Reebok pulls deal with Brandon Spikes

The pre-NFL sex tape featuring Patriots linebacker Brandon Spikes may not affect his on-field earnings, but it already has cost him off the field.

According to Ian Rapoport of the Boston Herald, Reebok has opted not to finalize a marketing deal with Spikes.

Agent Terry Watson confirmed to Rapoport that Reebok has opted to yank the deal off the table.

Meanwhile, several of you have raised an intriguing question regarding the league’s decision to investigate the situation.  If Spikes faces scrutiny for making a sex tape (presumably with a consenting adult) before joining the NFL, what if anything has the league done to explore whether an employee of a club was or wasn’t sending unwelcome photos via text message to a non-player employee of the club?

By all appearance, that story died faster than a mayfly with a malignancy.  If Spikes’ situation could get him in trouble, how can it be that the other situation went nowhere?

25 responses to “Reebok pulls deal with Brandon Spikes

  1. If Spikes’ situation could get him in trouble, how can it be that the other situation went nowhere?

    Star power.
    Same reason that anyone who sneezes anywhere close to Favre will be getting a letter from the league office.

  2. “According to Ian Rapoport of the Boston Herald, Reebok has opted not to finalize a marketing deal with Spikes.
    Agent Terry Watson confirmed to Rapoport that Reebok has opted to yank the deal off the table.”
    If he would’ve been caught banging Kim Kardashian on tape, Reebok would’ve been all over it…after an extended explaination by KK about how the tape was stolen, of course…

  3. It is neither illegal nor wrong to film yourself having sex with a consenting adult. It is absolutely none of the league’s business.

  4. Business people are true morons.
    What idiot would buy shoes, or otherwise, based on some assclown wearing/endorsing them?
    What a way to bilk the public.
    Ex: Hanes underwear — who gives a shit if Michael Jordan / Charlie Sheen act like they wear them?
    Do people really go to the store, and say: “Hey ! you got any Brad Pitt underwear? What about some George Clooney shorts?”

  5. What? No witty title?
    Reebok yanks Spikes deal hard/fast
    Reebok swallows guaranteed money, spits out Spikes contract
    Reebok deal exposed, ends prematurely

  6. “how can it be that the other situation went nowhere?”
    Because there was no evidence at all in that other situation. Just some attention whore trying to extend her 15 minutes of fame that actually expired a few years ago.
    And more likely, Farve paid her off.
    But there is video proof of Spike having really dull sex. Also the fact that he appears to be quite awful sexually will affect him more than the lost endorsements.

  7. Because it’s Lord Favre, the league wants to protect him….and the Wilfs added a few million to the pot so he could pay off said employee.

  8. “superb owl says:
    September 1, 2010 9:03 PM
    kid, dont hump with our shoes on…

    I was thinking the ame thing. Reebok missed an opportunity here.

  9. As a loyal customer of Reebok, I’m now going to shop competitors. Sorry Reebok but if the company is shocked by college kids having sex then there’s more to be shocked about in the rest of the real world.

  10. Maybe Favre isn’t being investigated because the story broke on Deadspin, which is about as reliable as Mike Wise. And Sterger supposedly has evidence that can easily be provided electronically to any news outlet, yet she has chosen not to do so. And Sterger is the only source of the story, and she’s really good at turning a little bit of attention into a career. And the story broke right at the time that it would draw the most attention – when Favre was waffling.
    There is no proof, no evidence, no reliable source, and the story came from a rumor-mill. I, for one, don’t want the NFL investigating rumors unless there is SOME kind of reasonable belief that they are true, which, in this case, there isn’t.
    That said, it’s dumb that the NFL is investigating the Spikes thing, because it was pre-NFL, and wasn’t a crime. What are they going to do, reprimand a guy for not representing the NFL appropriately when he wasn’t supposed to be representing the NFL?

  11. I will never understand the taboo of sex in america…you can show movies on tv where 1000 people die, but some tits & ass are forbidden
    no wonder most people suck at life

  12. Should anyone care about adults having legal consentual sex? I don’t understand the constant fascination, and that goes for Tiger too (though he was married)

  13. Because Roger Goodell is the model of inconsistent punishment. He sits in his office and rolls dice on who they are going to investigate, punish, and what the punishment will be. How can his inconsistencies not get way more coverage than they are? He has no rhyme or reason. He should write the rules down, “You do A, you get B”. Whatever it is, sex tapes, nude pics, suspended a game or get a fine. DUI 2 games, roids/hgh 4 games. I don’t understand how Goodell is getting away with selective punishment. If this were a real company, he would be getting sued like crazy over the inconsistencies he has shown.

  14. Brandon, as a Pats fan, I am proud of you. You are exactly what your scouting reports claimed: you can fill the gap and plug the hole.

  15. Because it’s the Patriots. If they had lost OTA’s like the Ravens and Raiders did, it would have been front page news.
    “Them old Patriots been cheatin again”
    – Any fan of the other 31 NFL teams, before he goes to have relations with his sister.

  16. Boy, this can get zany.
    First of all, to all NFL’ers, why can’t you just have old school values and morals? Okay, having said that……………..
    1. What if anyone makes a tape like that and someone does steal it? Then they publish it? Is the fault of not taking care of the tape and therefore allowing it to get published? Or, what if someone “accidently” gets it on a video and it gets published?
    I understand the need for Personal Conduct Policy, no doubt, but Roger Goodell must be pulling his hair out.
    How is the level of a player’s responsibility defined? I guess, the player is in charge of making sure he does nothing detrimental to the league. I agree with it, just a sticky wicket.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!