Reed Doughty Facebook page - The owners have decided not to continue players health insurance past march 4.

[TimmySmith]

No one said they weren't giving the players enough money - the issue is the owners are trying to take back more money, from the already worst compensated professional athlete labor force, in the most dangerous sport, with the worst long term benefits.

Truth be told, this whole thing is about those 2 extra games. Those games would be worth somewhere from a half BILLION to one BILLION more dollars to the NFL. and the NFLPA wants to know it's share is going to be. The owners are basically saying that the players will get more money, but less percentage. There will absolutely be no new CBA without those 2 games.

[addicted]

A fairer comparison might be if I were paid half a million to play Halo, and my company locked me out. I would be rabid, even if playing it cost me a couple years off my life every year I worked there. You better believe this computer nerd would be livin' it up.

I'd probably agree to a new contract if I could get a bigger screen, better lumbar support, more time off, and my choice of catering.

Hahah true but in your situation those guys are still making millions to play halo. No ones forced them to take a job that takes some life off of you but the same is true with lots of other jobs too - Military, Police, Construction, Fire Department, etc - The jobs you take come with risks. No one's forcing anyone to work a job out there. If you want the money then maybe it's right for you to go do that job. Why is anyone upset about the life span and dangers with playing football but care much less then the dangers for the people with those other employments. In the end what separates these people is how they view life. If they view it like the money's never gonna run out then they have to deal with the consequences. If they are smart and do what Doug Williams suggested then they have a better chance to live as normal people do. It's screwed up to me that people making a fraction of what these men are earning can do this better then they can who don't have college educations to back themselves up on.

[jflow78]

No where is that asking for more money.

I said it in my previous post. The money you claim the owners are taking away from the players hasn't been on the table for 3 seasons. That was part of the 2006 CBA extension that was voided 3 years ago and only lasted 2 years. So, if "no one is asking for more money" then at the same time no one is "trying to take back more money". And the NFL players are far from the "worst compensated professional athlete labor force".

I agree they have the worst long term health affects, but that's due to what sport you chose to do. It's not as if football suddenly became the most dangerous sport in the NFL, it was the most dangerous sport in college and highschool as well. Part of the reason they aren't paid as much is because they play less than a quarter of the games every other pro sport plays, and they've got more players per team, but they are still compensated nearly the same as the average baseball player (a $100,000 difference) and half of what the average NBA player is compensated with 3 1/2 times the number of players.

You keep trying to say the NFL's players are so poorly compensated, all I'm saying is that THAT isn't the truth, the issue is that both sides need to sit down and figure out a way to play football next year. I'm not taking a side on this, just pointing out that when this statement is thrown out there it simply isn't true, it's completely based on emotion rather than facts.

[addicted]

If you look at the statistics I just put out, you can see, the NFL players are definitely not the "worst" compensated athletes in pro sports. That's what I was looking at. I don't care if they are or aren't, I've just heard lots of people say the NFL players aren't paid nearly as much as this or that sport. Apparently that's not true, though, before I looked at the stats, I would have agreed with you.

Can't say that I didn't think this already but I appreciate the work you put into this. Every sport is a year round thing these days. And the average player only plays 16 games a year in this sport because of how much money is incoming to them now. And we are basing the issue off of the lowest minimum salary in the game which very few players actually get paid. If the league was full of Stevie Johnsons then I would think the average guy needed more cash, but it's not. I'm not buying the posts saying how poor these players have it now, if they had it as bad as what some here have said with things like

"The NFL is the most popular, highest-revenue generating sports league in the US. And its players are the worst compensated athletes with the least job security - despite facing the greatest physical risks."

If that were at all true then the union wouldn't be asking for things to stay the same, they would be demanding more. Sorry but those who are saying this just don't make sense to me.

[phishisthegreatstuff]

give me a break...these players are making millions they can afford to pay for health insurance. WTF should the owners pay for their health insurance?? Its not like they don't get paid if they get hurt...

[jflow78]

Hahah true but in your situation those guys are still making millions to play halo. No ones forced them to take a job that takes some life off of you but the same is true with lots of other jobs too - Military, Police, Construction, Fire Department, etc - The jobs you take come with risks. No one's forcing anyone to work a job out there. If you want the money then maybe it's right for you to go do that job. Why is anyone upset about the life span and dangers with playing football but care much less then the dangers for the people with those other employments. In the end what separates these people is how they view life. If they view it like the money's never gonna run out then they have to deal with the consequences. If they are smart and do what Doug Williams suggested then they have a better chance to live as normal people do. It's screwed up to me that people making a fraction of what these men are earning can do this better then they can who don't have college educations to back themselves up on.

