be someone less fortunate. :noidea:
-------

I'm not feeling a whole lot of sympathy for Clark and the other players right now. There are middle-class union members in several states who are being stripped of their collective bargaining rights (whether this is right or wrong is for another debate). Regardless, it's happening ... and I can't bring myself to feel sorry for multimillionaires while so many middle-class families are struggling. If economic times were different, I might feel differently. For the players, I don't think this is the right time to be engaging in this fight.

DanRooney
03-16-2011, 07:15 AM
I'm hoping Ryan Clark keeps it going so we can get rid of this mediocre safety with zero closing speed.

steveironcity
03-16-2011, 08:44 AM
I hope he gets released. Maybe he can go play for the Broncos

steelerchad
03-16-2011, 09:17 AM
Wow. Lot of hate for Clark. I like Ryan as a player. He didn't have a great year in 2011, but he played very well our SB year. I don't have a big problem with his statements. Nothing earth shattering here. Art Rooney made a statement similarly about the players on NFL radio earlier this week. Nothing terrible, just that the players walked away from negotiations and didn't really want to get a deal done right now.

cloppbeast
03-16-2011, 10:38 AM
If Ryan Clark wants to lose the fans in Pittsburgh on this issue real quick trashing the Rooneys will get the job done

Ignorant statement by Clark - look for him to try to walk it back somehow but IMO the damage is done

He didn't bash the Rooneys. The title of this article misleads. Clark just stated a fact - owners hand down teams to their kids and players can't do the same thing. Afterwards, in insulted the offer the owners (not the Rooneys specifically) made to the Union.

SteelersinCA
03-16-2011, 12:44 PM
So people aren't allowed to have differing opinions? You guys are wild. Clark made a very clear point and used the Rooneys as an example. That's not trashing someone when you speak the truth. What was wrong with what he said?

DanRooney
03-16-2011, 01:32 PM
Wow. Lot of hate for Clark. I like Ryan as a player. He didn't have a great year in 2011, but he played very well our SB year. I don't have a big problem with his statements. Nothing earth shattering here. Art Rooney made a statement similarly about the players on NFL radio earlier this week. Nothing terrible, just that the players walked away from negotiations and didn't really want to get a deal done right now.

William Gay played well in our SB year. Oh how things have changed :chuckle:.

LVSteelersfan
03-16-2011, 03:01 PM
I find it really hard to feel sorry for the overpaid, whiny players in this situation. They need to sit down and hammer out the rookie salaries, the medical coverage for retired players and kicking Kraft and his cheating Patsies out of the league (ok, so that has nothing to do with anything except my glaring hatred for anything Boston) instead of arguing over how much a piece of the billion dollar pie they get.

ricardisimo
03-16-2011, 05:17 PM
I find it really hard to feel sorry for the overpaid, whiny players in this situation. They need to sit down and hammer out the rookie salaries, the medical coverage for retired players and kicking Kraft and his cheating Patsies out of the league (ok, so that has nothing to do with anything except my glaring hatred for anything Boston) instead of arguing over how much a piece of the billion dollar pie they get.
You don't feel the owners are overpaid and whiny?

I'll just come right out and say this: the rookie cap is complete nonsense and cowardice. The owners are not brave enough to ridicule and criticize their own (e.g., Al Davis) and so, since they themselves are completely lacking in self-discipline, they want 20-year-olds to bear the burden of that discipline instead.

You don't think Jamarcus Russell or Darius Heyward-Bey are worth a billion dollars? You know what... you're right. But then the solution is stupefyingly simple: don't ****ing pay them a billion dollars. Why should the players accept a cap just because Al Davis doesn't know what he's doing?

It's particularly dangerous to consider this proposal because the average NFL career is three-and-a-half years. That's the length of a rookie contract.

lipps83
03-16-2011, 09:19 PM
So people aren't allowed to have differing opinions? You guys are wild. Clark made a very clear point and used the Rooneys as an example. That's not trashing someone when you speak the truth. What was wrong with what he said?

