Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/10/hall-fame-receiver-art-monk-latest-sue-nfl/]Hall of Fame receiver Art Monk latest to sue NFL - Washington Times[/url]

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

This should be interesting.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

This is really starting to get old. Sorry but some of these players are just trying to get paid. Not saying this is the case with Monk but they all knew the risks.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=skinsfan69;916398]This is really starting to get old. Sorry but some of these players are just trying to get paid. Not saying this is the case with Monk but [B]they all knew the risks[/B].[/quote]

Not so sure about that.

What we know today about concussions is far different than 20 years ago.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=Mattyk;916399]Not so sure about that.

What we know today about concussions is far different than 20 years ago.[/quote]

So should you be able to sue a doctor 20 years after an operation because there's more information about the disease and they have better methods? No, it's part of the medical process. When it comes down to it, most of these guys are looking for a payday after mismanaging their money.

Football is a tough sport. It's tough on both body and mind to play -- and that's why I don't complain that they get paid a kings ransom. It is a violent sport that causes long term damage. We've known that for a long time. You can't possibly think that slamming your body into someone else at full speed hundreds or thousands of times a year isn't going to have lasting effects. We don't need modern medicine to reaffirm that.

It's too bad that so many of the old players are having issues. I have a lot more understanding for the guys that had to work another job while playing football. Who made the league on their back before the big contracts. But Art got paid a lot of money to sacrifice his body. Give them the collectively bargained health care and thank them for their service.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

I guess my neighbor should sue somebody, he was a roofer for about thirty years and cant even walk upright. Maybe my uncle should sue, he was a machinist and mechanic forever and cant even open his hands. Ive been teaching for about 15 years and my minds shot, im lawyering up im fixn to get paidddd beeetches!!!

I guess all enlisted military pros should be lawyering up to.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=Mattyk;916399]Not so sure about that.

What we know today about concussions is far different than 20 years ago.[/quote]

Maybe, maybe not. How can the NFL be held responsible if this is the case?

I am torn on this. On one hand I think "Nobody knew how bad this stuff can be so how can anyone be held responsible?" on the other I think "If the NFL really knew this stuff then why wasn't it a bigger deal in general?"

I think I mostly believe these players as a whole are as responsible for this as the NFL is so these lawsuits are ridiculous. Until I see some evidence the NFL league and teams made some concerted effort to knowingly endanger players then I sorta don't want to hear it.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=FRPLG;916410]Maybe, maybe not. How can the NFL be held responsible if this is the case?

I am torn on this. On one hand I think "Nobody knew how bad this stuff can be so how can anyone be held responsible?" on the other I think "If the NFL really knew this stuff then why wasn't it a bigger deal in general?"

I think I mostly believe these players as a whole are as responsible for this as the NFL is so these lawsuits are ridiculous. Until I see some evidence the NFL league and teams made some concerted effort to knowingly endanger players then I sorta don't want to hear it.[/quote]

I'm not saying they should or shouldn't be held responsible. Just saying it's not fair to say the players knew all the risks at that time. And I'm not saying even the league knew, but I guess the point was maybe they should have.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=Daseal;916403][B]So should you be able to sue a doctor 20 years after an operation because there's more information about the disease and they have better methods? No, it's part of the medical process[/B]. [/quote]

Yeah this is the key point for me. The only way the players have a case in my mind is if they can show that the NFL knew concussions were dangerous at the time and didn't do enough to prevent them.

We know more today about them, that doesn't mean the NFL knew about it back then and hid it.

I think the players are just using this as leverage to get the NFL to settle on better benefits for retired players.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=Schneed10;916413]Yeah this is the key point for me. [U][B]The only way the players have a case in my mind is if they can show that the NFL knew concussions were dangerous at the time and didn't do enough to prevent them.[/B][/U]

We know more today about them, that doesn't mean the NFL knew about it back then and hid it.

