Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15
  1. #11
    jmcdon00's Avatar
    jmcdon00 is offline Jersey Retired Snake Champion, Moto Trial Fest 2: Mountain Pack Champion, LL City Truck 2 Champion, Arithmetic sequence Champion, Troops Tower Defense Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,278

    Re: Congress invokes antitrust

    "vikinggreg" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "VikingMike" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    Thanks for the read my friend......

    Look, I'll be the first to admit that I think that the NFL should take care of its own a bit better, however, at somepoint I need to raise the bullshit flag.

    Didn't these players, at some point, sign some sort of settlement/retirement agreement that IS being honored/or has been honored?

    Who's fault is it that that agreement didn't take into account the long term affects of playing a game or the growth (in bucks) that the NFL would eventually become?
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/sports/football/01araton.html
    You may have believed it would be a snowy day at the Super Bowl when a member of the Pro Football Hall of Fame would stand up at a news conference to talk about what he calls the N.F.L.’s “dark secret,” as the Vikings great Carl Eller did here Thursday.

    After six years in the trenches left him with a broken body, Pear needed his pension early and was later denied a disability claim. The $606 pension check he receives monthly barely covers half the cost of the 38 pills he consumes daily.
    I'll be second.

    I don't like the government sticking its nose into sports (even Spector going after Belicheat). What's next...are they going to institute a minimum wage of $8.25 per hour? Or is OSHA going to install guidelines for safety regulations and change the game to flag football? It's a very bad omen when senators and congressmen start nosing around the game.
    I don't like the government getting involved. The NFL should start building it's own stadiums and live with the same anti-trust laws every other business sector does.
    As far as the players making enough to take care of themselves, that may be true of todays players but retirement benefits are going to guys who played in th 50's 60' and 70's. Salaries were no where near what they are now. Most of the players did not realize that they would suffer life long disabilities because they played the game. The NFL should just step up and give some of the billions it profits every year to the players that made the NFL great in the first place. Some of the stories I've read about this are about players who are totally disabled because they played in the NFL but because they didn't apply for benefits soon enough they are just out of luck.

    Would that be the same as the NBA, MLB, PGA, NASCAR, NHL..... don't they all package and sell their TV rights the same as the NFL.
    Hockey, baseball and basketball also see local governments aid in funding their venues when they see the benefits to the local economies and when they don't and teams see sweeter deals they move.
    It's not like people in Wyoming are funding venues in Colorado.
    I chose my words carefully and said other business sectors, as in sectors other than sports. My point is that sports teams get a lot of handouts from taxpayers so the taxpayers do have a right to demand a certain standard of decency, and they have a lot of leverage.

  2. #12
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re: Congress invokes antitrust

    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "VikingMike" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    Thanks for the read my friend......

    Look, I'll be the first to admit that I think that the NFL should take care of its own a bit better, however, at somepoint I need to raise the kaka del rio flag.

    Didn't these players, at some point, sign some sort of settlement/retirement agreement that IS being honored/or has been honored?

    Who's fault is it that that agreement didn't take into account the long term affects of playing a game or the growth (in bucks) that the NFL would eventually become?
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/sports/football/01araton.html
    You may have believed it would be a snowy day at the Super Bowl when a member of the Pro Football Hall of Fame would stand up at a news conference to talk about what he calls the N.F.L.’s “dark secret,” as the Vikings great Carl Eller did here Thursday.

    After six years in the trenches left him with a broken body, Pear needed his pension early and was later denied a disability claim. The $606 pension check he receives monthly barely covers half the cost of the 38 pills he consumes daily.
    I'll be second.

    I don't like the government sticking its nose into sports (even Spector going after Belicheat). What's next...are they going to institute a minimum wage of $8.25 per hour? Or is OSHA going to install guidelines for safety regulations and change the game to flag football? It's a very bad omen when senators and congressmen start nosing around the game.
    I don't like the government getting involved. The NFL should start building it's own stadiums and live with the same anti-trust laws every other business sector does.

    As far as the players making enough to take care of themselves, that may be true of todays players but retirement benefits are going to guys who played in th 50's 60' and 70's. Salaries were no where near what they are now. Most of the players did not realize that they would suffer life long disabilities because they played the game. The NFL should just step up and give some of the billions it profits every year to the players that made the NFL great in the first place. Some of the stories I've read about this are about players who are totally disabled because they played in the NFL but because they didn't apply for benefits soon enough they are just out of luck.
    I hear ya my friend, and agree to a point, however, like any agreement, the players (back in the day) had the chance to get this right and didn't.
    In fact thier settlement/retirement takes into accounts some of the very issues you discuss.

    I heard Robert Smith speak on this issue sometime last year.
    I will snoop around and see if I can find it, however, he says that most of the older players, back in the day, who are the ones who complain the most now, actually accepted cash settlements to support thier fast life styles and just moved on.

