An Alternative Approach to the Problem of Midterm Demands for Contract Renegotiation in the National Football League: the Incentive-Based Contract

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

An Alternative Approach to the Problem of Midterm Demands for Contract Renegotiation in the National Football League: the Incentive-Based Contract Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review Volume 17 Number 3 Symposium—Using Law and Identity Article 11 to Script Cultural Production 3-1-1997 An Alternative Approach to the Problem of Midterm Demands for Contract Renegotiation in the National Football League: The Incentive-Based Contract Daniel M. Walanka Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Daniel M. Walanka, An Alternative Approach to the Problem of Midterm Demands for Contract Renegotiation in the National Football League: The Incentive-Based Contract, 17 Loy. L.A. Ent. L. Rev. 771 (1997). Available at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr/vol17/iss3/11 This Notes and Comments is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO THE PROBLEM OF MIDTERM DEMANDS FOR CONTRACT RENEGOTIATION IN THE NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE: THE INCENTIVE-BASED CONTRACT I. INTRODUCTION In this day of the multipurpose, multiyear, and multimillion dollar contract, the average football fan marvels at how much National Football League ("NFL") players earn to hit the gridiron. As a result of these lucrative contracts, it is only natural for fans to develop certain expectations as to the quality and consistency of the product displayed throughout the grueling seventeen-week regular season and the ensuing playoffs. These expectations go unfulfilled when players strike, either collectively or individually. This Comment addresses the specific situation in which a player, in the middle of his contract term, demands renegotiation. When popular players hold out due to a demand for contract renegotiation, not only are the fans deprived of watching their favorite players perform, but many also sense a degree of unfairness. How can a player sign a four-year contract and, after playing well for two years, demand a better, more lucrative contract? Surely, it would not be fair for an architect, who contracted to build a four-story building for $4 million, to threaten to walk off the job after completing the first two floors unless the owner promised to pay an additional $2 million.' A basic interpretation of contract law reveals that such a midterm demand for contract renegotiation might constitute a breach of contract. For example, two parties form a contract, during the term of which, one of the parties demands a better deal, effectively holding the other hostage in order to improve the bargain. This Comment contends that all concerned parties are harmed in some way by this midterm demand for contract renegotiation. The controversy harms the athlete who does not perform, the team that loses a player, and the fans who have spent large sums of I. See E. ALLEN FARNSWORTH, CONTRACTS, § 4.21, at 287 (2d ed. 1982); see also infra Part IV.B.I. In fact, such a demand may be permissible if prompted by the discovery of unanticipated circumstances. RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONTRACTS § 89 (1981). 772 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES ENTERTAINMENT LA WJOURNAL [Vol. 17 money on tickets, concessions, and parking to watch their favorite players perform. The end result is an arguably inferior NFL product. When a player breaches his contract by demanding a midterm renegotiation and withholding performance, traditional contract remedies require court action. 2 These remedies, however, are either inefficient, ineffective, or cumbersome because the team wants the player on the field immediately while the player is steadfast in his demand for more money. Thus, a solution that ends the stalemate without delay is required to satisfy both parties. This Comment proposes an alternative to the traditional remedies for dealing with a demand for a midterm contract renegotiation: the incentive- based contract ("IBC"). In its simplest form, the IBC is a contract a team can offer its disgruntled player that is based primarily on the player's on- field performance. An IBC provides the player with the league's minimum base salary and then adds performance incentives. Thus, the better a player performs statistically, the more he will be compensated. Conversely, he is paid less for a poor performance. This system improves upon the fairness of the typical contract renegotiation because with an IBC, both parties take a risk by renegotiating. In the standard renegotiation scenario, the player receives more money and a longer contract term.3 The player is paid regardless of his performance. 