I think the players are just using this as leverage to get the NFL to settle on better benefits for retired players.[/quote]

I agree but how in the heck could you prove that, talk about a witch hunt. But im sure Godell could find somebody to finger!!:laughing2

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

Its like Evel Knievel sueing Harley Davidson for his injuries.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

Its all about money? Really?
It is called Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy. It is about awareness and creating funds for more research. Amazing that it is independent Research Universities like the Sports Legacy Institute at Boston University that is at the forefront of researching this condition. This is the same group that studied Dave Duerson's brain and will be studying Seau's.
I would be interested to see how much the $9-billion a year NFL spends to help research this disease?
All the while the citizen's of Minnesota are being forced to spend tax payer money to build the nfl a new stadium. Yeah you are right, the players are greedy.

[url=http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5591963]OTL: Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy - ESPN Video - ESPN[/url]

This video gets really interesting at the 01:19 mark.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=Mattyk;916399]Not so sure about that.

What we know today about concussions is far different than 20 years ago.[/quote]


A concussion was deemed serious enough back then as now. Maybe the coming of the MRI, etc has helped diagnose how serious it is, etc, but a shot to the head was always deemed dangerous. If not, why the development of hard shelled helmets? This is just another payday for these guys on the heels of the Seau tragedy. Should all of those wounded/maimed veterans of Iraq/Afghanistan sue the US Army for them getting injured? They signed up for the military and common sense should have told them what was going to be expected of them in war. You can say the same thing with regards to firefighters and cops, and they get paid way less than NFL football players. Sorry, but you play you pay and it doesn't matter what sport you play in. Look at MLB catchers and knee problems. See any of them suing MLB? Or how about hockey players losing teeth, concussions, etc? You never hear about that because these guys took the dangers in consideration, but decided to live life and play the sport they love. This is just high profile ambulance chasing, and if it doesn't get nipped in the bud, all it is going to mean is fans will pay more out of their pocket somehow.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-oLqMwzvBY]Slum Village - Get Dis Money - YouTube[/ame]

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;916456][B]A concussion was deemed serious enough back then as now.[/B] Maybe the coming of the MRI, etc has helped diagnose how serious it is, etc, but a shot to the head was always deemed dangerous. If not, why the development of hard shelled helmets? [B]This is just another payday for these guys on the heels of the Seau tragedy.[/B] Should all of those wounded/maimed veterans of Iraq/Afghanistan sue the US Army for them getting injured? They signed up for the military and common sense should have told them what was going to be expected of them in war. You can say the same thing with regards to firefighters and cops, and they get paid way less than NFL football players. Sorry, but you play you pay and it doesn't matter what sport you play in. Look at MLB catchers and knee problems. See any of them suing MLB? Or how about hockey players losing teeth, concussions, etc? You never hear about that because these guys took the dangers in consideration, but decided to live life and play the sport they love. This is just high profile ambulance chasing, and if it doesn't get nipped in the bud, all it is going to mean is fans will pay more out of their pocket somehow.[/quote]

Gotta disagree. Players are held out of games these days until they pass an independent test. There's much more awareness now vs 10 or 20 years ago. And there's a heck of a lot more research going on studying the long term effects as far as memory loss and early onset dementia.

And this class action started long before Seau's death.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

These are grown men who made a choice to play football and could say no.I don't understand how you hold the league responsible ,anyone playing knows there is a chance they can get hurt at anytime.....or worse.
Most of these men have college degrees and surly were smart enough to know that concussions can cause brain injuries.The NFL changed what they did be it helmits or the way they test the players when the information changed
So if someone I knew dies from an illness and 20 years later they find a cure......can I sue becuase these Doctors should have learned about this illness sooner?

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

A little background

[url=http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2011/02/the_nfls_next_big_headache.html]NFL concussion class action: Could the league withstand a lawsuit from players with brain injuries? - Slate Magazine[/url]

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

I think one of the primary reasons former players are suing the league isn't because of what we know now about concussions, but because the league didn't go out its way to protect player safety like they are doing now, which has indirectly led to unnecessary hits. Some of these rule and safety changes have been made prior to the whole concussion storm that has hit football.