    Now because of poor planning on thier part, they are coming with hats in hand asking for more.

    Again, big picture stuff, I believe the NFL should take care of thier own and feel that maybe these older players should get some sort of relief, but can't that be handled between the players union instead of getting the govt involved?

    Not sure how accurate the numbers are, but this is a pretty good article that I think gives us a good view from the older players perspective.

    http://www.mensjournal.com/feature/M...softheNFL.html
    The government is very much involved with the NFL, governments have built dozens of football stadiums designed specifically for the NFL, and special laws were enacted to allow the NFL to operate the way it does(as a monopoly). I think the government has a direct hand in this because they are the ones that will ultimately pick up the tab for the uninsured former players when they need constant care in retirement. Obviously this is not the top issue facing congress but I don't think one congress person making a statement to the NFL in any way takes away from the other issues it just gives this issue more of a voice and puts pressure on the NFL and players union to get something done. If the NFL doesn't want more of a black eye from this they will do something sooner rather than later.
    To me this is a much more appropriate government interference that say, steroids in baseball, barry bonds, spygate, nba betting scandal, stadiums. All of those have had much more governent involvment than this.
    Aren't you confusing Local Govt's with the Federal Govt?

    I agree that local Govts that help fund stadiums might have some sort of say with respect to that team, probably very little when you think about it, but to think that they Federal govt should step in is getting a bit out of the box I would think.

    Quick question, how much say does the local govt have in your local union's when thier union stewards discuss/renegotiate settlement packages such as this?
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  3. #13
    jmcdon00's Avatar
    jmcdon00 is offline Jersey Retired Snake Champion, Moto Trial Fest 2: Mountain Pack Champion, LL City Truck 2 Champion, Arithmetic sequence Champion, Troops Tower Defense Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,278

    Re: Congress invokes antitrust

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "VikingMike" wrote:
    [quote author=Marrdro link=topic=45898.msg796009#msg796009 date=1214398075]
    Thanks for the read my friend......

    Look, I'll be the first to admit that I think that the NFL should take care of its own a bit better, however, at somepoint I need to raise the kaka del rio flag.

    Didn't these players, at some point, sign some sort of settlement/retirement agreement that IS being honored/or has been honored?

    Who's fault is it that that agreement didn't take into account the long term affects of playing a game or the growth (in bucks) that the NFL would eventually become?
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/sports/football/01araton.html
    You may have believed it would be a snowy day at the Super Bowl when a member of the Pro Football Hall of Fame would stand up at a news conference to talk about what he calls the N.F.L.’s “dark secret,” as the Vikings great Carl Eller did here Thursday.

    After six years in the trenches left him with a broken body, Pear needed his pension early and was later denied a disability claim. The $606 pension check he receives monthly barely covers half the cost of the 38 pills he consumes daily.
    I'll be second.

    I don't like the government sticking its nose into sports (even Spector going after Belicheat). What's next...are they going to institute a minimum wage of $8.25 per hour? Or is OSHA going to install guidelines for safety regulations and change the game to flag football? It's a very bad omen when senators and congressmen start nosing around the game.
    I don't like the government getting involved. The NFL should start building it's own stadiums and live with the same anti-trust laws every other business sector does.

    As far as the players making enough to take care of themselves, that may be true of todays players but retirement benefits are going to guys who played in th 50's 60' and 70's. Salaries were no where near what they are now. Most of the players did not realize that they would suffer life long disabilities because they played the game. The NFL should just step up and give some of the billions it profits every year to the players that made the NFL great in the first place. Some of the stories I've read about this are about players who are totally disabled because they played in the NFL but because they didn't apply for benefits soon enough they are just out of luck.
    I hear ya my friend, and agree to a point, however, like any agreement, the players (back in the day) had the chance to get this right and didn't.
    In fact thier settlement/retirement takes into accounts some of the very issues you discuss.

    I heard Robert Smith speak on this issue sometime last year.
    I will snoop around and see if I can find it, however, he says that most of the older players, back in the day, who are the ones who complain the most now, actually accepted cash settlements to support thier fast life styles and just moved on.

    Now because of poor planning on thier part, they are coming with hats in hand asking for more.

    Again, big picture stuff, I believe the NFL should take care of thier own and feel that maybe these older players should get some sort of relief, but can't that be handled between the players union instead of getting the govt involved?

