Retired Players may cause problems

[carolinarolls]

maybe if they did not satiate their egos by leaking information to the press just to get their name back in the papers they would have gotten an invite.

[MadHatter]

The have a stake....moneywise However, they have no real legal standing in the lawsuit or the negotiations.

[carpanfan96]

The have a stake....moneywise However, they have no real legal standing in the lawsuit or the negotiations.

Since they are part of the original anti trust lawsuit now, as well as being a part of the old NFLPA. If they feel like the current negotiation party for the players isn't negotiation in their favor they can stake a claim in the negotiations, they have just as much to lose out of this as anyone else.

In the old CBA the player salary for each team was actually around 18 million higher then the public figure and that money went to providing health care and pension plans for retired players.

Right now the players are trying to get that figure thrown out of the revenue split all together and having teams and the NFL pay for that, where as that portion of the revenue used to come from the players side of things.

The current players are wanting a 50 - 50 split with the league having to foot the bill for stadiums, retired players..ext..ext..

As well since they can still have their names and likeness used by the NFLPA once the union reforms, I'd say that they have both a stake in the negotiations and the lawsuit.

All this boils down to is the current players and the players negotiating team being greedy for themselves and not thinking about the past or the future.

Edit : I know technically and by law that the retired players don't have a leg to stand on, but Nelson did include the in the original lawsuit. So anything can happen with that woman.

[MadHatter]

Since they are part of the original anti trust lawsuit now, as well as being a part of the old NFLPA. If they feel like the current negotiation party for the players isn't negotiation in their favor they can stake a claim in the negotiations, they have just as much to lose out of this as anyone else.

In the old CBA the player salary for each team was actually around 18 million higher then the public figure and that money went to providing health care and pension plans for retired players.

Right now the players are trying to get that figure thrown out of the revenue split all together and having teams and the NFL pay for that, where as that portion of the revenue used to come from the players side of things.

The current players are wanting a 50 - 50 split with the league having to foot the bill for stadiums, retired players..ext..ext..

As well since they can still have their names and likeness used by the NFLPA once the union reforms, I'd say that they have both a stake in the negotiations and the lawsuit.

All this boils down to is the current players and the players negotiating team being greedy for themselves and not thinking about the past or the future.

Edit : I know technically and by law that the retired players don't have a leg to stand on, but Nelson did include the in the original lawsuit. So anything can happen with that woman.

I talked to a couple of our attorneys here in our office about this.

They stated that the NFLPA and the owners have included provisions in the CBA to handle to "ethical" issue that is the retired players.

However, the plast players do not have a valid legal arguement or standing as part of the lawsuit. They were paid for their services in the past and retired under the pension/retirement program that was in place at the time.

You do not have a legal position to sue for a better package after you have already retired.

Again, both the owners and the NFLPA have what I consider is a moral obligation to make a past travesty right.....but there is no legal requirement to do so.

[carpanfan96]

I talked to a couple of our attorneys here in our office about this.

They stated that the NFLPA and the owners have included provisions in the CBA to handle to "ethical" issue that is the retired players.

However, the plast players do not have a valid legal arguement or standing as part of the lawsuit. They were paid for their services in the past and retired under the pension/retirement program that was in place at the time.

You do not have a legal position to sue for a better package after you have already retired.

Again, both the owners and the NFLPA have what I consider is a moral obligation to make a past travesty right.....but there is no legal requirement to do so.

Thanks, I was pretty sure they didn't have any legal rights, but then again Nelson threw them in with the current players in the anti trust lawsuit.

That's the part that's got me confused, I didn't think they had any legal rights. Then she added them to the original lawsuit and the retired players were at the first couple sessions of negotiations.

I'm still confused as to why she even threw the retired players lawsuit in to begin with.

[PanthaSan]

"retired"?

I thought the average NFL career was 3 to 5 years. Given that some players last longer, would it be based on how many years played?

[rayzor]

what i have seen is that the problem is that the new deal will help out guys retiring in the future, but not so much for ones that are already retired. seems like those guys feel left out. everyone else is benefiting except them.

this let me know that they are pissed at everyone...

The retired players say that NFL owners, the NFL Players' Association and a group of current players including star quarterbacks Tom Brady, Peyton Manning and Drew Brees are "conspiring to depress the amounts of pension and disability benefits to be paid to former NFL players in order to maximize the salaries and benefits to current NFL players."

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2011-07-05-NFL-retirees-lockout_n.htm?csp=34sports&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+UsatodaycomNfl-TopStories+%28Sports+-+NFL+-+Top+Stories%29