Fouts, Chandler Upset by Personnel Revelations

SAN DIEGO — Charger players Dan Fouts and Wes Chandler, neither of whom has crossed the National Football League Players Assn. picket line, on Thursday accused team management of releasing confidential contractual information to the media.

Chandler and some of his teammates said the Chargers were attempting to divide the striking players.

The San Diego Union, which obtained a copy of Chandler’s contract signed in 1983, reported Wednesday that Chandler has a clause in his contract enabling him to recover salary he does not collect during a strike. According to the Union, Chandler is the only Charger player with such a clause. Chandler, the team’s player representative, said that his agent, Bud Asher, put the clause in his contract without his knowledge.

Said Chandler: “I had no knowledge as to what was in my contract other than my base salary and how many years I had signed for. If I had known about it, don’t you think I’d be trying to get my checks if I was entitled to them?”

The Union also reported that Fouts’ attorney, Howard Slusher, sent the Chargers a letter asking for Fouts’ salary during the strike. According to the report, the letter also stated that if Fouts did not receive the salary due to him by Oct. 16, Fouts and Slusher would consider the Chargers in breach of contract. Fouts is not a member of the players association, but he has been out on strike.

Steve Ortmayer, Charger director of football operations, said Thursday that the information was not leaked to any newspaper reporter. He said that if the players “choose to believe we are interested in creating a rift between players and management, that would be erroneous.

“Somebody ought to tell Wes that management didn’t leak this story,” Ortmayer said. “Management has been asked about this for the last couple of weeks and has refused to comment on it.”

Chandler, Fouts and their teammates were upset by the way the information was made public and by the timing of it.

“To have this happen to me and to try to embarrass me in the eyes of the public, as well as my teammates, shows no class at all,” Chandler said. “To have them try to destroy my credibility in the eyes of my teammates is uncalled for . . .

“I guess it’s a tactic--a low-ball tactic, in my eyes--to lure my players across the line. It’s unfortunate that these are the type of tactics people would try to lure players across the line.

“Management is trying to get to the leadership of the union. But as far as my players are concerned, it’s just propaganda. This is going to have a reverse effect. I truly believe that because of what has happened, we’ll be a much stronger team next week.”

Fouts confirmed Thursday that he believes the Chargers owe him his salary during the strike because he is honoring his contract by conducting the practices held by the striking players.

“It was agreed upon by Mr. Ortmayer and Mr. (Al) Saunders that I do what I’m doing--that I not join the scab team and that I stay out and work with the guys,” Fouts said.

“At this time during the ’82 strike, we had five or six guys working out every day. In the last few weeks, we’ve averaged 75% of the guys.”

Saunders, the Charger coach, said he did not have the jurisdiction or authority to comment on contractual matters.

“Any conversations I’ve had with Dan are between Dan and I,” Saunders said. “Dan has been in communication with the staff and has done an exemplary job of working out with the team.”

Ortmayer said he would not discuss players’ contracts, but he did speak about contractual obligations in general terms.

“What it takes for a player to be paid is that he not be striking, he be with us or he be doing what a player is told to do,” Ortmayer said.

The last point is a fine line in Fouts’ case.

Said Ortmayer: “I knew Al had conversations with Dan about keeping the team going, but the issue is whether or not he is living up to his player contract.”

Is he?

“I haven’t seen him,” Ortmayer said.

Fouts referred specific questions about his contract to Slusher, but the quarterback did speak out about the manner in which his contract became public. Slusher’s secretary, reached by telephone at Slusher’s Los Angeles area office, would only say that the agent was “in transit” Thursday.

“It’s amazing when a letter is sent with three copies, it turns up in the paper,” Fouts said. “It’s amazing how it turns up like that, isn’t it? . . . When they don’t identify sources and one guy keeps getting the same sources all the time, it’s pretty strange.”

Fouts was referring to a number of newspaper stories that appeared during his contract dispute with the Chargers during training camp. Fouts said the Chargers “turned a private situation into a public one.”

“I don’t know what motivates the Chargers’ organization,” Fouts said. “It’s a different personality with the organization.”

Chandler said Thursday that he had been confronted by a reporter with the contract information last week.

“When I was confronted with it, I confronted Ortmayer with it. He told me had no knowledge,” Chandler said.

“From what I read, he said they don’t discuss contracts publicly. I’m sure you all read it. So now you’ve got to wonder about the credibility. I’m wondering about the credibility. If we don’t reveal contracts publicly, then why is mine in the paper?

“There’s only so many people that would have access to player contracts. It ain’t my concern as to who did it, but I know sooner or later it will come to light, because it’s hard for an individual to look you in the eye with a straight face.”

During the players’ meeting after Thursday’s practice, which consisted of a softball game among 30 players, one of the topics discussed was Chandler’s contract.

“My contract was negotiated before most of these players even came to San Diego,” Chandler said. “They voted on me as being their player representative because I could do the job. Up to this point, my players think I’ve done that job . . .

“We refuse to let anything of this nature, which is to sidetrack us, destroy what we’re working for as a team.

“As a matter of fact, we laughed and joked about it.”

Cornerback Gill Byrd, the assistant player representative, said, “I look at it as contract negotiating in 1982-83. If a guy had enough foresight back then to see this coming, more power to him. That’s great on his agent’s part.”

Linebacker Gary Plummer said, “I’m extremely happy for Wes that he will receive money during the strike. I wish I had the foresight to have that in my contract.”

Chandler’s contract, which includes a base salary of $205,000, has numerous options, but it is not guaranteed. According to the NFL Management Council, the average NFL player salary is $230,000.

“Look, I’ve been playing this game for 10 years, and that’s all I’m making,” said Chandler, who confirmed the salary. “I came in here (as) the No. 1 draft choice, the second player overall (actually, the third selection in the 1978 draft) . . . I love to play the game for the sake of playing it.”

Chandler said he wasn’t angry.

“As far as this is concerned,” Chandler said, “I’ve blown it out the window. But there will always be a dot in the back of my mind as to how it was handled, and how I was treated.”

Charger Notes

Steve Ortmayer, Charger director of football operations, is not optimistic about when the NFL players strike is going to end. “I’m extremely discouraged that the mass of players in the National Football League can continue to be misled as to what is happening in Washington D.C.,” Ortmayer said. “The players were promised something could happen by the middle of the week or Saturday. I’m very discouraged that the atmosphere on our picket line is still of the opinion that that could happen. No way. I am very discouraged, but they are apparently encouraged. I don’t know how many rounds we’re going to go.” . . . Coach Al Saunders will announce today whether Rick Neuheisel or Mike Kelley will start Sunday against Tampa Bay.