toldailytopic: Are pro sports organizations liable for the longterm injuries that the

[Nathon Detroit]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for May 4th, 2012 06:54 AM

toldailytopic: Are pro sports organizations liable for the longterm injuries that the players may have suffered?

Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Get ready for the age "retired athlete lawsuits", some experts are actually stating this could pose a real threat to the existence of pro sports.

The latest wave....

Over 100 more former NFL players sue over head injuries

(Reuters) - More than 100 former NFL players on Thursday sued the league claiming ongoing debilitating effects from head injuries, joining a group of some 1,500 retired players who have brought legal action on the same grounds, a plaintiff's attorney said.
The latest lawsuit on behalf of over 100 plaintiffs was filed in federal court in Atlanta, said lawyer Kirk Pope. It seeks an unspecified amount of damages for lost wages, pain and suffering, and medical treatment.
Among the top athletes in the latest suit are Chris Doleman, Jamal Anderson and Jessie Tuggle, Pope said.​

 

[Nathon Detroit]

So... what do you think?

Should the NFL and other pro sports organizations be held liable for the injuries that may have a lasting effect on the athletes who played in their sport? Or is it the chance you take to play a contact sport? After all you are being paid a huge sum of money to play in the league.

 

[Granite]

:think:

I acknowledge that choosing to play a violent sport, and willingly putting yourself in harm's way, makes this a dicey issue.

However, the coach mentality of "Just shake it off" is inexcusable now with what we know about the damage concussions can cause...and frankly the more study is given to this matter, the more obvious it'll become that concussions and other injuries greatly degrade the quality of life of players.

I'd say at the very least that the NFL should prepare itself to pay for the care of its retired players, and treat the players--who made this league into the juggernaut it is today--a lot better.

With that said, given the ever-growing body of evidence that head injuries lead to truly horrific consequences for the players who endure them, I'd be stunned if the NFL as we know it exists within twenty years. Bad publicity will cause greater and greater outcry.

 

[BillyBob]

Lawyers are going to ruin the NFL.

The league will be forced to have all players sign waivers. But that won't stop the lawsuits.

I'm gonna miss football.

 

[The Barbarian]

One of my children, who chose to play sports in college, had two concussions less than two months apart. Years ago, she'd be back on the field in a short time. Now there's a long period of inactivity for her.

We know more now than we did. And that's what should count. The standard should be what a prudent man would do under the circumstances, given what was known.

And my daughter knew the risks and assumed them because she loved the game. And yes, because her tuition costs were lower because she played. I worry, just as I worried about her sibs. But life isn't meant to be played on the couch.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

concussions and other injuries greatly degrade the quality of life of players.

True, but millions of dollars also enhance a persons life when they are being paid to play

I'd say at the very least that the NFL should prepare itself to pay for the care of its retired players, and treat the players--who made this league into the juggernaut it is today--a lot better.

How much more can they possibly pay them and continue to be a viable business?

Seriously.... pro sports organizations are struggling right now. The days of unlimited budgets are over. The billion dollar TV contracts are over. If a business does not make a profit that business ends.

With that said, given the ever-growing body of evidence that head injuries lead to truly horrific consequences for the players who endure them, I'd be stunned if the NFL as we know it exists within twenty years. Bad publicity will cause greater and greater outcry.

That's true, public/media outcry will spell the end.

One thing that seems to get overlooked is athlete's suffer these injuries at the pro level as well as collegially and even prior to that, yet it will be the pro-level that suffers the brunt of the law suits because that's where all the money is.

However, if these law suits start trickling down to high school, junior high, and youth sports you might see a much quicker end to the sports you love to watch.

All of this is where our legal system is exposed as asinine. A judge should say..... "look pal, you knew that contact sports were a dangerous occupation. And you gladly accepted HUGE sums of money to play that sport. You have personal responsibility in this because you knowingly accepted funds for a job that you knew to be dangerous. This one is on you. - Case dismissed."

 

[Newman]

I say, let 'em crash!

 

[Quincy]

I think they need to develop ways to keep players safer. That is doable through R&D for new equipment and enforcing rules to protect the players. I don't see how the league can pay long-term pension plans and health insurance plans to every single player that comes into it. It would go broke in no time.

I heard that the life expectancy of NFL players is something like, the late 50s. So...... that is a good 20 years after retirement that most live. The league will go broke supporting players for that long.

I was shocked to see Kurt Warner say that he won't let his kids play the game...... If many parents take that approach it won't be long before the league will kill itself off if it doesn't do something.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

I have 6 kids, 4 of them played ice hockey and all 4 girls compete(d) in gymnastics. My oldest son had a couple concussion's in ice hockey and my daughter had a concussion as well. My middle age daughter broke her femur bone completely in half last summer in Gymnastics (she's all healed up and just about to go to her first gym meet this weekend since the "big accident").

Injuries are part of life, and especially a part of sports. When you make the decision to play you have to consider that you might suffer a injury, even a longterm injury.

IF... you are good enough to play sports as a profession you must weigh the risk verus the reward and determine if that's something you are willing to do, i.e., exchange the money you might make for the risk of longterm injury.