4 Although the team always has the option of cutting the player, that option is not realistically available when the player is of the stature of Jerry Rice, Brett Favre, or Emmitt Smith.5 In other words, when a team agrees to renegotiate a superstar's contract, it is forced to accept the risk that the player may not meet all expectations. Both parties assume a degree of risk with the IBC. If the player performs beyond expectations, he will be compensated accordingly; if the player performs below expectations, he is paid less. The team therefore avoids the frustrating situation in which a player has two or three exceptional years, obtains a renegotiated contract that pays him at a level commensurate with the league's elite, and then flounders in mediocrity. With the IBC, everyone has the chance to win. This type of contract potentially compensates the player at the level commensurate with his 2. See Alex M. Johnson, Jr., The Argument for Self-Help Specific Performance: Opportunistic Renegotiation of Player Contracts, 22 CONN. L. REv. 61, 77-92 (1989) (discussing traditional remedies such as affirmative and negative injunctions and constructive trusts). 3. Id. at 94. 4. Id. at 117. 5. Such players are indispensable not only to the team's on-field success but also to the team's ability to generate revenue. 1997] THE INCENTIVE-BASED CONTRACT accomplishments, ensures that the team receives the player's on-field performance, and delivers to the fans top-level NFL excitement. Part II of this Comment discusses the fundamental principles of contract law implicated by a midterm demand for a renegotiated contract. Part III reviews the historical evolution of the player-owner relationship in the NFL, focusing on the state of the NFL today, specifically the NFL's hard salary cap and its implications for the IBC. Part IV examines the components of a typical NFL contract, including the absence of guarantees and the use of deferred compensation and escalator clauses. Part V analyzes the current state of contractual negotiations in the NFL by focusing on holdouts, demands for midterm renegotiations, and the problem of "one-year wonders." Part VI presents the IBC, compares it to the typical NFL contract today, and applies it to a recent midterm demand for renegotiation. Part VI also addresses the problems of drafting bonus and incentive provisions. Part VII discusses the viability and the potential disadvantages of implementing the IBC into a NFL player contract. Finally, this Comment concludes that the introduction of the IBC into the NFL may have the indirect effect of diminishing the frequency of midterm demands for renegotiation. II. IMPLICATIONS OF CONTRACT LAW ON THE IBC When a player demands renegotiation, various contract law principles are implicated, such as consideration, the pre-existing duty rule, and the law of modification of executory contracts. Therefore, before the IBC can be presented and analyzed, it is important to address how the law of contracts affects the viability of the IBC in the NFL. A. The Problem of Consideration 6 One of the fundamental components of any contract is consideration. to the team by In the case of a renegotiated contract, consideration given 7 the player is normally in the form of an extension of the contract period. This extension will fulfill any of the additional requirements raised in contract law.8 However, because the IBC does not necessarily extend the 6. RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONTRACTS § 71 (1981). "To constitute consideration, a performance or a return promise must be bargained for." Id. § 71(1). 7. Johnson, supra note 2, at 94. 8. For a complete explanation of the preexisting duty rule, see infra Part i1.B; see also RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONTRACTS § 89 (1981). 774 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES ENTERTAINMENT LA WJOURNAL [Vol. 17 length of the player's commitment to the team, the contract may have9 to provide some other form of consideration to be a valid modification. The consideration supporting an IBC is the contract's risk allocation to both the player and the team, a matter bargained for between the two. The team risks that the player will perform beyond expectations and be entitled to collect a huge salary. On the other hand, the player risks that he will have an off-season and earn a smaller salary. Do these mutual risks adequately constitute valid consideration? It is a well-recognized principle of contract law that courts will not examine the adequacy of consideration.10 Restatement (Second) of Contracts, section 79 expressly provides that "[i]f the requirement of consideration is met [i.e., bargained for mutual inducement], there is no additional requirement of ... equivalence in the values exchanged.'11 The rationale underlying section 79 is that, in many contracting situations, "there is no reliable external standard of value."' 2 Therefore, the courts defer to the judgment of the private, contracting parties to determine the value of the consideration, as they are more qualified to evaluate the circumstances of particular transactions.13 This difference is particularly applicable when one or both of the values exchanged are difficult to quantify.
