JuggernautJ wrote:Spoken like someone who has never been involved in a contract negotiation... or been a teacher in West Virginia (or Kentucky or Oklahoma...). They can get... heated.RRMarshall wrote:...Looking back it is amazing how much animosity there was by teams to player reps during the era, especially in baseball where a very high percentage of them were traded. His career just seemed to tail off after that, I assume because of injuries.
Context and timing is also important to consider regarding how an individual is perceived/remembered.
An "uppity" union rep from the 60's-70's might today be seen as a black man standing up for his rights and those of his fellows.
Those days were "another era" in more than just football history...
(So, yes. I am saying that part of the way Roy Jefferson (and John Mackey, et al) were perceived might've been related to the way in which race was viewed in that time.)
I think we're talking about two different issues, I don't think race, or Jefferson's involvement in the player's union were any factor in his trade from the Steelers to Baltimore. When a player has a great individual season statistically for a 1-13 football team, and doesn't buy into the vision by the first year head coach, that's a problem. We've seen this scenario play out many times in the NFL, a veteran player unhappy with a new head coach in a rebuilding situation. The Steelers simply could not have that type of negativity with the young talent coming on board. Jefferson was a good player who wanted to do things his own way, and that type of player isn't conducive to championship winning football. When there's a conflict between the head coach, and an unhappy player, said player will likely depart.