    Not sure how accurate the numbers are, but this is a pretty good article that I think gives us a good view from the older players perspective.

    http://www.mensjournal.com/feature/M...softheNFL.html
    The government is very much involved with the NFL, governments have built dozens of football stadiums designed specifically for the NFL, and special laws were enacted to allow the NFL to operate the way it does(as a monopoly). I think the government has a direct hand in this because they are the ones that will ultimately pick up the tab for the uninsured former players when they need constant care in retirement. Obviously this is not the top issue facing congress but I don't think one congress person making a statement to the NFL in any way takes away from the other issues it just gives this issue more of a voice and puts pressure on the NFL and players union to get something done. If the NFL doesn't want more of a black eye from this they will do something sooner rather than later.
    To me this is a much more appropriate government interference that say, steroids in baseball, barry bonds, spygate, nba betting scandal, stadiums. All of those have had much more governent involvment than this.
    Aren't you confusing Local Govt's with the Federal Govt?

    I agree that local Govts that help fund stadiums might have some sort of say with respect to that team, probably very little when you think about it, but to think that they Federal govt should step in is getting a bit out of the box I would think.

    Quick question, how much say does the local govt have in your local union's when thier union stewards discuss/renegotiate settlement packages such as this?
    [/quote]
    The federal governent represents all of the states, and taxpayers so they have a say. Plus the federal government changed anti trust laws in favor of the NFL. What is wrong with the government using it's leverage to bring about change that it feels will help the people of the country. Plus the representive that made the comment on this(that's all that's been done so far is a comment), represents the state of California, a state that has NFL teams.
    I think the local government are very involved with the Unions, unfortunetly it is the money and power of the unions that is usually running the government, I just don't see a problem with the government asking for a favor in return.

  4. #14
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,909

    Re: Congress invokes antitrust

    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    [quote author=VikingMike link=topic=45898.msg796018#msg796018 date=1214398665]
    [quote author=Marrdro link=topic=45898.msg796009#msg796009 date=1214398075]
    Thanks for the read my friend......

    Look, I'll be the first to admit that I think that the NFL should take care of its own a bit better, however, at somepoint I need to raise the kaka del rio flag.

    Didn't these players, at some point, sign some sort of settlement/retirement agreement that IS being honored/or has been honored?

    Who's fault is it that that agreement didn't take into account the long term affects of playing a game or the growth (in bucks) that the NFL would eventually become?
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/sports/football/01araton.html
    You may have believed it would be a snowy day at the Super Bowl when a member of the Pro Football Hall of Fame would stand up at a news conference to talk about what he calls the N.F.L.’s “dark secret,” as the Vikings great Carl Eller did here Thursday.

    After six years in the trenches left him with a broken body, Pear needed his pension early and was later denied a disability claim. The $606 pension check he receives monthly barely covers half the cost of the 38 pills he consumes daily.
    I'll be second.

    I don't like the government sticking its nose into sports (even Spector going after Belicheat). What's next...are they going to institute a minimum wage of $8.25 per hour? Or is OSHA going to install guidelines for safety regulations and change the game to flag football? It's a very bad omen when senators and congressmen start nosing around the game.
    I don't like the government getting involved. The NFL should start building it's own stadiums and live with the same anti-trust laws every other business sector does.

    As far as the players making enough to take care of themselves, that may be true of todays players but retirement benefits are going to guys who played in th 50's 60' and 70's. Salaries were no where near what they are now. Most of the players did not realize that they would suffer life long disabilities because they played the game. The NFL should just step up and give some of the billions it profits every year to the players that made the NFL great in the first place. Some of the stories I've read about this are about players who are totally disabled because they played in the NFL but because they didn't apply for benefits soon enough they are just out of luck.
    I hear ya my friend, and agree to a point, however, like any agreement, the players (back in the day) had the chance to get this right and didn't.
    In fact thier settlement/retirement takes into accounts some of the very issues you discuss.

    I heard Robert Smith speak on this issue sometime last year.
    I will snoop around and see if I can find it, however, he says that most of the older players, back in the day, who are the ones who complain the most now, actually accepted cash settlements to support thier fast life styles and just moved on.

    Now because of poor planning on thier part, they are coming with hats in hand asking for more.

    Again, big picture stuff, I believe the NFL should take care of thier own and feel that maybe these older players should get some sort of relief, but can't that be handled between the players union instead of getting the govt involved?

    Not sure how accurate the numbers are, but this is a pretty good article that I think gives us a good view from the older players perspective.

    http://www.mensjournal.com/feature/M...softheNFL.html
    The government is very much involved with the NFL, governments have built dozens of football stadiums designed specifically for the NFL, and special laws were enacted to allow the NFL to operate the way it does(as a monopoly). I think the government has a direct hand in this because they are the ones that will ultimately pick up the tab for the uninsured former players when they need constant care in retirement. Obviously this is not the top issue facing congress but I don't think one congress person making a statement to the NFL in any way takes away from the other issues it just gives this issue more of a voice and puts pressure on the NFL and players union to get something done. If the NFL doesn't want more of a black eye from this they will do something sooner rather than later.
    To me this is a much more appropriate government interference that say, steroids in baseball, barry bonds, spygate, nba betting scandal, stadiums. All of those have had much more governent involvment than this.
    Aren't you confusing Local Govt's with the Federal Govt?

