FanNation - The Republic of Sport

There's plenty to go around.

QUOTE(#1):

Originally posted 09:52 AM ET  07.06 by F J J

There's plenty to go around.

So it seems. The players think the owners should pay for it and the owners think the players should fund the retirement system. Since there are more retired players than retired owners, I think the players should be more active.
In the new contract, it would be a good idea for a percentage of all players salaries to go to fund their own retirement. Maybe not so many would end up with nothing when they are done playing.

QUOTE(#1):

Originally posted 09:52 AM ET  07.06 by F J J

There's plenty to go around.

True.

1. The "Over $50 Million" club should somehow find it within themselves to spare a little seed money for a player assist fund.

2. The top 25 money players, who made an average of $14 million PER YEAR in 2008, should ante up too.

Ben Rothlesberger, Albert Haynesworth, Jared Allen et al should ante up....or should I say man up. Otherwise cry me a river.

I don't know about this one. Looking at it from the perspective of today's player, yes the guys that went before laid the foundation for today's rich athletes. However, does anyone really believe that those former players did it for the benefit of future generations? They did it for themselves because they wanted a bigger piece of the pie, and they got it. Now they want today's players to pay for their retirement because they mishandled their funds while they were playing? If I were a current player I'm not so sure I'd be interested in that. After all, the current players didn't ask the former players to do what they did. Think about your current job. How would you react if a guy that retired 20 years ago came to your company and asked the current employees to start paying for his retirement costs. I think this issue is not as clear cut as it might seem to be.

QUOTE(#2):

Originally posted 10:29 AM ET  07.06 by 50yearfan

So it seems. The players think the owners should pay for it and the owners think the players should fund the retirement system. Since there are more retired players than retired owners, I think the players should be more active. In the new contract, it would be a good idea for a percentage of all players salaries to go to fund their own retirement. Maybe not so many would end up with nothing when they are done playing.

Going forward, I think its all really just a matter of how you want to label it - there's a (somewhat) fixed amount of revenue that's going to be distributed btw players, owners, etc. Whichever side gets the burden, they will surely use that as a bargaining chip to get something else, so its all semantics.

As far as the former players' situations, I think that's totally on the current players. It says a lot about a guy who makes millions every year (albeit for a relatively short time) and doesn't feel any duty to give back to the people who made his great fortune possible. Conversely, I also think it says a lot about the guys who are pushing hard to get these guys some money. Birk et al are stand-up guys...

QUOTE(#4):

Originally posted 12:34 PM ET  07.06 by Jakester

Think about your current job. How would you react if a guy that retired 20 years ago came to your company and asked the current employees to start paying for his retirement costs. I think this issue is not as clear cut as it might seem to be.

This makes a lot of sense... if you make $5M a year.

Guys who played 30, 40, 50 years ago made a very small fraction of what guys today make, even adjusted for inflation. Also, I don't think we're talking about able-bodied retired football players here - we're talking about guys with serious medical problems and/or other hardships who are down and out. Roger Staubach is not looking for a hand here...

I printed off the article and went to my boss with it asking for more retirement...I think I still hear laughing!

QUOTE(#7):

Originally posted 12:57 PM ET  07.06 by Bucknutz

I printed off the article and went to my boss with it asking for more retirement...I think I still hear laughing!

Its kind of silly to apply the rules of a "normal" work situation to the NFL... Professional sport is not the same as accounting (or whatever)

QUOTE(#4):

Originally posted 12:34 PM ET  07.06 by Jakester

I don't know about this one. Looking at it from the perspective of today's player, yes the guys that went before laid the foundation for today's rich athletes. However, does anyone really believe that those former players did it for the benefit of future generations? They did it for themselves because they wanted a bigger piece of the pie, and they got it. Now they want today's players to pay for their retirement because they mishandled their funds while they were playing? If I were a current player I'm not so sure I'd be interested in that. After all, the current players didn't ask the former players to do what they did. Think about your current job. How would you react if a guy that retired 20 years ago came to your company and asked the current employees to start paying for his retirement costs. I think this issue is not as clear cut as it might seem to be.

Good point, but it is the case already. Any business that has a retirement plan in place has the current employees subsidizing the system to some degree. And too many companies that do not honor that retirement system later on. Happens all the time..tough call..It seems to me they can come up with a health plan for the old guys to help with their medical problems at least. Then those with serious health problems can get proper care. If only that, then it is a step foward. I don't know..Honestly, the ex players are in the same boat as millions of other people who used to have a job and do not now..

