PDA

View Full Version : Concussion Lawsuit Argues Harrison Should Be Banned?


Atlanta Dan
07-26-2012, 07:41 AM
A concussion-related lawsuit filed against the NFL by 73 former players, including former Raiders star Ken “The Snake” Stabler, questions why Steelers linebacker James Harrison is allowed to keep playing despite repeat offenses that endanger fellow players.

The lawsuit, filed Monday in Philadelphia, is one in a series of such legal actions nationally in which more than 2,700 former players are seeking relief from what they contend is the league’s slowness in dealing with the dangers of concussions and brain trauma.

Mentioned prominently are a number of in-game incidents from 2009 on, after a Boston University study revealed that multiple former NFL players died prematurely after developing boxer-like brain damage.

The players argue in the suit that “recidivist violators” such as Harrison, a former NFL Defensive Player of the Year and one of the league’s most punishing hitters, shouldn’t be allowed to keep playing. In legal terms, a recidivist is a repeat offender. The court filing mentions five illegal hits by Harrison on quarterbacks over three seasons.

http://triblive.com/sports/2272925-85/players-nfl-former-harrison-lawsuit-player-concussions-fight-game-hits

WTF?:noidea:

So the former players not only want to get paid but they want to start putting their beak into disciplinary actions against current player? I am attempting to find the complant to see if that really is part of the relief sought.

The irony of former Raider Ken Stabler, who played with headhunters including George "let's punch Lynn Swann in the back of the head" Atkinson and Jack Tatum, being a plaintiff in a lawsuit that apparently contends "recidivist" players should be banned is a nice touch.

On a side note, the Trib-Review reporter on this story is Alan Robinson, who i believe was the long time AP reporter who has written numerous stories for the AP over the years. If this is the same guy, Robinson will be a great addition to the Trib Revoiew coverage of the Steelers, which IMO has in some ways become better than that provided by the Post-Gazette

Whodis
07-26-2012, 07:52 AM
http://gifs.gifbin.com/052009/reverse-1243271414_black_guy_laughing.gif

steelfury02
07-26-2012, 07:55 AM
This, combined with the PUP list, and the Wallace situation will surely keep haters happy for a long time to come

As far as I'm concerned - I want both Harrison and Woodley on the field together - my guess is at the rate Harrison has been breaking down lately - he's got 2 more seasons in him - and I'm not even sure that is 2 full ones. The time to get his replacement game-time ready is now. If this lawsuit has any teeth, Adolf Goodell will do whatever to uphold the "image" and make someone else the fall-guy.

Ugh.

Vis
07-26-2012, 07:57 AM
A concussion-related lawsuit filed against the NFL by 73 former players, including former Raiders star Ken “The Snake” Stabler, questions why Steelers linebacker James Harrison is allowed to keep playing despite repeat offenses that endanger fellow players.

The lawsuit, filed Monday in Philadelphia, is one in a series of such legal actions nationally in which more than 2,700 former players are seeking relief from what they contend is the league’s slowness in dealing with the dangers of concussions and brain trauma.

Mentioned prominently are a number of in-game incidents from 2009 on, after a Boston University study revealed that multiple former NFL players died prematurely after developing boxer-like brain damage.

The players argue in the suit that “recidivist violators” such as Harrison, a former NFL Defensive Player of the Year and one of the league’s most punishing hitters, shouldn’t be allowed to keep playing. In legal terms, a recidivist is a repeat offender. The court filing mentions five illegal hits by Harrison on quarterbacks over three seasons.

http://triblive.com/sports/2272925-85/players-nfl-former-harrison-lawsuit-player-concussions-fight-game-hits

WTF?:noidea:

So the former players not only want to get paid but they want to start putting their beak into disciplinary actions against current player? I am attempting to find the complant to see if that really is part of the relief sought.

The irony of former Raider Ken Stabler, who played with headhunters including George "let's punch Lynn Swann in the back of the head" Atkinson and Jack Tatum, being a plaintiff in a lawsuit that apparently contends "recidivist" players should be banned is a nice touch.

On a side note, the Trib-Review reporter on this story is Alan Robinson, who i believe was the long time AP reporter who has written numerous stories for the AP over the years. If this is the same guy, Robinson will be a great addition to the Trib Revoiew coverage of the Steelers, which IMO has in some ways become better than that provided by the Post-Gazette


I don't think they asked the court to ban anybody. It would be like asking the court to redesign a product. You can use a better design as evidence. They are just using the discipline given or not given to show how the NFL handles the health issues.