    I agree that local Govts that help fund stadiums might have some sort of say with respect to that team, probably very little when you think about it, but to think that they Federal govt should step in is getting a bit out of the box I would think.

    Quick question, how much say does the local govt have in your local union's when thier union stewards discuss/renegotiate settlement packages such as this?
    [/quote]
    The federal governent represents all of the states, and taxpayers so they have a say. Plus the federal government changed anti trust laws in favor of the NFL. What is wrong with the government using it's leverage to bring about change that it feels will help the people of the country. Plus the representive that made the comment on this(that's all that's been done so far is a comment), represents the state of California, a state that has NFL teams.
    I think the local government are very involved with the Unions, unfortunetly it is the money and power of the unions that is usually running the government, I just don't see a problem with the government asking for a favor in return.
    [/quote]
    Eventually the govt has its hands in everything and we are no longer a free society. (in a nutshell)

    Look, I am not as well versed in this as you seem to be, however, my opinion is that this should be handled by the union and not the gov't.
    I am paying those dickweeds (I just used the word to see how it gets changed
    ;D) salaries to address other things than trying to fix a botched union agreement from ages gone past.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Bakersfield, CA
    Posts
    1,128

    Re: Congress invokes antitrust

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    "VikingMike" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    Thanks for the read my friend......

    Look, I'll be the first to admit that I think that the NFL should take care of its own a bit better, however, at somepoint I need to raise the kaka del rio flag.

    Didn't these players, at some point, sign some sort of settlement/retirement agreement that IS being honored/or has been honored?

    Who's fault is it that that agreement didn't take into account the long term affects of playing a game or the growth (in bucks) that the NFL would eventually become?
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/sports/football/01araton.html
    You may have believed it would be a snowy day at the Super Bowl when a member of the Pro Football Hall of Fame would stand up at a news conference to talk about what he calls the N.F.L.’s “dark secret,” as the Vikings great Carl Eller did here Thursday.

    After six years in the trenches left him with a broken body, Pear needed his pension early and was later denied a disability claim. The $606 pension check he receives monthly barely covers half the cost of the 38 pills he consumes daily.
    I'll be second.

    I don't like the government sticking its nose into sports (even Spector going after Belicheat). What's next...are they going to institute a minimum wage of $8.25 per hour? Or is OSHA going to install guidelines for safety regulations and change the game to flag football? It's a very bad omen when senators and congressmen start nosing around the game.
    I don't like the government getting involved. The NFL should start building it's own stadiums and live with the same anti-trust laws every other business sector does.

    As far as the players making enough to take care of themselves, that may be true of todays players but retirement benefits are going to guys who played in th 50's 60' and 70's. Salaries were no where near what they are now. Most of the players did not realize that they would suffer life long disabilities because they played the game. The NFL should just step up and give some of the billions it profits every year to the players that made the NFL great in the first place. Some of the stories I've read about this are about players who are totally disabled because they played in the NFL but because they didn't apply for benefits soon enough they are just out of luck.
    I hear ya my friend, and agree to a point, however, like any agreement, the players (back in the day) had the chance to get this right and didn't.
    In fact thier settlement/retirement takes into accounts some of the very issues you discuss.

    I heard Robert Smith speak on this issue sometime last year.
    I will snoop around and see if I can find it, however, he says that most of the older players, back in the day, who are the ones who complain the most now, actually accepted cash settlements to support thier fast life styles and just moved on.

    Now because of poor planning on thier part, they are coming with hats in hand asking for more.

    Again, big picture stuff, I believe the NFL should take care of thier own and feel that maybe these older players should get some sort of relief, but can't that be handled between the players union instead of getting the govt involved?

    Not sure how accurate the numbers are, but this is a pretty good article that I think gives us a good view from the older players perspective.

    http://www.mensjournal.com/feature/M...softheNFL.html
    How about the INVESTMENTS that have been made, or maybe you believe that profit is a dirty word.

    If you want someone to "blame", try agents.
    These kids coming in are still young, dumb and full of....
    they think they are indestructible and will live forever.
    Agents use this to get everything up front for a bigger cut for themselves.
    The bottom line is these players need to plan ahead for the inevitable future, facing the fact that someday they will grow old.
    Contract need to be negotiated that allow for investment and security.


    most of the older players, back in the day, who are the ones who complain the most now, actually accepted cash settlements to support thier fast life styles and just moved on.
    Governments cannot provide security for the elder years, no matter how many promises they make.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Retired players file antitrust suit against NFL
    By BadlandsVikings in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-29-2011, 12:57 PM
  2. Congress gives itself a pay raise
    By COJOMAY in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-19-2008, 01:23 PM
  3. Congress to hear from ex-players
    By singersp in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-08-2007, 05:18 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •