Shaun O’Hara: Union solidarity gesture "doesn’t get anything done"

In some NFL stadiums on Sunday, players on both teams repeated the on-field show of union solidarity prior to kickoff that the Vikings and Saints started on Thursday night.

But in other stadiums the union did not have that show of unity.

There was no union gesture prior to the Panthers-Giants game, and Giants center Shaun O’Hara said that while he didn’t have a problem with the Saints and Vikings doing it, he didn’t see what it accomplished, either.

“I didn’t even know about it when the Saints played,” O’Hara said. “It wasn’t like they told everybody they were going to do that. I thought they handled it well, but we didn’t talk about doing anything here because it doesn’t get anything done. Players right now, our responsibility is our jobs and focusing on games. We have people to negotiate for us. We are not negotiating ourselves so it’s not anything we are concerned about now.”

21 responses to “Shaun O’Hara: Union solidarity gesture "doesn’t get anything done"

  1. It’s counter productive… would give the average slob who pays their salary a chance to give the players a one finger salute of their own.
    The economy is in great shape right?
    Why do the players even need public support to make their case?

  2. Someone who gets it. The public doesn’t care if you raise up your fingers and sees right through it as political pandering, which most people hate and certainly don’t want to see when they want to be enjoying the football game.
    Let the union and the owners battle it out, if players start to descend to that level it can and will hurt their status even more among fans.

  3. Nice to read that some grown men actually understand how the world works, but disappointing O’Hara’s understanding of the situation isn’t shared by the majority of NFL players.

  4. He makes a good point. You elected and/or hired union officials. You either stand behind them or you replace them.

  5. If the idea for the gesture (as Drew Brees says ) was to get football fans to get themselves familiar with the CBA and the issues that the owners and players are fighting about then O Hara is right.
    The fans could protest, write hundreds of thousands of letters and e mails, boycott games and both sides would care less. The fans are nothing more than suckers to the the owners who try to drain every dime they can from them. To the players, the fans are an annoyance and easily dismissed.

  6. Actually a pretty intelligent comment.
    Some of these union morons will be led down the wrong path. Hello UAW

  7. Shaun O’Hara said that while he didn’t have a problem with the Saints and Vikings doing it, he didn’t see what it accomplished, either.
    Keep that mindset numb-nuts, and remember later why you failed.

  8. No, Mr. O’Hara, it doesn’t get anything done, but what it does do is open a glimpse of the reality of pro football today to the average person who doesn’t have a clue.
    The billionaires are playing hardball with the millionaires, and in both camps, Joe and Jane Sixpack are paying for it. What the union wanted to express is to alert the fans that there’s issues to be bargained out. Lets make this clear: the union didn’t start this. They negotiated a deal and were living by the contract. It was the owners who started this and plan to not only lock out the players next year unless there’s deep cuts in compensation to the players, but lock the fans out as well.
    Take a look at the injury list from the opening weekend of play and see why the players aren’t wild about an 18 game schedule, something the league wants to justify the money they are allegedly losing.
    I thought the move to signal “1” was brilliant, and a good way to alert the consumer that they are about to be screwed by the owners who then will blame the union for being bad guys.
    Baseball’s union is silly, and have given .2oo hitters millions. But the football union has literally saved the brains, limbs and lives of it’s members.
    In this battle, the union members are the good guys and the owners are the villians. The current contract didn’t net the owners AS MUCH money as they wanted. I haven’t seen any of the owners come forward to say they were LOSING money. Even the Packers, in the league’s smallest market, made money last year. The owners are also out to screw the TV networks out of more cash, or hold the product away from them via lockout.
    This entire episode was brought on by the owners who agreed to the contract that was in place, and now act like they have right to screw the public out of even more money from the current outrageous ticket prices.
    I’m ‘1’ with the union on this one.