True, I wonder what the percentages, of factory workers who are injured for life vs football players nationwide who are injured for life, are annually. It would be an interesting comparison.

I really don't care how the CBA works out, I just want it to work out. I'm not on the player's side or the owner's side, I'm on the fan's side and as long as these two groups sit out and won't talk we're the one's who are getting screwed.

[addicted]

NFL Minimum salary is $325,000 - the average is over $700,000... . They can afford health insurance on their own.

Boo freaking hoo.

What's comical is that this thread is mentioning Reed Doughty who made 1.75 million last year

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/jim-haslett/redskins-give-doughty-a-second.html

I mean if you can't afford some cobra care coverage and you made that much money what in the hell is wrong with you?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Truth be told, this whole thing is about those 2 extra games. Those games would be worth somewhere from a half BILLION to one BILLION more dollars to the NFL. and the NFLPA wants to know it's share is going to be. The owners are basically saying that the players will get more money, but less percentage. There will absolutely be no new CBA without those 2 games.

The players don't want those games. The fans don't want those games.

So, this is just a money grab by the owners to squeeze season ticket holders and the networks.

Why not 24 games? Why not a year round league? Can you imagine what a Week 18 game between the Redskins and Cowboys would have looked like this year? Dave McKenna might have been the starting QB.

---------- Post added February-8th-2011 at 04:59 PM ----------

True, I wonder what the percentages, of factory workers who are injured for life vs football players nationwide who are injured for life, are annually. It would be an interesting comparison.

I really don't care how the CBA works out, I just want it to work out. I'm not on the player's side or the owner's side, I'm on the fan's side and as long as these two groups sit out and won't talk we're the one's who are getting screwed.

I'm on the players' side until I see the Redskins' books.

[jflow78]

Can't say that I didn't think this already but I appreciate the work you put into this. Every sport is a year round thing these days. And the average player only plays 16 games a year in this sport because of how much money is incoming to them now. And we are basing the issue off of the lowest minimum salary in the game which very few players actually get paid. If the league was full of Stevie Johnsons then I would think the average guy needed more cash, but it's not. I'm not buying the posts saying how poor these players have it now, if they had it as bad as what some here have said with things like

"The NFL is the most popular, highest-revenue generating sports league in the US. And its players are the worst compensated athletes with the least job security - despite facing the greatest physical risks."

If that were at all true then the union wouldn't be asking for things to stay the same, they would be demanding more. Sorry but those who are saying this just don't make sense to me.

I think what it really comes down to is that fact that the NFL players have actually done a BETTER job of watching out for each other than the other leagues, but it makes things stickier in negotiations as well.

---------- Post added February-8th-2011 at 05:05 PM ----------

The players don't want those games. The fans don't want those games.

Absolutely agreed. I really don't want any extra games. I especially hated the idea of adding more teams to the playoffs' date=' that came out earlier this season. However, I can't say it's the owner's being greedy until the books are open. Normally I'd take a side, but in this one I'm going to wait until we hear more. I just know Forbes reported that the Dolphins and Lions lost money in 2009:

[url']http://blogs.palmbeachpost.com/thedailydolphin/2010/08/26/forbes-miami-dolphins-1-of-2-nfl-teams-to-lose-money-in-2009/[/url]

And the USA Today has said that the value of NFL franchises has actually gone down, which isn't a sign of a company that's growing or has extra money to spend:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2010-08-25-nfl-franchise-values_N.htm

This is probably the closest we're going to get to seeing "the books".

[addicted]

True, I wonder what the percentages, of factory workers who are injured for life vs football players nationwide who are injured for life, are annually. It would be an interesting comparison.

That would be interesting. I know in my own life two things like this which I can compare this too...

One summer years ago I went up to Alaska and fished for a summer and brought home a little less then 20k. As a 19 year old with no rent, food, transportation, and most importantly bar cost for the summer it was great for me. Yet this is one of those "most dangerous" jobs out there. I know that the guys on the boat with me didn't make that much either.

And years ago I was in the military. When I joined up I was making a grand a month. I could have died for my country back then, and sure my life insurance policy would have paid out a lot (couple hundred thousand) to my loved ones but it really isn't enough.

I'm sure these aren't even good examples of comparison but in my world and eyes there are many other more dangerous jobs out there then playing professional football and those guys are paid very well for only having to play 20 games a year

I really don't care how the CBA works out, I just want it to work out. I'm not on the player's side or the owner's side, I'm on the fan's

side and as long as these two groups sit out and won't talk we're the one's who are getting screwed.