Just my opinion on this.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=skinsfan69;916398]This is really starting to get old. Sorry but some of these players are just trying to get paid. Not saying this is the case with Monk [B][U]but they all knew the risks[/U][/B].[/quote]

Did they? Probably not. Would it have changed their decision? Probably not.



If I'm correct, people that smoked their whole lives won major lawsuits against the tobacco industry even though there wasn't any evidence at the time of lung cancer and smoking. (or that I know of)

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=Defensewins;916439]Its all about money? Really?
It is called Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy. It is about awareness and creating funds for more research. Amazing that it is independent Research Universities like the Sports Legacy Institute at Boston University that is at the forefront of researching this condition. This is the same group that studied Dave Duerson's brain and will be studying Seau's.
I would be interested to see how much the $9-billion a year NFL spends to help research this disease?
All the while the citizen's of Minnesota are being forced to spend tax payer money to build the nfl a new stadium. Yeah you are right, the players are greedy.

[URL="http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5591963"]OTL: Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy - ESPN Video - ESPN[/URL]

This video gets really interesting at the 01:19 mark.[/quote]

Ah dude, players know it is a dangerous, rough sport, when they decide to play the game, just like hockey players, or even race car drivers know they could get into a serious car accident. If the players are just trying to increase awareness or get the NFL to maybe spend more on protective equipment I am all for it, but to be honest, with these guys getting bigger and faster every decade, it is going to be very hard to really increase the protection they can get. The whole thing is tremendous blunt force. Maybe create a helmet with some sort of shock absorber mechanism, but even that might only alleviate the force some.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

Also, it is a condition, not a disease. A disease can hit you without any warning, these guys would be fine if they didn't subject themsleves to powerful blows.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=Schneed10;916413]Yeah this is the key point for me. The only way the players have a case in my mind is if they can show that the NFL knew concussions were dangerous at the time and didn't do enough to prevent them.

We know more today about them, that doesn't mean the NFL knew about it back then and hid it.

I think the players are just using this as leverage to get the NFL to settle on better benefits for retired players.[/quote]

short of a smoking gun, they really don't have much of a chance at this... unless they get in front of a jury. I have zero faith in the average citizen to be able to decide a case based on its merits and not emotional attachment.

[QUOTE=Mattyk;916399]Not so sure about that.

What we know today about concussions is far different than 20 years ago.[/QUOTE]

And what the players are alleging, much like those who sued big tobacco, is that, just as big tobacco knew about the risks of nicotine, NFL teams knew much more about the dangers of concussions but hid that information from the players.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=NC_Skins;916496]Did they? Probably not. Would it have changed their decision? Probably not.



If I'm correct, people that smoked their whole lives won major lawsuits against the tobacco industry even though there wasn't any evidence at the time of lung cancer and smoking. (or that I know of)[/quote]

how many former players actually have brain damage from playing football? a very very small number. it's just that the guys that actually did or do have it, it's been overplayed by the media. what about the thousands of guys that had numerous head hits and are fine?

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

^ Got some stats to back that up?

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;916514]And what the players are alleging, much like those who sued big tobacco, is that, just as big tobacco knew about the risks of nicotine, NFL teams knew much more about the dangers of concussions but hid that information from the players.[/quote]

I always love a good conspiracy! Then I remember it seems virtually impossible for such a thing to take place on such a large scale considering how many people would have to hold the line.

The issue the former players are fighting for is health care.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=redskins5044;916540]The issue the former players are fighting for is health care.


---
I am here: [url]http://tapatalk.com/map.php?f24w4b[/url][/quote]

And that, I think the NFL should do its reasonable best to make happen.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=firstdown;916425]Its like Evel Knievel sueing Harley Davidson for his injuries.[/quote]

Wait...that's true...totally true!

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;916501]Also, it is a condition, not a disease. A disease can hit you without any warning, these guys would be fine if they didn't subject themsleves to powerful blows.[/quote]

You are correct my mistake,a self-inflicted condition.That could have happen at any level of their playing career or during any other activity in their life.Why not sue the colleges or any other league,why not sue your parents for leting you play the sport itself?


P.S.

