WT: Rypien Leading Suit Against NFL for Head Injuries

Lanky Livingston said:

I'm suing HP because their keyboard is giving me Carpal Tunnel.

Click to expand...

And here is the thing, right here. There are inherent risks with nearly every single job in the world. I bang on a keyboard and stare at monitors all day. I am at risk for carpal tunnel and eye issues the longer I do it but I enjoy it and it puts food on my table.

I am aware of the risks and yet I keep doing this, day after day. Does that make my employer responsible? They know the risks they are asking me to undergo to.

The NFL is high risk, high reward. Even players 25 or 30 years ago made seriously better money than most of us will see, and just to play a game. A game that each and every single one of them knew was dangerous yet they all continued to play it. Many of them fought tooth and nail to play as long as they possibly could.

Perhaps they should consider suing their younger selves right along with the league because in my view they are just as culpable.

All due respect, you all are missing the point. Go back and re-read Tshile's post. Neo, you KNOW about the dangers of carpal tunnel syndrome and other problems that could arise from your work. This lawsuit is stemming from the idea (that has to be proven) that the NFL KNEW definable, specific damages that could potentially arise from their employees playing football, yet did nothing to communicate those dangers.

Instead, the players were told nebulous things, like "we don't know the effects, but we do think there might be problems down the road". That's not the same as passing over test results and data that (allegedly) showed specific results of head injuries.

Now, if these test results don't exist now, and never existed, imo, the players have no grounds for a suit. But if the data existed, and the NFL did not pass them on, the league has a problem.

And Lanky, your argument, with all due respect, is about as good an example of a strawman as I have seen in a while. So, congrats for that!

Lanky Livingston said:

Ask yourself this question: if the NFL did know the long-term ramifications, and DID disclose them - do you think it would have made a difference? Do you think guys would have said "you know what, I'm not going to play this GAME for MILLIONS of DOLLARS because concussions are bad, you guys."

The answer is: No. Maybe a few might hang it up a little earlier, but nobody is going to step away from the game. Keeping players in the game with a concussion? Okay, sure - but do you really think guys struggling to keep their jobs wouldn't have gone back in the game? Guys play with knee injuries all the time because their jobs are on the line - same thing IMO.

Click to expand...

well, here's a few things.

first - i'm not really disagreeing with you. i'm just trying to point out things that (appear to me) others are missing. so keep that in mind I'm just trying to advocate that it may be worth hearing all the facts before you cast judgement on the players as a group of people grasping at straws to make any dollar they can from the NFL. there may be a very, very serious problem going on that the NFL (sans players) has created. one thats worth 10x the outrage our fanbase (including you) has regarding the cap penalties.

whether the players would have gone back in or not is a moot point - it's not the NFL's place to make that decision, it's the players. so if the NFL withheld information, yeah - the players have a valid point in seeking legal action, and it goes well, well beyond the 'inherit' risks argument or the 'well you'd play anyways for the money' argument.

also, a lot of these players didn't make millions. this isn't the only lawsuit going on, there are others. players in the 60's, 70's, and 80's made nowhere near as much as players today make. so that argument really is moot.

you also need to remember that the public awareness of concussions and their long term effects is a relatively recent thing - like in the last 10 years recent. so yes, i can see players wanting to go back in solely to play the game they love, not knowing any of the real risks. i would guess there were (this is purely speculation on my part) plenty of times players were sent back in being told they were 'fine' and just need to 'walk it off', when infact they had received a serious concussion.

i'm not above the idea that the players are grasping for more money in their retirement. i'm also not above the idea that the NFL hid these problems, ignored them, and decided that making more money by having the best players on the field was the best direction to go. i think everyone should be a bit more open minded with this case. the allegations are very serious - that the NFL has known about these problems for a long time, and willfully hid them from the players, and purposefully decided not to have staff on hand at every game to diagnose these things.

there's a reason the NFL changed it's tune 3 years ago; the reason is these law suits. we'll find out if it's because they were trying to protect themselves in case something like this happened, or if it's because they knew they screwed up and this was inevitable and they stand a serious chance of losing and losing big.

edit: i also think some of you are underestimating how awful your life can be when you're older and you have these impacts on your head. tehse players are still (mostly) relatively young. look at the boxers who are now in their 70's and 80's... NFL players might not be much better off when players from the '90s and 2000-2010 are in their 70's and 80's.

Goaldeje said:

All due respect, you all are missing the point. Go back and re-read Tshile's post. Neo, you KNOW about the dangers of carpal tunnel syndrome and other problems that could arise from your work. This lawsuit is stemming from the idea (that has to be proven) that the NFL KNEW definable, specific damages that could potentially arise from their employees playing football, yet did nothing to communicate those dangers.

Click to expand...

First, I was writing my reply to Lanky before while tshile was writing his so I had not read his before posting mine.

Second, how can grown men who throw themselves at each other full speed and experience the effects of that first hand not wonder to themselves about the long term effects of what they are doing? Where was the Players Union in this and why did the players themselves not commission their own studies instead of relying on the league for their information?