Recommended publications
  • All-Time All-America Teams
    1944 2020 Special thanks to the nation’s Sports Information Directors and the College Football Hall of Fame The All-Time Team • Compiled by Ted Gangi and Josh Yonis FIRST TEAM (11) E 55 Jack Dugger Ohio State 6-3 210 Sr. Canton, Ohio 1944 E 86 Paul Walker Yale 6-3 208 Jr. Oak Park, Ill. T 71 John Ferraro USC 6-4 240 So. Maywood, Calif. HOF T 75 Don Whitmire Navy 5-11 215 Jr. Decatur, Ala. HOF G 96 Bill Hackett Ohio State 5-10 191 Jr. London, Ohio G 63 Joe Stanowicz Army 6-1 215 Sr. Hackettstown, N.J. C 54 Jack Tavener Indiana 6-0 200 Sr. Granville, Ohio HOF B 35 Doc Blanchard Army 6-0 205 So. Bishopville, S.C. HOF B 41 Glenn Davis Army 5-9 170 So. Claremont, Calif. HOF B 55 Bob Fenimore Oklahoma A&M 6-2 188 So. Woodward, Okla. HOF B 22 Les Horvath Ohio State 5-10 167 Sr. Parma, Ohio HOF SECOND TEAM (11) E 74 Frank Bauman Purdue 6-3 209 Sr. Harvey, Ill. E 27 Phil Tinsley Georgia Tech 6-1 198 Sr. Bessemer, Ala. T 77 Milan Lazetich Michigan 6-1 200 So. Anaconda, Mont. T 99 Bill Willis Ohio State 6-2 199 Sr. Columbus, Ohio HOF G 75 Ben Chase Navy 6-1 195 Jr. San Diego, Calif. G 56 Ralph Serpico Illinois 5-7 215 So. Melrose Park, Ill. C 12 Tex Warrington Auburn 6-2 210 Jr. Dover, Del. B 23 Frank Broyles Georgia Tech 6-1 185 Jr.
    [Show full text]
  • WEEK 12 San Fran.Qxd
    THE DOPE SHEET OFFICIAL PUBLICITY, GREEN BAY PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL CLUB VOL. V; NO. 17 GREEN BAY, NOV. 18, 2003 11th GAME PACKERS CAPTURE TEAM RUSHING LEAD: The NFL’s best teams, since Sept. 27, 1992 Packers last weekend swiped from Baltimore the title of league’s No. 1 rushing offense (166.5 yards per game). Brett Favre made his first start at quarterback — and first of a league-record 200 in consecutive fashion — Sept. 27, 1992, vs. Pittsburgh. The NFL’s top X Green Bay hasn’t finished a season leading the NFL in teams since that day: rushing since 1964 (150.4). The team hasn’t finished in the Top 5 since 1967, when they won the Ice Bowl. And, Team W L T Pct Super Bowls Playoff App. the Packers haven’t ranked in the Top 10 since they San Francisco 120 63 0 .656 1 9 Green Bay 120 63 0 .656 2 8 were seventh in 1972. Pittsburgh 109 73 1 .598 1 8 X The Packers have paced the NFL in rushing three other Miami 110 74 0 .598 0 8 times: 1946, when future Hall of Famer Tony Canadeo Denver 109 74 0 .596 2 5 shined in a deep backfield, and 1961-62, when Vince Kansas City 109 74 0 .596 0 5 Minnesota 107 76 0 .585 0 8 Lombardi’s feared Green Bay Sweep dominated the Hou./Ten. 105 78 0 .574 1 5 game and led the Packers to consecutive world champi- Dallas 102 81 0 .557 3 7 onships.