You said it. That's why I'm on the owners side. I figure if the owners get what they want that means better things for us the fans like more games, cheaper rookie contracts, and them being happy where they are. When an owners unhappy they look to move and I don't want to see any more Baltimore Colts situations in the league. The players could use some better judgment and get by with what they are making more smartly and ease lots of there own issues. Or they can buy 10 houses in a year and be idiots. That's on them but lets be honest aint none of them starving getting what they get and its insulting to think otherwise imo

[HOF44]

Jflow how did you come up with the salary amounts of the teams. As convoluted as the NFL is, with the cap salary number for the year versus what is actually paid out in a year, with all the dead money. It seems like a monumental task to nail down what a team actually wrote out in checks as payroll for the year.

[addicted]

Absolutely agreed. I really don't want any extra games. I especially hated the idea of adding more teams to the playoffs, that came out earlier this season.

This is where you and I disagree. What good is the fourth preseason game of any year? None. So if we are going to play the game anyway why not make it mean something? The number of games in past years was 16 regular season games and 4 preseason games. Now they want to make it 18 regular season games with 2 preseason games. The same number of games, just moving two from the "who cares who wins this mess" to the "this one matters" group. To me thats better for the fans then keeping the stupid meaningless preseason crap. And as for injuries, it comes with the territory.

[jflow78]

That would be interesting. I know in my own life two things like this which I can compare this too...That's on them but lets be honest aint none of them starving getting what they get and its insulting to think otherwise imo

I'm a vet too.

I'm trying to remain neutral on this because I don't think everyone on either side are bad guys. I think we have a tendency to get forced on one side or the other, but I like lots of the players and I respect lots of the owners, but I know there are greedy guys on both sides too. Hopefully they don't cook the golden goose, the way things were running, with the salary cap, was part of what made the league so great. Any year a team that was awful could be in the SB, very different in the NBA or MLB where the Lakers and Yankees are going to the playoffs every season based on their enormous salaries.

---------- Post added February-8th-2011 at 05:13 PM ----------

Jflow how did you come up with the salary amounts of the teams. As convoluted as the NFL is, with the cap salary number for the year versus what is actually paid out in a year, with all the dead money. It seems like a monumental task to nail down what a team actually wrote out in checks as payroll for the year.

Like I said in the initial post, I'm not a statistician, but several sites have put up a list of team salaries. If anything, the dead money may not have been accounted for, but that would just inflate NFL salaries even more.

[PlayAction]

What's comical is that this thread is mentioning Reed Doughty who made 1.75 million last year

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/jim-haslett/redskins-give-doughty-a-second.html

I mean if you can't afford some cobra care coverage and you made that much money what in the hell is wrong with you?

My concern was only whether they were eligible for Cobra because, if not, they wouldn't get coverage. While pre-existing conditions are no longer an issue under Obama-care, the Florida court rejected the new rules in their entirety. Reed can definitely afford to pay Cobra while they are locked out. Someone said earlier that self-insurance (or Cobra) should be about $6k per year - - that's really low. I pay more than that for a bare bones family plan. A football player would be in a high risk category - I'm guessing at least $20-30k per year. Or, are football injuries covered by workman's comp?

[jflow78]

This is where you and I disagree. What good is the fourth preseason game of any year? None. So if we are going to play the game anyway why not make it mean something? The number of games in past years was 16 regular season games and 4 preseason games. Now they want to make it 18 regular season games with 2 preseason games. The same number of games, just moving two from the "who cares who wins this mess" to the "this one matters" group. To me thats better for the fans then keeping the stupid meaningless preseason crap. And as for injuries, it comes with the territory.

I hate 4 preseason games too. If we had to get rid of one, I'd rather see it turned into a regular season game than see it go away completely, but it's kind of a tie for me. I'd either rather them play 16 regular season games and 4 preseason, or 3 preseason and 17 regular season games. I just don't want 18 regular season games. I don't think it does much of anything for the game, especially with only 2 preseason games to evaluate depth players, and I'd rather there not be any .500 teams. But that's just a pet peeve of mine.

[TimmySmith]

The players don't want those games. The fans don't want those games.

So' date=' this is just a money grab by the owners to squeeze season ticket holders and the networks.

Why not 24 games? Why not a year round league? Can you imagine what a Week 18 game between the Redskins and Cowboys would have looked like this year? Dave McKenna might have been the starting QB.[/quote']It's Daniel Snyder marketing. Give the fans more product for the same money while pocketing more yourself. It's a no-brainer from the owner's standpoint.