As a lawyer, I think it's a bad strategy. Tell me if you agree. It opens the door to look at every play made by each individual plaintiff to see if their hands are dirty. Mayby Stabler never speared anyone but many of the Plaintiff's will have. The suits should have concentrated solely on what superior knowledge the NFL had which they could have provided to players and did not. Then it's about returning players to the field with actual knowledge that to do so is against the existing standard of care.

steelfury02
07-26-2012, 08:09 AM
ideally I'd like to see more op pieces and interviews from surviving NFL players that are dealing with some form of physical and/or mental/emotional issue:

A. Let's name some names of those they think should be held "responsible" for their issues
B. Let's hear directly from them how punishment of previous acts (some that have already resulted in disciplinary action) should affect the same player going forward with future punishments
C. What made them come forward now and not sooner . . .

I'm not saying some of these guys don't deserve care. I'd love to just identify those participating in the money grab . . .

Vis
07-26-2012, 08:14 AM
ideally I'd like to see more op pieces and interviews from surviving NFL players that are dealing with some form of physical and/or mental/emotional issue:

A. Let's name some names of those they think should be held "responsible" for their issues
B. Let's hear directly from them how punishment of previous acts (some that have already resulted in disciplinary action) should affect the same player going forward with future punishments
C. What made them come forward now and not sooner . . .

I'm not saying some of these guys don't deserve care. I'd love to just identify those participating in the money grab . . .


None of them can get money unless they can prove actual medical problems and causation. Remember that the NFL lawyers don't need the help of fans to weed out a claim that isn't supported by evidence. They will challenge every allegation vigorously, even the ones they know are true.

Some players in the suits admit they have no problems but they aren't asking for money, they are asking for the league to cover long term mental deficits in former players who do have them.

steelfury02
07-26-2012, 08:28 AM
yea, and the whole process is a great way to attach your name to something too . . .

It is very honorable to stand up for players, and I'm totally for compensating former players to make their quality of life as good as can be . . .but I got this feeling that some Steelers players have said and done some things that will open them up to some issues with other players down the road . . .

Just got that irritated feeling towards media coverage this morning, that's all :mad:

Vis
07-26-2012, 08:32 AM
yea, and the whole process is a great way to attach your name to something too . . .

It is very honorable to stand up for players, and I'm totally for compensating former players to make their quality of life as good as can be . . .but I got this feeling that some Steelers players have said and done some things that will open them up to some issues with other players down the road . . .

Just got that irritated feeling towards media coverage this morning, that's all :mad:

Media coverage will change soon to the dropped passes in camp and the rookie sensations. I can't wait.

steelfury02
07-26-2012, 08:41 AM
outside of the Steelers, what has been unfortunate to witness is the beginning of the end for Mark Sanchez.

At this rate, he'll never reach his true potential. He has what I call the Carson Palmer syndrome. You are surrounded by idiotic coaches and ownership, surrounded by me-first WRs, and eventually your chances end in injury, you can't stand it there anymore because of the bad situations you've been put in, or are just shown the door because too many people wanted you to fail from the get go . . .

From my perspective, he is handling thing as best as he can but eventually this is going to really screw with his confidence and psyche, more so than it already has. The guy has no one fully backing him - not even Rex Ryan who swears he is "Sanchize." You're Sanchize doesn't need a 2nd string wlidcat/option QB with last minute wins under his belt breathing down his neck and fans chanting for him time and time again. Competition is a good thing IMHO, but Tebow is a media circus and they knew what they were doing when they brought him in . . .

Atlanta Dan
07-26-2012, 08:51 AM
I don't think they asked the court to ban anybody. It would be like asking the court to redesign a product. You can use a better design as evidence. They are just using the discipline given or not given to show how the NFL handles the health issues.

As a lawyer, I think it's a bad strategy. Tell me if you agree.

I still have not found the lawsuit (using my PACER account to pull down a copy off the USDC ED PA Pacer site might not be viewed fondly by those who pay for that account :chuckle:))

If I find the lawsuit I will post a link. i agree the plaintiffs probably are citing no sanction above a 1 game suspension so far as a reckless disregard or deliberate indifference by the NFL to improper blows to the head (which supports an award of punitive danjges?:noidea:) but who knows

Vis
07-26-2012, 09:04 AM
I'll check.

It's not on Scribd yet.

This is interesting tho:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/99432117/NFL-Final-Hearing-w-NFLPA-Vilma

jiminpa
07-26-2012, 10:50 AM
Isn't this precisely why they justify making more money in five minutes than the rest of us do in a lifetime? compensation for the physical toll the game takes in the future. Most of these guys were already more than compensated up front. If they put their future up their noses, that was there own choice. Maybe the league should make a 50% payroll deduction from each of them to be put in an account baring more interest than the inflation rate, and paid out in installments bigging 10 years after they retire.