    [Show full text]
  • Pro Set Football Wantlist.Pdf
    The Trading Card Database http://www.tradingcarddb.com aussiewayne's Wantlist - Football 1989 Pro Set 193c Stacey Toran VAR 1993 Pro Set Power - All-Power Defense Gold APD25 Tony Bennett 1989 Pro Set 478c Jim McMahon VAR 1993 Pro Set Power - Combos Gold 2 Sterling Sharpe / Terrell 1989 Pro Set 480c Earnest Byner VAR 1993 Pro Set Power - Combos Gold 4 Deion Sanders / Tim McKye 1989 Pro Set 483c Gerald Riggs VAR 1993 Pro Set Power - Combos Gold 5 Bruce Smith / Darryl Tall 1989 Pro Set 535a Gizmo Williams RC, ER 1993 Pro Set Power - Combos Prisms 1 Emmitt Smith / Barry Sand 1990 FACT Pro Set Cincinnati 338 Eric Dickerson PB, UE 1993 Pro Set Power - Combos Prisms 2 Sterling Sharpe / Terrell 1990 Pro Set 161c Art Shell CO, CO 1993 Pro Set Power - Combos Prisms 3 Junior Seau / Gary Plumme 1990 Pro Set 343c Chris Hinton PB, VA 1993 Pro Set Power - Combos Prisms 5 Bruce Smith / Darryl Tall 1990 Pro Set 723a Oliver Barnett PSP, R 1993 Pro Set Power - Combos Prisms 6 Warren Moon / Webster Sla 1990 Pro Set 772a Dexter Manley ERR 1993 Pro Set Power - Combos Prisms 7 Chris Doleman / Henry Tho 1990 Pro Set NNOa Michael Dean Perry VAR 1993 Pro Set Power - Combos Prisms 10 Marco Coleman / Bryan Cox 1990 Pro Set NNOb Michael Dean Perry VAR 1993 Pro Set Power - Draft Picks Gold PDP1 Lincoln Kennedy UER 1990 Pro Set NNO William Roberts 1993 Pro Set Power - Draft Picks Gold PDP3 Robert Smith UER 1990 Pro Set 338 Lud Denny 1993 Pro Set Power - Draft Picks Gold PDP5 Dan Footman UER 1990 Pro Set 444 Thurman Thomas 3D 1993 Pro Set Power - Draft Picks Gold PDP7
    [Show full text]
  • Test Your Trivia Here
    EATS & TREATS: September 2011 A GUIDE TO FOOD & FUN HOW MANY AGGIE TEAMS WON NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS IN 2010? NAME 5 TEXAS A&M ATHLETES WHAT IS THE OLDEST BUSINESS WHO NOW HAVE PRO SPORTS CAREERS ESTABLISHMENT IN COLLEGE STATION? TEST YOUR B RAZ OS VALLEY TRIVIA HERE September 2011 INSITE 1 2 INSITE September 2011 20 CONTENTS 5 MAKINGHISTORY Headed to the White House New exhibit shows what it takes to become President by Tessa K. Moore 7 LIFESTYLE Wanted: Texas Hospitality Families can share much with Aggies far from home by Tessa K. Moore 9 COMMUNITYOUTREACH A Legacy of Love Bubba Moore Memorial Group keeps the giving spirit alive by Megan Roiz INSITE Magazine is published monthly by Insite 11 GETINVOLVED Printing & Graphic Services, 123 E. Wm. J. Bryan Pkwy., Everyone Needs a Buddy Bryan, Texas 77803. (979) Annual walk raises more than just funds 823-5567 www.insitegroup. by Caroline Ward com Volume 28, Number 5. Publisher/Editor: Angelique Gammon; Account Executive: 12 ARTSSPOTLIGHT Myron King; Graphic Wanted: Dramatis Personae Designers: Alida Bedard; Karen Green. Editorial Or, How to get your Glee on around the Brazos Valley Interns: Tessa K. Moore, by Caroline Ward Megan Roiz, Caroline Ward; INSITE Magazine is a division of The Insite Group, LP. 15 DAYTRIP Reproduction of any part Visit Houston without written permission Find the metro spots that only locals know of the publisher is prohibited. Insite Printing & Graphic Services Managing Partners: 19 MUSICSCENE Kyle DeWitt, Angelique Beyond Price Gammon, Greg Gammon. Chamber concerts always world class, always free General Manager: Carl Dixon; Pre-Press Manager: Mari by Paul Parish Brown; Office Manager: Wendy Seward; Sales & Customer Service: Molly 20 QUIZTIME Barton; Candi Burling; Janice Feeling Trivial? Hellman; Manda Jackson; Test your Brazos Valley Trivia IQ Marie Lindley; Barbara by Tessa K.
