Terrell Owens: A Legal Opera of Media-Sized Portions
“So what have you done for your client other than getting him kicked off the team?” Beautiful words uttered, in a rare display of perception and understanding of law, by a television reporter.
For the past six months, Terrell Owens has been playing one of the oldest legal games in the book. Crucial to that game has been manipulating Philadelphia’s media. To a large extent, it has worked - and it is continuing to work.
Many people dismiss Terrell Owens as a soap opera. Few realize how correct they are in ways they never stop to think about.
Under the auspices of Drew Rosenhaus, Mr. Owens adopted classic legal strategy in how to get out of an unwanted personal performance contract. In short, you do everything to honor your obligations under the contract...but you do so in a way that is insufferable to the other side yet still not violating any terms or provisions of the contract itself.
If the personal performance contract says nothing about standing on your head nude while reading War and Peace, well so be it. If it isn’t in the contract, and it is not covered by default laws that fill in the gaps of such situations, then, well....Tolstoy!
Mr. Owens has been doing the Tolstoy.
It is familiar practice among personal performers who have reached the upper echelon of their professions. Essentially, ‘quality’ runs the legal table: who else are you going to get of my caliber? It is a performer’s market. When opera houses demanded more user friendly ambiance from opera legend Luciano Pavarotti, he would simply doff his scarf and blow away in the winds of all things contract law. There may be a contract but that doesn’t mean I have to technically honor it, substantively I do, but will it be worth it in the long run?
There, in a nutshell (perhaps literally), is the bedrock key to understanding Terrell Owens. Is it real dementia or just good legal “personal performance contract” tactics?
Courthouses are stacked to rafters with dusty examples of how to torpedo a contract. It’s done all the time. And few legal theorists would disagree that Drew Rosenhaus’ earnest outburst for the media was not much more than a carefully scripted and well-oiled theatrical show validating the legal maneuver.
Mr. Rosenhaus said many things besides “Next question.” Overall, he said Terrell Owens performed his side of the contract. And that it was the Eagles who are barring full performance. Hence, the Eagles breached the contract and Mr. Owens should be allowed to play elsewhere.
When David Henry, as astute reporter for WPVI television (notably not a sports reporter), asked Mr. Rosenhaus what, if anything, he had done other than working to have Mr. Owens kicked off the Eagles, Terrell Owens could not contain himself - it took a full six months for someone in the media to understand precisely what was going on. (Video is temporarily available at http://nbc10.feedroom.com/iframeset.jsp?ord=495615 courtesy of the NBC10.com website.)
David Henry hit the reality nail on the legal head. Mr. Owen’s sheepishly smiled long and uncontrollably as the ABC television reporter stood off camera in a quiet demeanor that mimicked an intellectual equivalent of a WWF Smackdown headlock. In return, Mr. Owen’s demeanor reflected a silent blushy answer to “Who’s your daddy?” replete with wink. Or was that more “Aww, gee kids, you caught me”?
The underpinning legal psychology follows:
The Owens/Rosenhaus gambit is simple, clean and concise. Mr. Owens was willing to give up some money in order to gain more money later down the road. Which he probably will get, in the overall, despite many skeptics. He may lose previously agreed to signing bonuses but, even there, a simple reality exists from a legal maneuvering point of view: you can control the future, not the past.
Mr. Owens is willing to sacrifice his personal and professional reputation, temporarily, to achieve getting kicked off the team - knowing full well that the sooner that he is kicked off, the sooner the Eagles will let him out of his contract (one way or another), and the sooner it will be that Mr. Owens will be playing elsewhere. And the sooner that his obvious talents will overwhelm any tarnish to his reputation.
Afterall, the New York Times has reported that Luciano Pavarotti was figuratively banned from some opera houses much the same.
Did Mr. Owens, in good faith, honor the terms of his contract? Unless there is some language addressing behavior, the answer is yes. He showed up. He performed. He may not have done it well - off the field - but his performance did not sink to the overall level of not acting in good faith. Afterall, he scored a number of touchdowns, no?
And if he wants to criticize the Eagles, or quarterback Donovan McNabb, well, the First Amendment of the Constitution says he can...unless he agreed in the contract that he would not. Most likely, he didn’t.
For a little temporary perception that Mr. Owens is a nutcase, and he may very well be, larger benefits loom. Mr. Owens will probably get a contract that he likes elsewhere. His ‘personal performance’ is not different than what Luciano Pavarotti’s acumen was to opera. And being barred from some opera houses was no loss to Mr. Pavarotti - his overall performance quality was much larger and more outlasting than any momentary foible involving an opera house.
The same legal strategy - and ‘trust’ that quality trumps all - is motivating Mr. Owens and Mr. Rosenhaus. If history is any indication, the tactic will be successful.
.
Mr. Owens may not get a long term contract with another team but, it is clear, Mr. Owens does not like long term situations anyway...so that’s hardly a loss to Mr. Owens. Familiarity breeds contempt, Mr. Owens has a large gullet to harbor contempt as his antics demonstrate. And it certainly will not be a loss to the new team - for minimal exposure risk, they get to reap much talent. Afterall, it’s most likely only a one-year deal.
Hence, Mr. Owens will pick up where he left off before the Eagles. And, like Pavarotti after being banned by an opera house, Mr. Owens will be very handsomely compensated for his efforts notwithstanding.
As for the effect on all things opera house, also known as the Philadelphia Eagles, well....like Pavarotti, the house will stand, but the opera star will sing elsewhere.
Look for Terrell Owens in a Dallas Cowboys uniform shortly.
