- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: This is really, really bad for the NFL
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:58 am to hashtag
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:58 am to hashtag
quote:
studies have proven that repeated hits from football cause brain damage. At what point does that damage cause the players to lose the ability to discern a lie from, what they believe is, a medical professional? You may think I'm being silly, but I would be shocked if it doesn't come up during one of the trials.
if they had brain damage prior to the lie, this would probably hurt their claim. how could they make a claim today that they relied on a lie when they were already suffering from brain damage and couldn't even understand the lie?
1
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:00 am to Flair Chops
quote:
the fact that the former players have any recourse whatsoever is a joke. imo, it's the equivalent of a soldier suing the military because he suffers from ptsd. you know the risks before stepping on the respective fields of battle.
You're speaking in hindsight. The players did not know the full extent of the risks. Us fans didn't either.
The NFL did know, hid the findings, and flat out denied all the research shown to them for years before finally conceding.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:00 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
how many CBAs have washed that liability clean since the lie?
I would like to know this.
Is the lie contained in the most current CBA?
ETA:
Was there actually a discernible "lie" in written form?
What generation of players can lay claim to have been "lied" to?
Who do they sue? The teams they played for? The NFL office? All 32 teams even if the owners have changed since their playing days?
This post was edited on 1/10/13 at 9:04 am
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:03 am to Powerman
quote:up until about 4 years ago, the NFL completely denied CTE existed in its players.
But it's up to the employer to take reasonable measures to continually improve the safety of their employees. I think the NFL has taken steps to do so. And since it's a violent sport, the assumption of risk is not even really implied because it's so obvious that any 3 year old can figure it out.
How does that equate to the NFL taking proper steps?
And it if was so obvious for a 3 year old to figure out why did it take the NFL so long to do so?
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:03 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
a. which team said it? or was it the NFL? which management group/ownership of that team said it? or was it the NFL?
Pretty sure the claim is against the league office. One my one my family members works for the NFL in the legal department and I can tell you they're lawyering up in a serious way.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:04 am to shel311
quote:
The NFL did know, hid the findings, and flat out denied all the research shown to them for years before finally conceding.
How do we know this?
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:04 am to shel311
quote:
The NFL did know, hid the findings, and flat out denied all the research shown to them for years before finally conceding.
was it public research? how could the NFL hide it?
was it private research? if so, why didn't the NFLPA do its own research (if only for CBA leverage)?
and if it was the NFL in CBA discussions, there is almost assuredly no claim b/c all prior claims get waived with new CBAs. i'm pretty sure that context is how the "NFL" would have to be sued also, otherwise they'd have to sue which individual team lied and prove that lie affected that player
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:05 am to usc6158
quote:
One my one my family members works for the NFL in the legal department and I can tell you they're lawyering up in a serious way.
It will be a 100 man lawyer team. Going to be absurd. They have a multi-billion dollar lawsuit on their hands.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:07 am to usc6158
quote:
Pretty sure the claim is against the league office.
i'm curious how that unfolds with the USSC ruling
quote:
One my one my family members works for the NFL in the legal department and I can tell you they're lawyering up in a serious way.
oh i'm sure. they want to get this squashed
i don't think it's a class action
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:08 am to TheCaterpillar
I'm going to repeat my questions because I feel like some of you would know these answers:
Is the lie contained in the most current CBA?
Was there actually a discernible "lie" in written form?
What generation of players can lay claim to have been "lied" to?
Who do they sue? The teams they played for? The NFL office? All 32 teams even if the owners have changed since their playing days?
How do we know the NFL knowingly lied about CTE? Could they just have been given bad information?
Is the lie contained in the most current CBA?
Was there actually a discernible "lie" in written form?
What generation of players can lay claim to have been "lied" to?
Who do they sue? The teams they played for? The NFL office? All 32 teams even if the owners have changed since their playing days?
How do we know the NFL knowingly lied about CTE? Could they just have been given bad information?
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:08 am to Hugo Stiglitz
What I don't understand is players like Seau chose to go play in the NFL as their profession. They knew it was a very physical game that came with severe risk to their health and well being. They applied to the NFL to included in a yearly talent draft andd they were compinsated handsomely for the health risk they chose to take. No one forced Seau to continue to play all the years he did. He could of walked away from the game at anytime but he chose to continue playing and exposing his body to such risk.
Seau was not forced into the NFL when he left USC. It was his decission to chanse fame and fortune in the NFL dispite the health risk involved.
Seau was not forced into the NFL when he left USC. It was his decission to chanse fame and fortune in the NFL dispite the health risk involved.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:10 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i don't think it's a class action
If I was an ex-player and I wanted to get paid, I'd get my own lawyer and bring a lawsuit against all my former teams and the league office separately. Settle out of court then count the bills on the porch of my house on St. John.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:11 am to TheCaterpillar
Ohhhhhhh thought of another great question:
How does this translate to former college players? Undoubtedly there are cases of CTE in players that never saw the NFL. Do colleges have protection from this?
How does this translate to former college players? Undoubtedly there are cases of CTE in players that never saw the NFL. Do colleges have protection from this?
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:12 am to Sophandros
quote:
Totally different. If the military lied to its soldiers about the risks of going to war and about PTSD, then they'd get sued. And lose.
Actually, no. The Military are the only government employees who are not only barred from forming a union, but also barred from suing the government while in service.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:15 am to CGSC Lobotomy
SFP can speak to this further, but I am under the impression that the United States has to consent to being sued.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:16 am to SlowFlowPro
Even if the NFL is 32 separate entities, would the league as a whole still be a legal person? Seems almost like a union for instance.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:16 am to TheCaterpillar
it looks like it's an MDL and not a class
that's basically when one court sucks up all similar suits into one court
that's basically when one court sucks up all similar suits into one court
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:17 am to boosiebadazz
the government has sovereign immunity and can choose to create exceptions where you can sue it
i'm 99% sure military members cannot sue the federal government, both via sovereign immunity and in their enlistment paperwork
i'm 99% sure military members cannot sue the federal government, both via sovereign immunity and in their enlistment paperwork
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:19 am to usc6158
quote:
Even if the NFL is 32 separate entities, would the league as a whole still be a legal person?
the "NFL" can be a legal person, but i think if they try to sue the NFL then it ends up turning into a labor issue
if it's a labor issue, their suits are going to be tough. the CBA controls a lot of those issues, and it would fall under labor law and not negligence/fraud (unless they find a similar violation under labor law)
baloo knows labor law a lot better than i do
Master complaint in the MDL. I'm about to read it
Posted on 1/10/13 at 9:20 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i'm 99% sure military members cannot sue the federal government, both via sovereign immunity and in their enlistment paperwork
If they could, we would hear about a new lawsuit daily.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News