  9. RadioBoy200010:
    Big Bad Business, right? Just like Big Oil in the 1990’s, right? Just like Japanese automakers in the 1980’s, right? Clueless.
    If you’re an NFL fan, you should loathe the union because they are directly and 100% responsible for any lockout that might ever occur. I’m telling the union that as an owner, this is what you are getting – any more and it isn’t worth my time to keep my operation going. Fight me, but understand the situation: I hold all the cards, as it should be. The “business” is MINE. You, as a player, are an expendable slice of the business.
    This might seem unfair if you don’t understand simple economics. And, if you don’t understand the economics used to found this nation and help it reach ridiculous levels of wealth for many, many people, you’ve got much bigger issues than you’re feelings that NFL players are getting the shaft.
    Bone up on some Hayek.

  10. “We have people to negotiate for us. We are not negotiating ourselves so it’s not anything we are concerned about now.” …sounds alot like the way some people treated their retirement(401s,Madoff,etc.) plans 10 years ago outta sight outta mind, then wonder where it went when they needed it …

  11. Agree with the post above. More than a little bit of irony in people getting upset with the players when I rarely see anyone questioning the billionaire owners. If you think a millionaire player doesn’t understand the recession you should speak with a billionaire.

  12. RadioBoy20010 is a moron. Hauschild hit the nail directly on the head. The players are EMPLOYEES. They do NOT have a right to dictate to OWNERS how much they will make. They can play for what the owners DECIDE to pay them, or they can go do what most (but not all) of them are most qualified for, which is something along the lines of janitorial work.
    It doesn’t matter if the owners WERE making gazillions and ‘only’ paying the players millions. That is their RIGHT, because THEY were the ones who ponied up the BIG bucks and take the BIG risks. Players seem to want to think of themselves as “partners” in this enterprise. They are deluding themselves. They are employees (albeit very talented ones in most cases) and nothing more. The only thing the players should be doing collectively is buying a ticket on the clue bus. If they aren’t happy making millions, let them go sweep floors.

  13. I love the backlash on this…
    You know there is no need to take sides get the deal done. Any stoppage is bad for everyone and will hurt the game.

  14. Being against the players doing this doesn’t mean we are FOR the owners.
    We are FOR football, period. If that means you, the players, will get paid less, I don’t care.
    If the owners came out and gave a sign of solidarity they would get booed, too.
    It’s the players who are desperate for the fans to take their side, sorry if we aren’t accommodating. We want you to make the deal, not wave your finger.

  15. He might be the only player out there that gets the fact that the general public isn’t on their side. Not that the public is on the owners’ side either. It just serves as a reminder that talks have stalled and there’s a greater chance of no football next season.

  16. Hauschild says: September 13, 2010 9:47 AM
    If you’re an NFL fan, you should loathe the union because they are directly and 100% responsible for any lockout that might ever occur.”
    A “Strike” happens when the players refuse to report to work.
    A “Lockout” happens when the owners PREVENT the players from reporting to work.
    Like in the past, employers would padlock the doors to the mills – hence the term “lockout”.
    If it happens, by definition, a lockout is caused by the owners. Get it now?
    Talk about clueless.

  17. I have enough of those one-finger salutes. I give a sh!t if you don’t have health benefits making league minimum … most Americans don’t make the league minimum in ten years … STFU and play a stupid game, negotiate your deal behind closed doors. People work a week to have a few hundred Dollars of discretionary income to be able to attend a game. You always have a choice to find employment somewhere else. Thousands of Americans lost their jobs, thousands got no raise, thousands where told they had to take a pay cut or they had to leave only to be laid off later …
    Every year in the league you have the g0d d@mn privilege to earn more than most Americans earn in 10 years even at league minimum ….

  18. Here’s what will get something done, Shaun – face the economic reality of the situation (that the owners had reason to back out because of the 59.4 percentage in the previous CBA) and work with the owners to rectify it – if it means reverting to the pre-2007 CBA percentages (which should have been sufficient) and accepting an 18-game season, then do it.

Leave a Reply

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