    [Show full text]
  • Afc East Afc West Afc East Afc
    BUFFALO BILLS MIAMI DOLPHINS NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS NEW YORK JETS 2010 Jairus Byrd 2010 Patrick Cobbs 2010 Wes Welker 2010 Shaun Ellis 2009 James Hardy III 2009 Justin Smiley 2009 Tom Brady 2009 David Harris 2008 Chris Kelsay 2008 Ronnie Brown 2008 Sammy Morris 2008 Jerricho Cotchery 2007 Kevin Everett 2007 Andre Goodman 2007 Steve Neal 2007 Laveranues Coles 2006 Takeo Spikes 2006 Zach Thomas 2006 Rodney Harrison 2006 Chris Baker HHH 2005 Mark Campbell 2005 Yeremiah Bell 2005 Tedy Bruschi 2005 Wayne Chrebet 2004 Travis Henry 2004 David Bowens 2004 Rosevelt Colvin 2004 Chad Pennington 2003 Pat Williams 2003 Jamie Nails 2003 Mike Vrabel 2003 Dave Szott 2002 Tony Driver 2002 Robert Edwards 2002 Joe Andruzzi 2002 Vinny Testaverde 2001 Jerry Ostroski 2001 Scott Galyon 2001 Ted Johnson 2001 Curtis Martin 2000 Joe Panos 2000 Daryl Gardener 2000 Tedy Bruschi 2000 Jason Fabini 1999 Sean Moran 1999 O.J. Brigance 1999 Drew Bledsoe 1999 Marvin Jones 1998 John Holecek 1998 Larry Izzo 1998 Troy Brown 1998 Pepper Johnson 1997 Henry Jones 1997 O.J. McDuffie 1997 David Meggett 1997 David Williams 1996 Mark Maddox 1996 Bernie Parmalee 1996 Sam Gash 1996 Siupeli Malamala 1995 Jim Kelly 1995 Dan Marino 1995 Vincent Brown 1995 Kyle Clifton 1994 Kent Hull 1994 Troy Vincent 1994 Tim Goad 1994 Jim Sweeney AFC EAST 1993 John Davis 1993 John Offerdahl 1993 Bruce Armstrong 1993 Lonnie Young 1992 Bruce Smith 1992 John Grimsley 1992 Irving Fryar 1992 Dale Dawkins 1991 Mark Kelso 1991 Sammie Smith 1991 Fred Marion 1991 Paul Frase 1990 Darryl Talley 1990 Liffort Hobley
    [Show full text]
  • Records and Results
    RECORDS AND RESULTS NATIONAL CHAMPIONS UNDEFEATED & UNTIED TEAMS Year Team Poll (Regular Season Only) 1951 Tennessee AP, UPI YEAR TEAM W-L-T PTS OPP BOWL OPPONENT SCORE 1957 Auburn AP 1934 Alabama 9-0-0 287 32 Rose Stanford 29-13 1958 LSU AP, UPI 1937 Alabama 9-0-0 225 20 Rose California 0-13 1938 Tennessee 10-0-0 276 16 Orange Oklahoma 17-0 1960 Ole Miss FWAA 1939 Tennessee 10-0-0 212 0 Rose Southern Cal 0-14 1961 Alabama AP, UPI 1940 Tennessee 10-0-0 319 26 Sugar Boston Coll. 13-19 1964 Alabama AP, UPI 1945 Alabama 9-0-0 396 66 Rose Southern Cal 34-14 1946 Georgia 10-0-0 372 100 Sugar North Carolina 20-10 1964 #Arkansas FWAA 1951 Tennessee 10-0-0 373 88 Sugar Maryland 13-28 1965 Alabama AP, FWAA 1952 Georgia Tech 11-0-0 301 52 Sugar Ole Miss 24-7 1973 Alabama UPI 1956 Tennessee 10-0-0 268 75 Sugar Baylor 7-13 1978 Alabama AP, FWAA 1957 Auburn 10-0-0 207 28 (None) 1958 LSU 10-0-0 275 53 Sugar Clemson 7-0 1979 Alabama AP, UPI, FWAA 1961 Alabama 10-0-0 287 22 Sugar Arkansas 10-3 1980 Georgia AP, UPI, FWAA 1962 Ole Miss 9-0-0 230 40 Sugar Arkansas 17-13 1992 Alabama AP, UPI, USA Today, FWAA 1964 Alabama 10-0-0 223 67 Orange Texas 17-21 1996 Florida AP, USA Today, FWAA 1966 Alabama 10-0-0 267 37 Sugar Nebraska 34-7 1971 Alabama 11-0-0 362 84 Orange Nebraska 6-38 1998 Tenneseee AP, ESPN/USA Today, FWAA 1973 Alabama 11-0-0 454 89 Sugar Notre Dame 23-24 2003 LSU ESPN/USA Today 1974 Alabama 11-0-0 318 83 Orange Notre Dame 11-13 2006 Florida ESPN/USA Today, AP 1979 Alabama 11-0-0 359 58 Sugar Arkansas 24-9 1980 Georgia 11-0-0 316 127 Sugar Notre
