Honestly I see it as Montana had no intention or desire to show up at all. When the organizers contacted him (probably repeatedly), I ssume through his agent, it got to the point where they wouldn't stop pestering him. So at that point Joe was like "yeah I'll show up for $100,000." Of course he knows the NFL wouldn't pay him that amount which is why he said it, practically kidding. If he "requested" $10,000 the NFL might have actually paid him. How about this: say you're a loser in high school who always got beaten up. Well years later you're famous and are making billions. You get a notice for your 25th high school reunion and you put no thought into wanting to go -- you hated the people and have absolutely zero desire to return, so why go? School officials keep asking for you to show up when you don't want to. What do you do? Request a large sum of money that you know your poor public school doesn't have, therefore no more annoyances. Unless that slutty head cheerleader will be there. Anyway, this Montana thing seems like it's all blown out of proportion.
you were making a good point till you came up with this ridiculous scenario. that's the point, montana isn't a loser who got beat up by the nfl. he's considered one of its greatest participants. he's defined by superbowl victories more than any mvp who showed up. you're right, maybe he just didn't want to be there and threw out a ridiculous fee to discourage the nfl. that's actually a little more believable than really wanting the nfl to pay him for his time.
From what I understand, Bradshaw wanted to use his RARE Sunday off to watch the game with his family. I can understand that. Think about it, when was the last time that guy had a Sunday off? Bradshaw's no-show had nothing to do with money, unlike Montana's.
Well, not that it matters now, I was going to put in that it OBVIOUSLY isn't anywhere near the same thing, but I was using it as a way for anyone other than Joe Montana to get some kind of idea as to what was going on. Montana being one of the greatest in the NFL and a loser-turned-billionaire are not the primary issues with the situation or argument; the idea is what I was trying to get out, which you got. My point was don't be quick to judge. (Sorry I have to clarify it again, but the reason for the "ridiculous" scenario was because this real-life scenario is ridiculous. Who in their right mind besides Vernon Maxwell actually expects that much money???yes, I know there are people like that, but not everyone is Wilford Brimley) Montana could have said something else or just ignored the requests, but he was sick of it. If he knew the sensationalist media would overblow this, he wouldn't have made the comments (assuming he actually said those words). Everyone should give the guy a break.
Hey I think it is still a free country. Who cares if these guys showed up or not. They showed up and played well when they were actually playing in the game. Let them have a personal life.
. but montana has no reason to hate the nf, that can't be what's going on. that's why its completely useless. montana may have his reasons for not showing up, but there is no way your scenario could explain any one remotely close to what it may actually be. the real life scenario of what we know isn't ridiculous, its real. and besides all of that, what makes you an authority on what's going on? you don't know anymore than the rest of us. so thanks for trying to explain it to us simpletons, but i'm gonna go with the actual report instead of yours.
Jesus, dude calm yourself. Have you ever been in a real debate before?!?! I'm not acting as if I know more than anyone else; I'm simply going along with what I feel by making strong points. It's not very convincing regarding anything to mention things like "he might be this" or "perhaps he's a douchebag because". I have no reason to believe that Joe Montana is or isn't a greedy prick; I just tend to believe that he isn't being given fair consideration. For the sake of MY argument I'm going to ASSUME for MYSELF what I believe, as it makes for a better argument in giving Mr. Montana the benefit of the extreme doubt. If you or anyone else doesn't accept MY interpretaton of what I think is going on in this situation, then forget about it. You or anyone else doesn't know anymore about this situation than I do. Is my point clear yet? Now if I felt a need to respond to your viciousness, I could lower myself below your standards by mentioning you acting like a sarcastic, smarmy ******** or I could just ignore it and just keep my thoughts and opinions to myself. I think I'll take the high road. *-For those of you simpletons who read the marked sentence, I demand that you forget it alltogether in light of me taking the high road
. i know its a debate. your post is the one that is very matter of factual with the "who in the right mind believes montana expects that much money" you're the one claiming that the actual article is ridiculous when your point is nothing more than your opinion. so yes, I know how to debate, with facts. the facts are as being reported that montana asked for $100K to show up. that's all you or I know so far. and if you read the first response to you, I agreed that he may have asked for that money to get the nfl off his back. but its all speculation. and I really don't understand your logic of using some extreme example that we know isn't true helsps your point. but maybe you can explain debate to me further.
if he didnt wanna come then whatever dont go, i respect that. but he shouldnt have put a price tag on it. the nfl made montana, not the other way around.
The point of the high school reunion scenario was simply this: if someone doesn't want to show up and people keep on requestion his presence, he then asks for a large sum of money to get the organizers to stfu. That's all there was in that scenario. There was nothing else I was going after. You understood it and decided it was ridiculous. If you didn't think it added to the argument that's just super. Oh, and the use of "we" as in "...we know isn't..."; I'm glad you represent the entire board. I KNOW what I am claiming so you don't have to tell me about me. And nice job trying to deflect defeat by mentioning the idea of facts which is irrelevant. We're debating about a fake scenario I made up; if we are both agreeing that there may be more to this story than a guy being greedy, there is no debate there, since, you know, we AGREE with the idea. We're debating about specifics of each other's arguments which is getting silly. I understand it is all speculation; I understand you agreed with my point; so, what's your point??; you don't need to point that back out when it was clear. Oh, and if you want to use this to go back again and claim I am being contradicting, my exact words were "If you or anyone else...". That means if you or anyone doesn't agree with my thoughts or opinion, then ignore it. (Hmm let's see, considering you agreed with my opinion, I guess you aren't part of the "anyone else" who might think my ideas are off the wall). Your last post was nothing more than repetitive banter recapping what was clearly pointed out in my previous post as being MY OPINION. I NEVER CLAIMED I KNEW ANYTHING MORE THAN YOU; NOTHING IN MY POSTS CONTAIN CONCLUSIVE FACTUAL INFORMATION. Million dollar bet that this report was misconstrued in some way.
Guys, this is how it is in sports, okay? When I was at Topps, and we were putting together our Super Bowl MVP set (2001)b, Montana and Bradshaw (well, their reps) wouldn't even talk to us unless the autograph/memorabilia package started at $100,000. Bradshaw wanted to sell us one of his jerseys for $35,000! (We all had a nice laugh about that.) Hell, we couldn't even get photo rights to those guys for less than $10,000 an image. And as bad as it all was, we still got the deal done, eventually. And don't think for a second that this kind of greed is limited to just them. If you knew what the company paid Marino or Bonds per autograph card, you'd probably have a coronary. Granted, this situation is a little different, because it deals with a profit-making venture, but you get the idea: Sports is a business. Nothing personal. Now, get over it.
If every MVP that showed up asked for $100,000 I wouldn't really have a problem with it. The fact that ONLY ONE did is where I have a problem.
