For NFL, retirees' health care is tougher battle

[Auggie]

Gwen Knapp, San Francisco Chronicle Columnist / Sunday, July 10, 2011

Encouraging signs about the NFL lockout keep growing.

The rhetoric between the two sides has mellowed considerably. The owners and players issued a joint statement Friday, saying that a federal court decision in favor of the owners had not changed anyone's commitment to negotiating a deal. On its face, the comment seemed dry and fairly redundant, but from this cast of characters, it amounted to: "You bring the marshmallows. We'll pick out the campfire songs."

But one conflict remains intractable. It will outlive whatever agreement puts the game back in business, haunting the NFL for years, maybe even generations.

A group of former players filed a class-action lawsuit last week, demanding a voice in the bargaining. The merits of the case appear very murky, and the filing may have little effect on any deal making. But even if the courts can't side with the old-timers, the league's interest in public relations will keep conceding yardage to them.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/07/09/SPD11K8GHF.DTL#ixzz1Ro40Wrjx

""We have to take care of retired players. We have to. We have to do a better job for them."— Al Davis, Oakland Raiders

[Kingofalldems]

1. John Mackey is a case in point

I understand the family pretty much lost everything in the last few years.

[Auggie]

2. Given the recent findings linking contact sports to brain trauma

(especially in football, as the article points out), it's really myopic for the Players Union to ignore what the retirees are saying. It'll bite them in the ass 20 years from now. And owners have to respect it's the cost of "doing business" (as sick as that sounds).