    [Show full text]
  • UF Relaxes Measles Policy for Fear of Losing Students Rather Than Risk Closing UP, Ad- Dents, up Infir May Director Boyd Bleak in August, by Sept
    the indep-nden fItrid Students recount Soviet experience.13 Spurrier: 'There's no excuse' for UF's 27-3 Not 0111,0y as9twd wh Ihe Unrv. *y o Flo do PvbIhypM by Cmp., Comm .n.t.on. Irto ofGame. o victory..24 VOLUME 84, NUMBER 20 MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 24. 1990 Lombardi looks for alternative to NCAA penalty By SKAMON BENN Lombardi said Sunday he Is look- Both Lombardi and UP football compete tn a b owl game. Asking for the stronger penalty Alligator Staff Writer ing for a "reasonable alternative" coach Steve Spurrier said they One alternat ve is to request a would show the NCAA that UP is to the NCAA Committee on agree the penalty was too stiff be- harsherpenalty forthe football pro- willing to be punished (or its UP President John Lombardi Infractions'decision handed down cause it punishes the innocent foot. gram, such as a reduction of schol- wrongdoings, [ombardi said said he will announce Tuesday Thursday. The decision capped a ball players who are trying to win arships during the next two years, "it isn't reasonable that the com- whether the school will appeal an two-year investigation that un- their first Southeastern Confer- lombardi said. If UF takes that mittee will give us a lighter pun- NCAA ruling barring UF's football earthed violations committed by ence championship. According to route, the foot all team could win team from playing in a bowl game the football and men's basketball a 2-year-old SEC rule, the team is the SEC title and play in a bowl see NCAA.
    [Show full text]
  • Week 12 Football Release.Qxp
    SEC FOOTBALL 2009 Week 12 • Nov. 21 SECsports.com Southeastern Conference Media Relations SECSportsMedia.com • CollegePressBox.com EASTERN DIVISION LASTEST RANKINGS SEC Pct. PF PA Overall Pct. PF PA Home Away Neutral 2008 vs. Div. Top 25 Streak AP USA-T Harris BCS *Florida 8-0 1.000 221 96 10-0 1.000 339 105 5-0 4-0 1-0 9-1 5-0 1-0 W 10 1 1 1 1 Georgia 4-3 .571 207 218 6-4 .600 275 259 4-1 2-2 0-1 8-2 2-2 1-3 W 2 rv rv South Carolina 3-5 .375 144 195 6-5 .545 227 228 5-1 1-4 0-0 7-4 2-3 1-3 L 3 Kentucky 2-4 .333 122 165 6-4 .600 268 217 3-3 2-1 1-0 6-4 2-1 0-3 W 2 Tennessee 2-4 .333 138 135 5-5 .500 306 212 5-2 0-3 0-0 3-7 1-2 1-2 L 1 Vanderbilt 0-7 .000 55 160 2-9 .182 180 249 1-5 1-4 0-0 6-5 0-4 0-5 L 7 WESTERN DIVISION LASTEST RANKINGS SEC Pct. PF PA Overall Pct. PF PA Home Away Neutral 2008 vs. Div. Top 25 Streak AP USA-T Harris BCS *Alabama 7-0 1.000 182 64 10-0 1.000 309 109 6-0 3-0 1-0 10-0 4-0 4-0 W 10 2 3 3 2 LSU 4-2 .667 122 95 8-2 .800 250 137 5-1 3-1 0-0 7-3 2-1 1-2 W 1 10 10 10 8 Ole Miss 3-3 .500 128 112 7-3 .700 311 159 5-1 2-2 0-0 6-4 1-2 0-1 W 2 rv rv rv Auburn 3-4 .429 179 193 7-4 .636 374 297 6-1 1-3 0-0 5-6 3-1 1-1 L 1 rv rv rv Arkansas 2-4 .333 162 179 6-4 .600 376 255 5-1 0-3 1-0 4-6 1-2 1-4 W 3 Mississippi State 2-4 .333 118 166 4-6 .400 245 252 1-5 3-1 0-0 3-7 0-3 0-5 L 1 NOTES: 2008 - Record after same number of games in 2008 / vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Super Bowl Xlvii
