So the NFL Players Union has called a play in the huddle, asking for the league to refused to allow Rush Limbaugh to purchase a portion of the St. Louis Rams.

NFL Players Executive Director DeMaurice Smith spoke to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, strongly opposing the purchase transaction if it included Limbaugh.

“I’ve spoken to the Commissioner and understand that this ownership consideration is in the early stages. But sport in America is at its best when it unifies, gives all of us reason to cheer, and when it transcends. Our sport does exactly that when it overcomes division and rejects discrimination and hatred…”

As it stands right now, seven NFL players have publicly opposed Limbaugh’s interest in purchasing even a small portion of the Rams.

Now the union leader is asking players to begin to speak up and express their minds with the media.

“I have asked our players to embrace their roles not only in the game of football but also as players and partners in the business of the NFL. They risk everything to play this game, they understand that risk and they live with that risk and its consequences for the rest of their life. We also know that there is an ugly part of history and we will not risk going backwards, giving up, giving in or lying down to it.”

“Our men are strong and proud fathers, spouses and I am proud when they stand up, understand this is their profession and speak with candor and blunt honesty about how they feel.”

Today, the Reverend Al Sharpton joined the cheering section, asking that the NFL refuse to allow Rush Limbaugh to own any part, of any team in the league.

So let me get this straight, the players in St. Louis right now – resting at 0-5 on the season – would not play, cash their checks, nor create a maturation toward another Super Bowl run, all due to Rush Limbaugh owning 10-percent of the team?

I have a hard time believing that it is his 2003 comments. I think this is more about Rush’ political opinions and speech. It is more to do with his daily political opinions and diatribe on his national talk show?

Which brings to mind another “entertainer” who has a money-making relationship with the NFL and a political viewpoint or two – the now famous Keith Olbermann.

If Rush is refused, shouldn’t Obermann be terminated from the NBC Sunday Night Game due to his outspoken ideological opinions, political rants and daily ad-homonym attacks on MSNBC? Is he that much different when it comes to Rush, as outspoken personal opinions go?

Maybe this is the reason for Keith’s new found love for Rush Limbaugh late last week:

“You heard me - -critics of Rush Limbaugh, ones who were bristling at the news he and hockey executive Dave Checketts might buy the NFL’s St. Louis Rams, suggesting he should not be permitted to because he made racist comments about Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb that resulted in Limbaugh’s firing (he actual resigned) by ESPN in 2003.”

Sounds a bit peculiar Keith; could it be that Olbermann is concerned about his tenure with the NFL and NBC Sunday Night Game of the Week if Rush is banned from the NFL Owner’s Roster?

I think I would make that trade; no Rush for St. Louis, in exchange for the termination of Olbermann from my TV each Sunday night during the game of the week.

It’s another sacrificial thing Rush, you make the call.