Goaldeje said:

Instead, the players were told nebulous things, like "we don't know the effects, but we do think there might be problems down the road". That's not the same as passing over test results and data that (allegedly) showed specific results of head injuries.

Click to expand...

If the league covered it up then maybe the players have some ground here but I gotta tell you, I am thinking the players should have been at the forefront of this all along. Twenty years ago the league had shown nothing but a long disinterest in the condition of the players following the end of their careers. At some point, the individual has to be responsible for himself.

Goaldeje said:

And Lanky, your argument, with all due respect, is about as good an example of a strawman as I have seen in a while. So, congrats for that!

Click to expand...

Well, I wasn't really trying to refute anything anyone's said, it was more of a general point.

If the league had test data that clearly showed the long-term ramifications of concussions and did NOT pass it on, then yeah, they're probably liable. My point is that I don't think it would have mattered to the borderline guys if they did.

Neophyte said:

First, I was writing my reply to Lanky before while tshile was writing his so I had not read his before posting mine.

Second, how can grown men who throw themselves at each other full speed and experience the effects of that first hand not wonder to themselves about the long term effects of what they are doing? Where was the Players Union in this and why did the players themselves not commission their own studies instead of relying on the league for their information?



If the league covered it up then maybe the players have some ground here but I gotta tell you, I am thinking the players should have been at the forefront of this all along. Twenty years ago the league had shown nothing but a long disinterest in the condition of the players following the end of their careers. At some point, the individual has to be responsible for himself.

Click to expand...

Well, before we judge them too harshly, let's see what they say in court, shall we? If they take no responsibility whatsoever, and are clearly looking for a free financial ride after retirement, then yeah, I tend to agree with you. However, if they acknowledge that they had misgivings, but never acted upon them, to their own detriment, then I'm more inclined to cut them a little slack. The NFL is the ultimate performance based workplace. I saw Any Given Sunday (if it's on TV, it must be true). Dennis Quaid lost his job to Jamie Foxx because he was injured, and never got it back. So the incentive for players is to stay on the field. That pressure comes from themselves, but also from the coaching staff.

As to your last sentance, yes, the individual needs to be responsible unto himself, certainly. However, let's say for the sake of argument that the individual went to management in the 90's, and said, ya know, after that vicious hit the other day, I didn't feel quite right for a week, I'm thinking I'd like some more tests, and maybe we should look into concussions a little. And let's say the response was, ummm, no, concussions are like the tooth fairy, it's not a problem, we've got a big divisional game next week we need you ready for.

Not saying any of that happened, but is it really that implausible? When your paycheck depends on getting back on that field, isn't that going to override most things in life?

Like I said before, if the NFL knew about concussions and hid it from the players, I think they're in trouble. If they did research and it was inconclusive or even erroneous, I think they're fine. I'd like to see what comes out during the investigation before determining how frivilous this lawsuit is.

Lanky Livingston said:

Well, I wasn't really trying to refute anything anyone's said, it was more of a general point.

If the league had test data that clearly showed the long-term ramifications of concussions and did NOT pass it on, then yeah, they're probably liable. My point is that I don't think it would have mattered to the borderline guys if they did.

Click to expand...

You're probably right, I just don't think conjecture will be a tactic the defense will use very much.

(Watching the Practice and Boston Legal all those years may finally be paying off!)

Neophyte said:

If the league covered it up then maybe the players have some ground here but I gotta tell you, I am thinking the players should have been at the forefront of this all along. Twenty years ago the league had shown nothing but a long disinterest in the condition of the players following the end of their careers. At some point, the individual has to be responsible for himself.

Click to expand...

Lanky Livingston said:

If the league had test data that clearly showed the long-term ramifications of concussions and did NOT pass it on, then yeah, they're probably liable. My point is that I don't think it would have mattered to the borderline guys if they did.

Click to expand...

thats what the allegations in these suits are. thats why some of us are saying you should hold off on judgement. the idea that players should have known the risks is way different than the idea that the NFL knew and hid/covered up/etc and decided making more money was better than player safety.

i think most people agree with the general idea that they knew the risks; the same i think most people feel about boxers, smokers, etc. but these allegations go beyond that.

Does anyone know if/where the actual lawsuits are available for inspection? Kinda feel like we're off and running on a debate over a subject we haven't even defined yet.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I guess the problem I have with it is the flimsy association, and thus, the financial responsibility, being thrust on the people with deep pockets.

Why not sue the colleges?

Just because it CAN cause damage, doesn't mean it DOES.

Does everyone who ever played have the same problems? Why not?
Do the symptoms of the various suspected conditions happen with people who never played any contact sports? Of course. Why do you think that is?

Did everyone who ever smoked a cigarette get cancer?
Do people who never smoked get lung cancer too?

Flimsy, and hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. But hey, let's sue someone with money. They can afford it.