Because if you think differently than the 'true steelers fans' and disagree with something steelers related, you are wrong no matter how logically sound your argument is. You don't bleed the black and gold that they do. It's that simple.

SteelersinCA
03-16-2011, 10:12 PM
Yeah I've seen that with the Mods here before and the Arians threads.

Farrior_roirraW
03-16-2011, 10:16 PM
I don't see anything wrong with what Clark said. It's true.

But, anyways. Both the players and owners are greedy so I don't know why anyone is saying one is worse than the other. :noidea:

Atlanta Dan
03-16-2011, 10:26 PM
So people aren't allowed to have differing opinions? You guys are wild. Clark made a very clear point and used the Rooneys as an example. That's not trashing someone when you speak the truth. What was wrong with what he said?

Ryan Clark states he has earned what he has accomplished and Dan + AJR II have been given their success - Clark either ignores or is ignorant of what Dan Rooney has done to build up the Steelers since they had been the dregs of the league through the late 1960s - that is what is wrong with that

As long as Clark is so upset about Dan & AJR II being members of the lucky sperm club, does Clark not recognize a significant part of his athletic gifts literally were inherited from his parents genes and that a lot of his success flows from the good fortune to be playing next to #43 for the last 5 years? Anyone who thinks they are "self-made" is delusional - that is also what is wrong with what he said

Finally, this is a fight about $$$ and not any sort of civil rights movement - either side claiming the moral superiority of their position is also what is wrong with what Clark said

SteelersinCA
03-17-2011, 05:00 PM
Ryan Clark states he has earned what he has accomplished and Dan + AJR II have been given their success - Clark either ignores or is ignorant of what Dan Rooney has done to build up the Steelers since they had been the dregs of the league through the late 1960s - that is what is wrong with that

As long as Clark is so upset about Dan & AJR II being members of the lucky sperm club, does Clark not recognize a significant part of his athletic gifts literally were inherited from his parents genes and that a lot of his success flows from the good fortune to be playing next to #43 for the last 5 years? Anyone who thinks they are "self-made" is delusional - that is also what is wrong with what he said

Finally, this is a fight about $$$ and not any sort of civil rights movement - either side claiming the moral superiority of their position is also what is wrong with what Clark said

The point is he's not trashing the Rooneys, just pointing out facts. And like was said before, if they are broke or going broke, then the Rooneys and every other owner is terrible. Can't be both ways.

Neil-Still-Rules-14
03-17-2011, 06:33 PM
You don't think Jamarcus Russell or Darius Heyward-Bey are worth a billion dollars? You know what... you're right. But then the solution is stupefyingly simple: don't ****ing pay them a billion dollars. Why should the players accept a cap just because Al Davis doesn't know what he's doing?

I think the thing is that Rookie Contracts are pornographic as is. Paying draft picks is so risky as it is. They basically want more money than anyone after them and more than anyone taken in the same spot the year before. If rookies and their agents are able to demand any dollar amount, teams aren't going to be able to pay their draft picks and teams will save up and sign the "#1 pick" with leftover money.

steelerjim58
03-17-2011, 06:49 PM
as far as I am concerned, all an employer owes an employee is a fair salary. Professional athletes in America are the most overpaid labor force in the world.

ricardisimo
03-17-2011, 08:29 PM
I think the thing is that Rookie Contracts are pornographic as is. Paying draft picks is so risky as it is. They basically want more money than anyone after them and more than anyone taken in the same spot the year before. If rookies and their agents are able to demand any dollar amount, teams aren't going to be able to pay their draft picks and teams will save up and sign the "#1 pick" with leftover money.
But why are they pornographic? You give the agents far too much credit. The long and the short of it is that a fool (Al Davis) and his money (or in this case his creditors' money) are soon parted. Al Davis (and suckers like him) is the reason the numbers are "excessive". And yet even poor, foolish Al Davis is turning a profit. So those salaries can't be that excessive.
as far as I am concerned, all an employer owes an employee is a fair salary. Professional athletes in America are the most overpaid labor force in the world.
But they're not overpaid. You and I can agree that our society's values are clearly dysfunctional, almost to the point of psychosis. But in a purportedly free market economy, the wages will never go beyond what the market can bear. These athletes may be overvalued, but they are not overpaid.