Afterall, he may have exhausted War and Peace...but Anna Karenina yet lives.
For the past six months, Terrell Owens has been playing one of the oldest legal games in the book. Crucial to that game has been manipulating Philadelphia’s media. To a large extent, it has worked - and it is continuing to work.
Many people dismiss Terrell Owens as a soap opera. Few realize how correct they are in ways they never stop to think about.
Under the auspices of Drew Rosenhaus, Mr. Owens adopted classic legal strategy in how to get out of an unwanted personal performance contract. In short, you do everything to honor your obligations under the contract...but you do so in a way that is insufferable to the other side yet still not violating any terms or provisions of the contract itself.
If the personal performance contract says nothing about standing on your head nude while reading War and Peace, well so be it. If it isn’t in the contract, and it is not covered by default laws that fill in the gaps of such situations, then, well....Tolstoy!
Mr. Owens has been doing the Tolstoy.
It is familiar practice among personal performers who have reached the upper echelon of their professions. Essentially, ‘quality’ runs the legal table: who else are you going to get of my caliber? It is a performer’s market. When opera houses demanded more user friendly ambiance from opera legend Luciano Pavarotti, he would simply doff his scarf and blow away in the winds of all things contract law. There may be a contract but that doesn’t mean I have to technically honor it, substantively I do, but will it be worth it in the long run?
There, in a nutshell (perhaps literally), is the bedrock key to understanding Terrell Owens. Is it real dementia or just good legal “personal performance contract” tactics?
Courthouses are stacked to rafters with dusty examples of how to torpedo a contract. It’s done all the time. And few legal theorists would disagree that Drew Rosenhaus’ earnest outburst for the media was not much more than a carefully scripted and well-oiled theatrical show validating the legal maneuver.
Mr. Rosenhaus said many things besides “Next question.” Overall, he said Terrell Owens performed his side of the contract. And that it was the Eagles who are barring full performance. Hence, the Eagles breached the contract and Mr. Owens should be allowed to play elsewhere.
When David Henry, as astute reporter for WPVI television (notably not a sports reporter), asked Mr. Rosenhaus what, if anything, he had done other than working to have Mr. Owens kicked off the Eagles, Terrell Owens could not contain himself - it took a full six months for someone in the media to understand precisely what was going on. (Video is temporarily available at http://nbc10.feedroom.com/iframeset.jsp?ord=495615 courtesy of the NBC10.com website.)
David Henry hit the reality nail on the legal head. Mr. Owen’s sheepishly smiled long and uncontrollably as the ABC television reporter stood off camera in a quiet demeanor that mimicked an intellectual equivalent of a WWF Smackdown headlock. In return, Mr. Owen’s demeanor reflected a silent blushy answer to “Who’s your daddy?” replete with wink. Or was that more “Aww, gee kids, you caught me”?
The underpinning legal psychology follows:
The Owens/Rosenhaus gambit is simple, clean and concise. Mr. Owens was willing to give up some money in order to gain more money later down the road. Which he probably will get, in the overall, despite many skeptics. He may lose previously agreed to signing bonuses but, even there, a simple reality exists from a legal maneuvering point of view: you can control the future, not the past.
Mr. Owens is willing to sacrifice his personal and professional reputation, temporarily, to achieve getting kicked off the team - knowing full well that the sooner that he is kicked off, the sooner the Eagles will let him out of his contract (one way or another), and the sooner it will be that Mr. Owens will be playing elsewhere. And the sooner that his obvious talents will overwhelm any tarnish to his reputation.
Afterall, the New York Times has reported that Luciano Pavarotti was figuratively banned from some opera houses much the same.
Did Mr. Owens, in good faith, honor the terms of his contract? Unless there is some language addressing behavior, the answer is yes. He showed up. He performed. He may not have done it well - off the field - but his performance did not sink to the overall level of not acting in good faith. Afterall, he scored a number of touchdowns, no?
And if he wants to criticize the Eagles, or quarterback Donovan McNabb, well, the First Amendment of the Constitution says he can...unless he agreed in the contract that he would not. Most likely, he didn’t.
For a little temporary perception that Mr. Owens is a nutcase, and he may very well be, larger benefits loom. Mr. Owens will probably get a contract that he likes elsewhere. His ‘personal performance’ is not different than what Luciano Pavarotti’s acumen was to opera. And being barred from some opera houses was no loss to Mr. Pavarotti - his overall performance quality was much larger and more outlasting than any momentary foible involving an opera house.
The same legal strategy - and ‘trust’ that quality trumps all - is motivating Mr. Owens and Mr. Rosenhaus. If history is any indication, the tactic will be successful.
.
Mr. Owens may not get a long term contract with another team but, it is clear, Mr. Owens does not like long term situations anyway...so that’s hardly a loss to Mr. Owens. Familiarity breeds contempt, Mr. Owens has a large gullet to harbor contempt as his antics demonstrate. And it certainly will not be a loss to the new team - for minimal exposure risk, they get to reap much talent. Afterall, it’s most likely only a one-year deal.
Hence, Mr. Owens will pick up where he left off before the Eagles. And, like Pavarotti after being banned by an opera house, Mr. Owens will be very handsomely compensated for his efforts notwithstanding.
As for the effect on all things opera house, also known as the Philadelphia Eagles, well....like Pavarotti, the house will stand, but the opera star will sing elsewhere.
Look for Terrell Owens in a Dallas Cowboys uniform shortly.
Afterall, he may have exhausted War and Peace...but Anna Karenina yet lives.
posted by Qi at 11:03 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home