We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Pro Football HOF'ers Demands

buckeyewalt

buckeyewalt

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
5,479
Reaction score
892
Location
Tennessee
Handicap
13
When I first read this I thought that this was a joke, surely the guys don't mean this! Well it true, HOF members who are retired mind you are demanding health insurance and a salary that includes a share of the league's revenue. What's strange about this is that they only want the HOF members only not all retirees: stupid!!

“We believe we deserve more,” the letter said. “We write to demand two things: Health insurance and an annual salary for all Hall of Famers that includes a share of league revenue. It might seem like a lot, but it’s a drop in the bucket for the country’s most profitable sports league.”

https://www.foxbusiness.com/feature...f-famers-demand-nfl-health-insurance-salaries[SUB][SUP]
[/SUP][/SUB]​
 
They're right and wrong. Health coverage for a game with proven long term health effects and an annual salary would be a drop in the bucket for the NFL to manage. Where they are wrong is not trying to get that for all former league retirees. I know there's a pension or something similar when they reach so many games played, but it'd go a long way toward showing some faith in caring about the players and not just using them as a vessel to help get the rich richer.
 
tpluff said:
They're right and wrong. Health coverage for a game with proven long term health effects and an annual salary would be a drop in the bucket for the NFL to manage. Where they are wrong is not trying to get that for all former league retirees. I know there's a pension or something similar when they reach so many games played, but it'd go a long way toward showing some faith in caring about the players and not just using them as a vessel to help get the rich richer.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I can't understand for a second why a HOFer would get insurance but a 12 year journeyman wouldn't.
 
I could be wrong in my thinking, but why would they get it from the NFL? Why wouldn't that be something they negotiated with the team they played for?
 
So 22 players are going to boycott the induction ceremony? Is that such a big deal that the NFL would even thinking about giving in? Seems like a major stretch to me.
 
OGputtnfool said:
I could be wrong in my thinking, but why would they get it from the NFL? Why wouldn't that be something they negotiated with the team they played for?
Click to expand...
Benefits like health insurance are negotiated through the league. Currently retired players get several years of free coverage, and can purchase it through the league after that.

I can't imagine that is a cheap pool to be in however.

My beef with this would be if this was a big concern why wasn't it negotiated duringcollective bargaining during your career? For the players who played in long past eras I could give them a pass, but I'm sure the owner's would have negotiated for health insurance for life for tradeoffs like a lower salary floor or more practice time in pads.
 
In other words: We squandered our money aways and are broke and demand a hand out!!! IDIOTS
 
If I'm not mistaken, players who are vested with 5 years of service get a 250k yearly pension. I have a friend who's cousin played in the NFL and I think that is what he told me. I can certainly agree with the added benefit of health insurance but I don't think I agree that a "salary" is appropriate. That money should go into a fund for players who need it for injuries and substance abuse brought on by their time in the league.
 
gmiller598 said:
If I'm not mistaken, players who are vested with 5 years of service get a 250k yearly pension. I have a friend who's cousin played in the NFL and I think that is what he told me. I can certainly agree with the added benefit of health insurance but I don't think I agree that a "salary" is appropriate. That money should go into a fund for players who need it for injuries and substance abuse brought on by their time in the league.
Click to expand...
I think it is based on your last three year's salary. Lots of head coaches come back for that.
 
Smallville said:
I think it is based on your last three year's salary. Lots of head coaches come back for that.
Click to expand...

That may be. A 250k pension for someone who made millions isn't much. I know my friend's cousin only played the 5 years as a DB. He spent his last year in the league on IR and now has severe brain issues he is dealing with. I don't know the full details but I do believe you have to play 5 years to get it.
 
gmiller598 said:
That may be. A 250k pension for someone who made millions isn't much. I know my friend's cousin only played the 5 years as a DB. He spent his last year in the league on IR and now has severe brain issues he is dealing with. I don't know the full details but I do believe you have to play 5 years to get it.
Click to expand...
You don't even need to be a player. My brother was the director of information systems for about 25 years befinning in the 1986 season and actually has two NFL pensions. He was qualified for one after he was there (I believe it was 5 years as you mentioned) but then they came up with a different plan and he was qualified for that one too.
 
