- 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 8:04 am to boosiebadazz
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:04 am to boosiebadazz
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.
i'm all in favor of the league taking care of the players and their families, but not to the tune of multimillion dollars
i'm all in favor of the league taking care of the players and their families, but not to the tune of multimillion dollars
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:07 am to Sophandros
quote:
There's an implied assumption of risk when you become a coal miner, too.
Those families have won lawsuits...
Well every profession has some risk. There is no such thing as a risk free profession.
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.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:08 am to Flair Chops
quote:
imo, it's the equivalent of a soldier suing the military because he suffers from ptsd, after the military learned that serving can lead to ptsd and then lied to the soldiers about it. you know the risks before stepping on the respective fields of battle
fify
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:08 am to hashtag
quote:
that's not the issue. the issue is that the NFL researched it, then lied to the NFLPA about the results. They intentionally lied to players about it.
Yeah that's obviously a problem
I'm not defending the NFL here. I'm just saying it shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that repeated regular head trauma is going to be bad for you. No helmet can protect you from that type of abuse.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:09 am to Powerman
quote:
Well every profession has some risk. There is no such thing as a risk free profession.
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.
again, the issue isn't the risk, though that's what it is being made out to be. the issue is that the NFL intentionally lied to the players about it. Sure, players know there is a risk. But, when the NFL tells you that medical research says it isn't nearly as risky as you thought, players (not being in the medical profession) will probably believe them.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:10 am to hashtag
quote:
the issue is that the NFL intentionally lied to the players about it.
I'm with you on that and I do have a problem with that
I'm pretty easy to convince if you're right, and it appears that you are. No argument from me.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:11 am to Powerman
quote:
I'm just saying it shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that repeated regular head trauma is going to be bad for you.
yeah, but can you figure it out once you've already had the repeated regular head trauma? maybe the head trauma damaged the players' brains to the point that they couldn't think rationally any more. Then, the NFL tells them that it is medically proven that it isn't dangerous.
how can someone with brain damage make a rational judgment call?
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:11 am to Flair Chops
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.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:18 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.
yep. Plus, even with the huge reality of PTSD, the suicide rate among our military has increased at the same rate as the suicide rate among America as a whole. IMO, mental health is increasing at a similar rate regardless of careers. Whether you are a military person, NFL player, stripper, lawyer, IT analyst, bus driver, etc., you have the same likelihood to have mental health issues. America is failing it's population as a whole in this area.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:23 am to boosiebadazz
I forget that Seau killed himself.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:34 am to Sophandros
i just don't understand how anyone could tell me with a straight face that they didn't know the risk of brain damage existed in a sport as violent as football. yeah, the nfl fricked up by lying about it, but the players know the risks.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:43 am to hashtag
quote:
that's not the issue. the issue is that the NFL researched it, then lied to the NFLPA about the results. They intentionally lied to players about it.
that is bad, but i always wondered why the NFLPA didn't do it's on research
but the suits aren't being brought by the NFLPA, right? they're brought by former players
there are also some issues i'd imagine with the ability to even bring the claim. when was the lie they claim? how many CBAs have washed that liability clean since the lie?
there is also this real difficult issue
The "NFL" is 32 sepaarate businesses
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:46 am to Flair Chops
quote:
i just don't understand how anyone could tell me with a straight face that they didn't know the risk of brain damage existed in a sport as violent as football. yeah, the nfl fricked up by lying about it, but the players know the risks.
yeah it kind of doesn't pass the smell test
if the NFLPA didn't believe the NFL (which it should not have), it should have done its own research and then busted it on the NFL in the next CBA negotiations (in private). frick, for all we know they did do this
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:49 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
but i always wondered why the NFLPA didn't do it's on research
Yeah, seems like they'd want their own research on the topic, independent from whatever the league did. That seems kinda odd.
I'd also be interested in the details of what exactly the NFl lied about, and how they did it...as in if there is some sort of loophole they could use to cover their asses with all this. It doesn't make much sense to lie about something like this. I realize they've made tons of money on that lie, but they'd have made tons of money with the truth too.
Doesn't make sense at all really, especially in the type of sport that it is...violent, repeated collisions, etc. Like most have said here, it takes about the intelligence of a child to realize that being in this sport can be bad for your head. So saying otherwise is just a blatantly stupid move.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:50 am to hashtag
quote:
yeah, but can you figure it out once you've already had the repeated regular head trauma? maybe the head trauma damaged the players' brains to the point that they couldn't think rationally any more.
Now you're just being silly
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:55 am to Powerman
there is just such a moving target in this instance
a. which team said it? or was it the NFL? which management group/ownership of that team said it? or was it the NFL?
b. who was this said to? when?
c. where is the direct reliance on this alleged lie? was it one group of players in the 70s? 80s? how could a player coming into the league in the 90s make a claim?
a. which team said it? or was it the NFL? which management group/ownership of that team said it? or was it the NFL?
b. who was this said to? when?
c. where is the direct reliance on this alleged lie? was it one group of players in the 70s? 80s? how could a player coming into the league in the 90s make a claim?
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:56 am to Powerman
quote:
Now you're just being silly
really? 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.
You have players who are so messed up that they kill themselves, but you want to tell me they still have the cognitive ability to overrule a medical professional?
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:57 am to Hugo Stiglitz
They know its dangerous to hit your head repeatedly and if they don't then they are morons. They get paid a shite ton of money to do so and a vast majority of the players that have permanent head trauma were in the league long enough to collect a pension.
They will be sued. They will lose billions. They will survive post-lawsuit. They will, from now on, make every player sign a release form/waiver about head injuries.
They will be sued. They will lose billions. They will survive post-lawsuit. They will, from now on, make every player sign a release form/waiver about head injuries.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:58 am to hashtag
quote:
that's not the issue. the issue is that the NFL researched it, then lied to the NFLPA about the results. They intentionally lied to players about it.
Yeah that is bad. Can they not prove they were given bad information and that it wasn't intentional? That might be their best shot to survive this.
Posted on 1/10/13 at 8:58 am to Sophandros
quote:
"Bounty gate" is and was all about the ex-players' lawsuit and the league's attempt to protect itself.
I thought that was fairly obvious.
But a lot of Saints fans acted like Goodell personally targeted them.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News