Besides, the money is there - in abundance - and someone's going to get it. Why do you think it should be the owners, rather than the people actually producing the product?

We've already determined that there is no financial risk involved in being an NFL owner, and less every year. There already is a salary cap, and the rookies are part of it. So what all of you who are cowtowing to the owners are saying is that they shouldn't have to suffer any consequences from not doing their homework before the draft. Having the owners make six or seven responsible, sober decisions every year, and asking them to live with those decisions is simply too much for those poor, poor billionaires. Get real, people.

Steelthe#1dynasty
03-18-2011, 01:06 AM
I'm hoping Ryan Clark keeps it going so we can get rid of this mediocre safety with zero closing speed.


Indeed. That mediocre speed cost us a SB win. Average players should just shut their mouth and play. Contract negotiations hurt average players. I am truly sorry we ever re-signed this guy. His playing ability is equivalent to a pile of dog sh*t!

Steelthe#1dynasty
03-18-2011, 01:10 AM
as far as I am concerned, all an employer owes an employee is a fair salary. Professional athletes in America are the most overpaid labor force in the world.

I totally agree. As far the owners are concerned, they have a right to make money. They are the ones that carry the financial risk. Obviously, the NFL is immensely popular these days but some franchises are finding it difficult to survive, like most sports leagues.

ricardisimo
03-18-2011, 05:49 AM
I totally agree. As far the owners are concerned, they have a right to make money. They are the ones that carry the financial risk. Obviously, the NFL is immensely popular these days but some franchises are finding it difficult to survive, like most sports leagues.
Pay attention. There is no financial risk in being an NFL owner. None. The profits are shared, and many of the costs are socialized outwards. Furthermore, salaries are capped and increases are predictably controlled. There will never be an unforeseen cost arising. Never.

All of these guys are wealthy and guaranteed to get wealthier as NFL owners. And to Ryan Clark's point, they did nothing to earn their NFL money other than be born in the right families.

Why do you not say "As far the players are concerned, they have a right to make money. They are the ones that carry the health risks." That statement would at least be true.

TRH
03-18-2011, 01:12 PM
please. The players have more...way more than enough money to take care of any health risks or injuries they incure. If they don't like it, go put on a dress and waitress somewhere. And a "right" to make money? Last time i checked they do. And plenty of it.
The owners own the g***amn teams. They should have and make more than the players. Poor slaves that they are....

MasterOfPuppets
03-18-2011, 01:16 PM
i wonder how much money Troy has made selling those "Rooney" jerseys...:huh:

ricardisimo
03-19-2011, 02:57 PM
please. The players have more...way more than enough money to take care of any health risks or injuries they incure. If they don't like it, go put on a dress and waitress somewhere. And a "right" to make money? Last time i checked they do. And plenty of it.
The owners own the g***amn teams. They should have and make more than the players. Poor slaves that they are....
We've certainly been trained in this "Ownership Society", as Bush Jr. put it, to think this way. Owners have a right as owners to make all of the money they want and can. Have you ever asked yourself why this is true? You don't need to be a Marxist - or even a liberal - to see massive problems with an "Ownership Society". Conservatives should readily see the problems inherent with any massive concentrations of money and power, not just government concentrations.

Besides, the players are entitled to the wage they can negotiate, and which the market can bear. That's capitalism 101, for those of you not paying attention. If the owners don't like it, they can sell and go into some other line of work. We won't get into Marxism 101, which can also be quite on the mark: workers need to have control over their work, their workplace or their product, or there will be problems for industry.

The NFL is taking away the limited control the players had over their work. We're seeing that right now with the weird rule changes, being arbitrarily imposed and enforced from above. That's just one example among many. I'm sure we'll start seeing them telling Troy to cut his hair soon.