gmiller598 said:
If I'm not mistaken, players who are vested with 5 years of service get a 250k yearly pension. I have a friend who's cousin played in the NFL and I think that is what he told me. I can certainly agree with the added benefit of health insurance but I don't think I agree that a "salary" is appropriate. That money should go into a fund for players who need it for injuries and substance abuse brought on by their time in the league.
Click to expand...
Injuries I can agree with, but "substance abuse brought on by"? I don't think so. Their career didn't talk them into abusing substances. They made that choice on their own.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
gmiller598 said:
That may be. A 250k pension for someone who made millions isn't much. I know my friend's cousin only played the 5 years as a DB. He spent his last year in the league on IR and now has severe brain issues he is dealing with. I don't know the full details but I do believe you have to play 5 years to get it.
Click to expand...
If they made millions, thanks more reason why they don't need any pension. How is it that these guys doing know how to manage money well enough to live on millions of dollars, but the average Joe lives on what amounts to pocket change to them?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 
Pro Football HOF'ers Demands

OGputtnfool said:
Injuries I can agree with, but "substance abuse brought on by"? I don't think so. Their career didn't talk them into abusing substances. They made that choice on their own.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Say whatever you want but these guys punish their bodies for a payday and hide injuries so they don't lose their job and then turn to painkillers in order to be able to function. I think the league has a moral obligation to support these players in the same manner they need to support head injuries.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
At first glance, I thought it was odd that they'd lobby for their own benefit rather than for all.

I still think it's odd but the fact is, long after their retirement from the game, the league still very actively uses their likeness and exults their accomplishments for their own benefit.

The NFL uses it's history and it's former participants, particularly the greats, to advance their story.

They do that, the players, preferably all the players, should be compensated.
 
If I am reading it correctly the Men who played before 1993 have a different pension than whats in place now.

I find it silly that they are only asking for benefits for HOF players and Not ALL players.

Most of this stuff was collectively bargained and the Players only have themselves to blame. They have the Weakest union in all of pro sports.
 
I have 25 years in my industry, so when I retire I want my pension and a salary - never going to happen, so why should certain retired players receive a salary on top of whatever pension they already have?

Personally I agree with the comment about them having wasted their money so they want a handout, and if the NFL gives in to them then they are in for a whole world of claims coming in from anyone else

gmiller598 said:
Say whatever you want but these guys punish their bodies for a payday and hide injuries so they don't lose their job and then turn to painkillers in order to be able to function. I think the league has a moral obligation to support these players in the same manner they need to support head injuries.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Turning to painkillers to be able to function is still on them though, nobody else has forced them to get addicted to them
I don't feel it is entirely down to the league to support them, it is the responsibility of the teams to manage the health of their players

Looking at it from another perspective, how many 'injured' players have cost their teams a win because they shouldn't really be on the pitch due to whatever injury they have? If teams managed their players better by resting and rotating the squad then it wouldn't be an issue - it happens in other sports, so why not this one?
 
TheDoctor said:
I have 25 years in my industry, so when I retire I want my pension and a salary - never going to happen, so why should certain retired players receive a salary on top of whatever pension they already have?

Personally I agree with the comment about them having wasted their money so they want a handout, and if the NFL gives in to them then they are in for a whole world of claims coming in from anyone else



Turning to painkillers to be able to function is still on them though, nobody else has forced them to get addicted to them
I don't feel it is entirely down to the league to support them, it is the responsibility of the teams to manage the health of their players

Looking at it from another perspective, how many 'injured' players have cost their teams a win because they shouldn't really be on the pitch due to whatever injury they have? If teams managed their players better by resting and rotating the squad then it wouldn't be an issue - it happens in other sports, so why not this one?
Click to expand...

If it is the player’s fault that they take painkillers out of the fear they might lose their job is it a woman’s fault that she doesn’t speak up about harassment out of the fear she might lose her job?

In both scenarios, the employer created and fostered an environment that supported this behavior. Yes, the individual chose their own path in the end but they were placed in that situation by their work environment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I don't blame them for asking but it's unlikely the NFL will give them anything additional, even with only a few hundred HOFers alive today. Providing healthcare and a pension for all the players will never happen, there are many thousands or tens of thousands of ex NFL players. The math doesn't work.
 
gmiller598 said:
If it is the player’s fault that they take painkillers out of the fear they might lose their job is it a woman’s fault that she doesn’t speak up about harassment out of the fear she might lose her job?