    SUPER BOWL XLVII n emotionally-charged and perceived the run of losses to be Baltimore’s late-season Athrilling six weeks kicked demise, but the Ravens felt otherwise. As each wintry off the Baltimore Ravens’ 2012 week passed, the team’s resilient chemistry never faded, campaign. Despite playing their nor did its genuine belief that the best was yet to come. first four games in an 18-day span, the Ravens produced a 5-1 record, On Wild Card weekend, before a sellout M&T Bank Stadium marking the best start ever under crowd that celebrated and saluted Ray Lewis in his final home John Harbaugh. Highlighted by a game, Baltimore pummeled the Colts, 24-9, kick-starting an season-opening victory on Monday incredible playoff run. Holding Indy without a touchdown, the Night Football against division foe Ravens’ defense was led by Lewis, who returned to action for the first time since tearing his triceps in Week 6. Cincinnati and an exhilarating, last-second triumph over AFC rival “I think we’re all appreciative, grateful for the opportunity to New England, the Ravens immediately demonstrated the be here and to witness this historic moment in sports,” head type of heart and resolve that would allow them to conquer coach John Harbaugh said after the win. “And, it wasn’t just anything in an NFL season. about one guy [Lewis]. Nobody understands it more than Climbing to 9-2, Baltimore tied (2006) the then-best record the one guy we’re talking about. It was about a team. It was about a city, a fan base, a great sport, about a great career.” to begin a season in franchise history.
    [Show full text]
  • All-Gator Bowl Team Based Off Gator Bowl Performance OFFENSE
    All-Gator Bowl Team Based Off Gator Bowl Performance OFFENSE Quarterback (Vote for 1) Matt Cavanaugh (Pittsburgh QB 1975 – 1977) Pitt exploded for 566 total yards and a record 30 first downs. Cavanaugh threw for 387 yards and 4 touchdowns to shoulder his team’s offense and lead them to a win over the South Carolina Gamecocks. Chip Ferguson (Florida State QB 1985 – 1988) The Seminoles accounted for 597 yards of total offense in 1985 and 338 came via QB Chip Ferguson’s arm. He added 2 touchdowns as the Seminoles would go on to defeat the Oklahoma State Cowboys 34-23. Kim Hammond (Florida State QB 1965 – 1967) Penn State looked to put the 1967 Gator Bowl away early, and by the looks of the first half they succeeded. Penn State took a comfortable 17-0 lead into halftime. Kim Hammond simply took over in the second half. Hammond completed 37 passes for 362 yards, both records that eclipsed former FSU quarterback Steve Tensi. Hammond scored twice; once on the ground and once through the air. 14 of his completions were to his favorite target, Ron Sellers, who caught for 145 yards. The Seminoles stormed back and nailed a field goal with 15 seconds left to end the game in a 17-17 tie. Graham Harrell (Texas Tech QB 2005 – 2008) Harrell had one of the most successful Gator Bowl performances against the Virginia Cavaliers. He set the bowl record in passing attempts (69), completions (44), and yards gained (407). He threw for 3 touchdowns to lead the Red Raiders to a 38-35 victory over the Cavaliers and was named game MVP.