Some of the older players who didn't get paid as much, I feel for a little, but then any of those guys who will be impacted by concussions already have been.

Vis
07-26-2012, 11:04 AM
Isn't this precisely why they justify making more money in five minutes than the rest of us do in a lifetime? compensation for the physical toll the game takes in the future. Most of these guys were already more than compensated up front. If they put their future up their noses, that was there own choice. Maybe the league should make a 50% payroll deduction from each of them to be put in an account baring more interest than the inflation rate, and paid out in installments bigging 10 years after they retire.

Some of the older players who didn't get paid as much, I feel for a little, but then any of those guys who will be impacted by concussions already have been.

No, they justify how much they make by the income they generate from those of us who pay to see them play. No one pays to see Rooney.

MACH1
07-26-2012, 11:06 AM
Stupid question. Naming names wouldn't that open it up to players suing players(former or not) down the road if they have head traumas or any career ending injuries?

Vis
07-26-2012, 11:19 AM
Stupid question. Naming names wouldn't that open it up to players suing players(former or not) down the road if they have head traumas or any career ending injuries?

No? You either have assumption of risk or comparative negl defenses. The whole point of the lawsuits is a particular time frame where the league allegedly had supperior knowledge of the risks and intentionally kept that knowledge from the players. It's about that crap study they had arthritis doctor do that went against all medical knowledge, and the truth.

Atlanta Dan
07-26-2012, 09:07 PM
Silverback obviously is very concerned about these allegations:chuckle:

Harrison was asked about it on Thursday by Tim Benz of WXDX radio.

Here’s the relevant exchange.

Benz: “James, are you aware of the story about the lawsuit mentioning your name in Philadelphia and if so what’s your reaction to it?”

Harrison: “I’m not aware of it.”

Benz: “Ken Stabler and some of the other former pro football players in a concussion suit referenced you as a guy that was a repeat offender and maybe should be out of the game. When you hear former players say that about you –”

Harrison: “Who is — Ken who?”

Benz: “Ken Stabler.”

Harrison: “Who is that?”

Benz: “Former Raider quarterback.”

Harrison: “Never heard of him. His opinion doesn’t matter to me.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/07/26/james-harrison-doesnt-know-who-ken-stabler-is/

Brief audio here

http://www.1059thex.com/player/?station=WXDX-FM&program_name=podcast&program_id=interviews.xml&mid=22295986

ricardisimo
07-26-2012, 09:30 PM
Not exactly a student of the game, but that's not why he gets paid, I guess.

OX1947
07-27-2012, 12:14 AM
Silverback obviously is very concerned about these allegations:chuckle:

Harrison was asked about it on Thursday by Tim Benz of WXDX radio.

Here’s the relevant exchange.

Benz: “James, are you aware of the story about the lawsuit mentioning your name in Philadelphia and if so what’s your reaction to it?”

Harrison: “I’m not aware of it.”

Benz: “Ken Stabler and some of the other former pro football players in a concussion suit referenced you as a guy that was a repeat offender and maybe should be out of the game. When you hear former players say that about you –”

Harrison: “Who is — Ken who?”

Benz: “Ken Stabler.”

Harrison: “Who is that?”

Benz: “Former Raider quarterback.”

Harrison: “Never heard of him. His opinion doesn’t matter to me.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/07/26/james-harrison-doesnt-know-who-ken-stabler-is/

Brief audio here

http://www.1059thex.com/player/?station=WXDX-FM&program_name=podcast&program_id=interviews.xml&mid=22295986

If God gives me a son on March 21st of 2013(wife's due date), That will be the first day I unleash him to be the next James Harrison. Because in 18 years and beyond, he will be one of the few, true badass mofos left on earth.

LVSteelersfan
07-27-2012, 12:17 AM
Not exactly a student of the game, but that's not why he gets paid, I guess.

Could very possibly be tongue in cheek. Or maybe not. Hard to say. Stabler just hates the Steelers just like his old coach Madden. It is always sour grapes to both of them any time the Steelers are brought up.

OX1947
07-27-2012, 12:23 AM
Could very possibly be tongue in cheek. Or maybe not. Hard to say. Stabler just hates the Steelers just like his old coach Madden. It is always sour grapes to both of them any time the Steelers are brought up.

Come on people, of course it's tongue in cheek, anyone who doesn't believe so is Kenny Britting it.