In both scenarios, the employer created and fostered an environment that supported this behavior. Yes, the individual chose their own path in the end but they were placed in that situation by their work environment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

And that is why I said it is the responsibility of the team to manage the health of their players

In your scenarios, if neither person feels like they can speak up then it is a problem with the employer, not the employee, and someone I personally wouldn't work for, regardless of how much I was being paid

At the end of the day, if you don't like the environment, do something about it, either speak up or find other employment. Resorting to drug / alcohol abuse etc is just a poor excuse and does nothing to solve the core issues
 
gmiller598 said:
If it is the player’s fault that they take painkillers out of the fear they might lose their job is it a woman’s fault that she doesn’t speak up about harassment out of the fear she might lose her job?

In both scenarios, the employer created and fostered an environment that supported this behavior. Yes, the individual chose their own path in the end but they were placed in that situation by their work environment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Very much so on both accounts. You either have morals to live by or you don't. If you become addicted to pain killers, then it's on you. If you accept sexual harassment as a condition of employment and don't fight against it, then it's on you... male or female.
 
OGputtnfool said:
Very much so on both accounts. You either have morals to live by or you don't. If you become addicted to pain killers, then it's on you. If you accept sexual harassment as a condition of employment and don't fight against it, then it's on you... male or female.
Click to expand...

So you believe the NFL, who treats the players like gladiators and knows they put their bodies on the line for their personal profit, has no social responsibility to provide mental and physical counseling for the after effects of playing in the NFL and should just be cast aside?

You were in the military. I assume that you support better treatment and counseling options for soldiers who suffer from PTSD and have addictions caused by that. I can't believe that anyone would go tell a former soldier that they should have known better when they joined the military and we aren't going to offer you any help because of it.

This is an article about a hockey player but it holds similar parallels to football players in regards to addiction and mental illness. whether you are a professional football player, hockey player, are soldier, there seem to be plenty of similarities of the risks of your chosen profession and mental illness and addiction that can come from it.

https://www.theplayerstribune.com/en-us/articles/nick-boynton-everythings-not-ok

The NFL and all other professional sports need to provide more of their profits to assist former players with proper mental and physical care due to the risks brought on from their participation. I don't think anything will change my mind on that.
 
gmiller598 said:
So you believe the NFL, who treats the players like gladiators and knows they put their bodies on the line for their personal profit, has no social responsibility to provide mental and physical counseling for the after effects of playing in the NFL and should just be cast aside?

You were in the military. I assume that you support better treatment and counseling options for soldiers who suffer from PTSD and have addictions caused by that. I can't believe that anyone would go tell a former soldier that they should have known better when they joined the military and we aren't going to offer you any help because of it.

This is an article about a hockey player but it holds similar parallels to football players in regards to addiction and mental illness. whether you are a professional football player, hockey player, are soldier, there seem to be plenty of similarities of the risks of your chosen profession and mental illness and addiction that can come from it.

https://www.theplayerstribune.com/en-us/articles/nick-boynton-everythings-not-ok

The NFL and all other professional sports need to provide more of their profits to assist former players with proper mental and physical care due to the risks brought on from their participation. I don't think anything will change my mind on that.
Click to expand...

The fact that you tried to equate professional entertainers with military members tells me that your argument is 100% invalid. Those two should not be mentioned in the same sentence. One is prepared to give their life to better the lives of others. The other is simply there to entertain.

I believe that all humans, athletes, movie stars, doctors, lawyers, school teachers, Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, stay at home moms, Uber drivers, and folks from all other walks of life, make conscious decisions to do things. Some choose to play a game, some choose to play make believe, some choose to save lives in the OR, some choose to defend others accused of crimes. Some choose to teach young children, some choose a life of service and the offering up of their life to defend the freedom so cherished by others, some choose to spend their lives caring for their families by maintaining a home for them to come to after school or work so they can relax, some choose to drive around shuttling strangers to Starbucks, sporting events, malls, or wherever they're going, and many choose other endeavors. Alas, some choose to turn to drugs and/or alcohol when the going gets tough. That is no one's fault, but the person who makes that choice. To blame it on your boss is childish.

To compare treatment for PTSD (which, I believe (though it's nearly impossible to prove) is far over diagnosed) caused by the horrible things our troops witness in combat to a junkie choosing to be addicted to drugs is asinine. PTSD - not voluntary. Drug addiction - voluntary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top