    [Show full text]
  • SEC Record Book
    RECORDS AND RESULTS MISSISSIPPI STATE • MISSOURI • SOUTH CAROLINA • TENNESSEE • TEXAS A&M • VANDERBILT NATIONAL CHAMPIONS UNDEFEATED AND UNTIED TEAMS Year Team Poll (Regular Season Only) 1951 Tennessee AP, UPI YEAR TEAM W-L-T PTS OPP BOWL OPPONENT SCORE 1957 Auburn AP 1934 Alabama 9-0-0 287 32 Rose Stanford 29-13 1937 Alabama 9-0-0 225 20 Rose California 0-13 1958 LSU AP, UPI 1938 Tennessee 10-0-0 276 16 Orange Oklahoma 17-0 1960 Ole Miss FWAA 1939 Tennessee 10-0-0 212 0 Rose Southern Cal 0-14 1940 Tennessee 10-0-0 319 26 Sugar Boston Coll. 13-19 1961 Alabama AP, UPI 1945 Alabama 9-0-0 396 66 Rose Southern Cal 34-14 1964 Alabama AP, UPI 1946 Georgia 10-0-0 372 100 Sugar North Carolina 20-10 1964 #Arkansas FWAA 1951 Tennessee 10-0-0 373 88 Sugar Maryland 13-28 1952 Georgia Tech 11-0-0 301 52 Sugar Ole Miss 24-7 1965 Alabama AP, FWAA 1956 Tennessee 10-0-0 268 75 Sugar Baylor 7-13 1973 Alabama UPI 1957 Auburn 10-0-0 207 28 (None) 1978 Alabama AP, FWAA 1958 LSU 10-0-0 275 53 Sugar Clemson 7-0 1961 Alabama 10-0-0 287 22 Sugar Arkansas 10-3 1979 Alabama AP, UPI, FWAA 1962 Ole Miss 9-0-0 230 40 Sugar Arkansas 17-13 1980 Georgia AP, UPI, FWAA 1964 Alabama 10-0-0 223 67 Orange Texas 17-21 1966 Alabama 10-0-0 267 37 Sugar Nebraska 34-7 1992 Alabama AP, UPI, USA Today, FWAA 1971 Alabama 11-0-0 362 84 Orange Nebraska 6-38 1996 Florida AP, USA Today, FWAA 1973 Alabama 11-0-0 454 89 Sugar Notre Dame 23-24 1998 Tenneseee AP, ESPN/USA Today, FWAA 1974 Alabama 11-0-0 318 83 Orange Notre Dame 11-13 1979 Alabama 11-0-0 359 58 Sugar Arkansas 24-9 2003 LSU
    [Show full text]
  • Oakland Raiders San Francisco 49Ers
    SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS OAKLAND RAIDERS NO NAME POS HT WT AGE EXP COLLEGE NO NAME POS HT WT AGE EXP COLLEGE NO NAME POS 3 C.J. Beathard QB 6-2 215 24 2 Iowa 2 AJ McCarron QB 6-3 215 28 4 Alabama NO NAME POS 91 ...... Armstead, Arik ..................DL 4 Nick Mullens QB 6-1 210 23 1 Southern Mississippi 4 Derek Carr QB 6-3 215 27 5 Fresno State 88 ...... Ateman, Marcell ...............WR 3 ...... Beathard, C.J. .................. QB 5 Bradley Pinion P 6-5 240 24 4 Clemson 5 Johnny Townsend P 6-1 210 23 R Florida 95 ...... Brown, Fadol .....................DE 98 ...... Blair III, Ronald ..................DL 9 Robbie Gould K 6-0 190 35 14 Penn State 8 Daniel Carlson K 6-5 213 23 R Auburn 12 ...... Bryant, Martavis ..............WR 17 ...... Bolden Jr., Victor ..............WR 11 Marquise Goodwin WR 5-9 180 27 6 Texas 10 Seth Roberts WR 6-2 195 27 4 West Alabama 53 ...... Cabinda, Jason .................LB 84 ...... Bourne, Kendrick..............WR 13 Richie James Jr. WR 5-9 185 23 R Middle Tennessee State 12 Martavis Bryant WR 6-4 210 26 4 Clemson 91 ...... Calhoun, Shilique ..............LB 22 ...... Breida, Matt ......................RB 14 Tom Savage QB 6-4 230 28 5 Pittsburgh 17 Dwayne Harris WR/RS 5-11 206 31 8 East Carolina 8 ...... Carlson, Daniel ...................K 99 ...... Buckner, DeForest .............DL 15 Pierre Garçon WR 6-0 211 32 11 Mount Union 19 Brandon LaFell WR 6-3 210 31 9 LSU 4 ...... Carr, Derek ....................... QB 88 ...... Celek, Garrett ...................
    [Show full text]