 

[Granite]

True, but millions of dollars also enhance a persons life when they are being paid to play

Correct, but not every player makes that kind of money. And if they're misled about the severity of concussions, or discouraged from reporting them, it changes the dynamic. Lying to your players and putting them at risk without their knowledge is fairly insidious, regardless of what you're offering them.

How much more can they possibly pay them and continue to be a viable business?

That's for the leagues and players's unions to decide.

Seriously.... pro sports organizations are struggling right now.

The NFL is not.

That's true, public/media outcry will spell the end.

If it's a question of eliminating or reducing violence and brutality, isn't that a moral victory?

However, if these law suits start trickling down to high school, junior high, and youth sports you might see a much quicker end to the sports you love to watch.

This is probably where it'd start: either the threat of litigation, or parents unwilling to risk the health of their children. In which case they'd encourage their children to play sports other than football, which would dry up the talent pool and end the NFL. I certainly love the game, but if it's a question between Sunday afternoons watching the Pats--or perpetuating a game that no matter what safe guards are taken destroys and degrades lives--then I'd say that sacrificing three hours every week is a small price to pay.

The Romans loved their gladiators; the British loved their bear baiting. If there is no way to make football safer, and if the concussion/head injury issue is worse than we know today, it's a simple enough decision. I'd hate to see it go, sure. But what's the trade off?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

That's for the leagues and players's unions to decide.

Not when these cases go to court it's not. A judge and some slimy lawyers will be deciding how much more the organization's will need to pay these players.

The NFL is not.

There will come a point when the risk outweighs the reward. And I'm not talking about the athletes this time.

If it's a question of eliminating or reducing violence and brutality, isn't that a moral victory?

Only a flaming liberal would call it "brutality".

These are contact sports for crying out loud!

This is probably where it'd start: either the threat of litigation, or parents unwilling to risk the health of their children. In which case they'd encourage their children to play sports other than football, which would dry up the talent pool and end the NFL. I certainly love the game, but if it's a question between Sunday afternoons watching the Pats--or perpetuating a game that no matter what safe guards are taken destroys and degrades lives--then I'd say that sacrificing three hours every week is a small price to pay.

That's because you are a liberal.

The Romans loved their gladiators; the British loved their bear baiting. If there is no way to make football safer, and if the concussion/head injury issue is worse than we know today, it's a simple enough decision. I'd hate to see it go, sure. But what's the trade off?

Why don't you move to France ya wuss.

 

[The Barbarian]

If you're on a first-name basis with your orthopod,

If you get frequent-flyer miles at your local E.R.,

If you actually know the difference between the ACL and the LCL,

If there are more than three sets of crutches in your garage,

You might be a soccer player.






you probably have a kid who plays soccer.

 

[Granite]

Not when these cases go to court it's not. A judge and some slimy lawyers will be deciding how much more the organization's will need to pay these players.

If players were deceived and unnecessarily put at risk, someone needs to be held accountable for this. It's not just a game at that point: it's gambling with people's lives.

That's because you are a liberal.

Can you actually have an adult conversation with me or not?

I'm legitimately interested in this issue and having a discussion. Maybe you're not.

Go Pats.

 

[GuySmiley]

In my mind the NFL should only be liable for negligence without the use of hindsight. I dont think its fair for a player from the 80's to be suing now for concussions when we know so much more now than we did then. But if a team doctor was lying to players and clearing them to play while knowing it was a danger to them, then the team is liable I think.

But everyone knows there is an inherent risk to sports (except soccer). Without some glaring negilgence by the team/league at the time, no, there shouldn't be a lawsuit.

I've heard (on a local sports radio station) that currently there are better helmets (safety-wise) available to players but they arent allowed to use them due to a contract with whoever supplies the current helmets. That's an open door for a future lawsuit.

 

[Granite]

But if a team doctor was lying to players and clearing them to play while knowing it was a danger to them, then the team is liable I think.

Absolutely. Are we supposed to let this behavior slide? There needs to be accountability somewhere along the line.

But everyone knows there is an inherent risk to sports (except soccer). Without some glaring negilgence by the team/league at the time, no, there shouldn't be a lawsuit.

Agreed, although I suspect negligence will out. Like I said, the risks are understood, but misleading your players, lying to them about injuries that could have devastating consequences and side effects? That's beyond sick. That's beyond twisted. That's wanton cruelty.

I've heard (on a local sports radio station) that currently there are better helmets (safety-wise) available to players but they arent allowed to use them due to a contract with whoever supplies the current helmets. That's an open door for a future lawsuit.

Indeed. If the bottomline is the only priority, and player safety be damned, then this attitude makes sense--but it also puts a lie to Goodell's public stance on increased player safety.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Can you actually have an adult conversation with me or not?

I admit, with you... it's very difficult.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

The government (via the courts) will ultimately force the NFL to pay these athletes billions of dollars, yet wine and moan about paying a injured war veteran a small retirement.

Liberals are jerks.

 

[vegascowboy]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for May 4th, 2012 06:54 AM

toldailytopic: Are pro sports organizations liable for the longterm injuries that the players may have suffered?

Nope, I don't believe so. I love professional sports, but no one forces folks to participate.

 

[chrysostom]

The government (via the courts) will ultimately force the NFL to pay these athletes billions of dollars, yet wine and moan about paying a injured war veteran a small retirement.

Liberals are jerks.

here is just another good reason to vote republican