Gus let me ask you a question,should your name sake be part of the lawsuit when he got a concussion from banging his head against a stadium wall???

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

No doubt some of these players sustained actual life altering injuries,but a lot of these players are jumpoing on the bandwagon for the money.I heard on the radio yesterday that a former kicker{didnt catch his name}who played around 10 years and never sustained a concussion joined the lawsuit.Are you kidding me,a kicker?

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=htownskinfan;916563]No doubt some of these players sustained actual life altering injuries,but a lot of these players are jumpoing on the bandwagon for the money.I heard on the radio yesterday that a former kicker{didnt catch his name}who played around 10 years and never sustained a concussion joined the lawsuit.Are you kidding me,a kicker?[/quote]

Yeah his name is Chip Lohmiller. You might have heard of him.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;916498]Ah dude, players know it is a dangerous, rough sport, when they decide to play the game, just like hockey players, or even race car drivers know they could get into a serious car accident. If the players are just trying to increase awareness or get the NFL to maybe spend more on protective equipment I am all for it, but to be honest, with these guys getting bigger and faster every decade, it is going to be very hard to really increase the protection they can get. The whole thing is tremendous blunt force. Maybe create a helmet with some sort of shock absorber mechanism, but even that might only alleviate the force some.[/quote]

For me it is about raising awareness. Especially for parents that let their small little kids play full contact pee-wee football or hockey. They might think differently once educated on the real risks of exposing a young child to a certain sport at such an early age.
I had never heard of Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy until just a few months ago. I did not know that it has been found in kids as young as 18 years old.
As the research and funding continue to grow we will learn more about this preventable condition. I hear they are close to developing a test that will identify it in the living.

What shocked me is when Kurt Warner was recently quoted on "The Dan Patrick Show", saying he would prefer if his children did not play football. Backlash and criticism followed, “I think it’s irresponsible and unacceptable,” Merril Hoge said on "NFL Live" on ESPN. "He has thrown the game that has been so good to him under the bus. [B][U]He sounds extremely uneducated[/U][/B].”
[B][U]Really? [/U][/B]
Merril Hoge a former running back suffered a concussion during the 1994 season with the Bears, but was cleared to play without further examination by the team doctor. A few weeks later, he suffered another concussion, this one causing him to stop breathing. Hoge was eventually resuscitated and spent two days in intensive care, which marked the end of his football career.

In the weeks, months, and years following this incident Merril Hoge experienced severe memory loss and even had to learn to read again.

It is nearly mind-boggling to hear Hoge, who nearly lost everything on the field, not only question Kurt Warner’s safety-related comments, but to essentially call blasphemy on the Super Bowl MVP. Hoge more than anyone should understand the extreme risks that come with playing an extremely violent sport.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=FRPLG;916594]Yeah his name is Chip Lohmiller. You might have heard of him.[/quote]

seriously? If i would have heard his name i would have remembered that.Dude should be ashamed of himself

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[url=http://www.fatpickled.com/?p=4467]Former Redskins Kicker Chip Lohmiller Is Suing The NFL For Concussions?! | Fatpickled[/url]

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

Here's a question. These guys played football for years. How can prove any injuries sustained happened in the NFL versus college or high school?

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

I think one of the areas the NFL is most concerned with, is any instance where a player might claim that a coach forced/persuaded him to go back in hurt. IE, 20 years ago coach Gibbs made me play concussed, and now my arm is going numb. I think this does create some liability for the NFL?

Not that the coach had knowledge of the longterm effects of the injury at the time. We know how the league culture has evolved over the years, and is still evolving. So they could also point the finger back at themselves, if a player didn't go back in he might have been ostracized by his teammates.

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=FRPLG;916668]Here's a question. These guys played football for years. How can prove any injuries sustained happened in the NFL versus college or high school?[/quote]

Sue them also? Taxpayer ends up being responsible in the end...

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

[quote=Evilgrin;916680]Sue them also? Taxpayer ends up being responsible in the end...[/quote]


....how?

Re: Art Monk vs. NFL
 

i believe public schools receive funding from taxpayers