QUOTE(#9):

Originally posted 01:07 PM ET  07.06 by 50yearfan

Good point, but it is the case already. Any business that has a retirement plan in place has the current employees subsidizing the system to some degree. And too many companies that do not honor that retirement system later on. Happens all the time..tough call..It seems to me they can come up with a health plan for the old guys to help with their medical problems at least. Then those with serious health problems can get proper care. If only that, then it is a step foward. I don't know..Honestly, the ex players are in the same boat as millions of other people who used to have a job and do not now..

I don't know about this one. I agree to a point. But you are not taking into cosideration this company,the NFL. is still in business and striving financially. SOOOO I wouldn't say they're in the same boat as millions of others. I blame GU for creating this mess this mess and forgetting about the older members.

From Birk's article in MMQB today: Under the current system, about two percent of the revenues being paid to PLAYERS go toward retired players.

************************************************************
How about this? Five percent of TOTAL league revenue goes toward retired players. The catch is this, there should be a cutoff. So, the 5% goes toward players retired before 2010. What about the players still playing? Have a mandatory 5% of their personal salaries/bonuses/etc go into a fund to fund their medical/retirement/whatever. They'll hate it now, but 15-20 years from now, they'll be thankful for it.

QUOTE(#11):

Originally posted 03:03 PM ET  07.06 by E-Nasty

How about this? Five percent of TOTAL league revenue goes toward retired players. The catch is this, there should be a cutoff. So, the 5% goes toward players retired before 2010. What about the players still playing? Have a mandatory 5% of their personal salaries/bonuses/etc go into a fund to fund their medical/retirement/whatever. They'll hate it now, but 15-20 years from now, they'll be thankful for it.

That sounds good and more like what the rest of us have to do.

Isn't Matt Birk the one who sent out letters to all the players sometime around Thanksgiving last year asking for donations to a fund for retired/disabled players? I do remember the response to this was pitiful. Perhaps these young "studs" could donate one month's partying money to the fund. The coffers would be overflowing.

Brett can pay

Mike Ditka has tried to push the League for years to do something about this issue. Give him credit. I think the League should put him in charge to come up with something workable. I suspect he would take charge for the good of everybody..

QUOTE(#15):

Originally posted 06:15 PM ET  07.06 by 50yearfan

Mike Ditka has tried to push the League for years to do something about this issue. Give him credit. I think the League should put him in charge to come up with something workable. I suspect he would take charge for the good of everybody..

Can't argue with that kind of logic. Though I tried in #10 post. On the morrow lads. It's Louisiana Red night.

QUOTE(#15):

Originally posted 06:15 PM ET  07.06 by 50yearfan

Mike Ditka has tried to push the League for years to do something about this issue. Give him credit. I think the League should put him in charge to come up with something workable. I suspect he would take charge for the good of everybody..

He did a good job collecting money for his golf jaunts.

Obviously, Mike takes the holistic view and focuses on the therapeutic effects the concussion-addled and orthopedically-hobbled ex-players experience seeing him knock golf balls around and eat steak dinners.

QUOTE(#2):

Originally posted 10:29 AM ET  07.06 by 50yearfan

So it seems. The players think the owners should pay for it and the owners think the players should fund the retirement system. Since there are more retired players than retired owners, I think the players should be more active.

In the new contract, it would be a good idea for a percentage of all players salaries to go to fund their own retirement. Maybe not so many would end up with nothing when they are done playing.

How did Al Franken get into the Senate ahead of you?

Let the players boost their input and let's add a new stadium tax. Say 5% of construction costs must be donated to medical expenses.

QUOTE(#13):

Originally posted 04:01 PM ET  07.06 by Housekeeping needs a rake

Isn't Matt Birk the one who sent out letters to all the players sometime around Thanksgiving last year asking for donations to a fund for retired/disabled players? I do remember the response to this was pitiful. Perhaps these young "studs" could donate one month's partying money to the fund. The coffers would be overflowing.

Amen Lady.

20 years from now when one of them is whining we can ask why we should care when he didn't either.

QUOTE(#4):

Originally posted 12:34 PM ET  07.06 by Jakester

I don't know about this one. Looking at it from the perspective of today's player, yes the guys that went before laid the foundation for today's rich athletes. However, does anyone really believe that those former players did it for the benefit of future generations? They did it for themselves because they wanted a bigger piece of the pie, and they got it. Now they want today's players to pay for their retirement because they mishandled their funds while they were playing? If I were a current player I'm not so sure I'd be interested in that. After all, the current players didn't ask the former players to do what they did. Think about your current job. How would you react if a guy that retired 20 years ago came to your company and asked the current employees to start paying for his retirement costs. I think this issue is not as clear cut as it might seem to be.

Spoken like a True Neocon! I bet you don't work for a living.