[jflow78]

My concern was only whether they were eligible for Cobra because, if not, they wouldn't get coverage. While pre-existing conditions are no longer an issue under Obama-care, the Florida court rejected the new rules in their entirety. Reed can definitely afford to pay Cobra while they are locked out. Someone said earlier that self-insurance (or Cobra) should be about $6k per year - - that's really low. I pay more than that for a bare bones family plan. A football player would be in a high risk category - I'm guessing at least $20-30k per year. Or, are football injuries covered by workman's comp?

Another consideration, but this is purely for Reed's situation, is that his kid needs a particular procedure regularly, so he's not paying the minimum health care costs. His are going to be really really high because of what they charge to take care of his kid.

I'm actually concerned for Reed's family because he's not one of those guys making millions of dollars every year. He's probably made vet minimum his entire career, so this will hurt him harder than most players in the league. I'll be praying for him and his family. I wonder if there's a way to start a fund for his kid's health care bills or something.

Anyone know? TK or someone might have an idea on that one.

EDIT: Nevermind, I just read that Micah, Reed's son, has a kidney transplant and is okay. I'm a bit behind.

[Lavarleap56]

Reeds point is that when you make the final roster in you are guarented health benefits for a calendar year. Final rosters are decided by September so the players should have coverage thru September. Cutting off healthcare in march is purely a negotiating tactic which is frustrating. Yeah reed has the money to pay for the cobra benefits but why should he have to before September when he already earned a calendar year of coverage by making the roster.

[jflow78]

Oops, nevermind. I didn't realie Micah had a successful kidney transplant a few years back. I'm sure the health care bills are higher after a transplant, but he doesn't need the constant care he used to need, so that's a positive.

[addicted]

I'm a vet too.

Thanks for your service It's always awesome to learn some things about the people behind these posts and see the similarities we share.

I'm trying to remain neutral on this because I don't think everyone on either side are bad guys. I think we have a tendency to get forced on one side or the other, but I like lots of the players and I respect lots of the owners, but I know there are greedy guys on both sides too. Hopefully they don't cook the golden goose, the way things were running, with the salary cap, was part of what made the league so great. Any year a team that was awful could be in the SB, very different in the NBA or MLB where the Lakers and Yankees are going to the playoffs every season based on their enormous salaries.

I think there is a segment of the group with a tendency to blame the owner over the players so I'm a bit biased on this. But truth is if the suggestions coming out of the owners didn't agree with me then I'd probably look at this differently. I'm funny like that sometimes like with the Superbowl. The Skins weren't in it but knowing the Steelers had 3 former Skins playing for them I rooted for them over the Packers. To me if it means more Redskins I'm in favor of that

---------- Post added February-8th-2011 at 03:28 PM ----------

Reeds point is that when you make the final roster in you are guarented health benefits for a calendar year. Final rosters are decided by September so the players should have coverage thru September. Cutting off healthcare in march is purely a negotiating tactic which is frustrating. Yeah reed has the money to pay for the cobra benefits but why should he have to before September when he already earned a calendar year of coverage by making the roster.

Now this is a point in which I hadn't considered. If true then the league shouldn't be allowed to take that away from them and this could be decided by a court of law. Thanks for opening my eyes to this. In this case I'd side with the players.

[NewCliche21]

Reeds point is that when you make the final roster in you are guarented health benefits for a calendar year. Final rosters are decided by September so the players should have coverage thru September. Cutting off healthcare in march is purely a negotiating tactic which is frustrating. Yeah reed has the money to pay for the cobra benefits but why should he have to before September when he already earned a calendar year of coverage by making the roster.

At first I thought that he should just buy health insurance like the rest of us, but now that you've enlightened me, that's complete bull****. All players should have it through September if that was the agreement.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Reeds point is that when you make the final roster in you are guarented health benefits for a calendar year. Final rosters are decided by September so the players should have coverage thru September. Cutting off healthcare in march is purely a negotiating tactic which is frustrating. Yeah reed has the money to pay for the cobra benefits but why should he have to before September when he already earned a calendar year of coverage by making the roster.

Under the current CBA, did the owners have to pay health insurance this year? They did not have to pay into the 401K benefits this season. And they did not. They each created something like a $30 million slush fund to get them through the lockout by withholding 401K payments throughout the season.

The owners are prepared for this. They each have money stashed away for day to day operating expenses. They still have the tv money for next year. They are going to get their season ticket money. They can hold out for at least a full season, if not longer.

As the NBA lockout taught us, the players are never prepared for this. Your average pro athlete lives paycheck to paycheck like the rest of America. If the owners are committed, they can push this into October and then get what any kind of deal they want.

Want a strange prediction: If the lockout goes until August, you will have more drug suspensions next year than at any point in league history. As soon as a lockout ends, the league will get to business as usual nearly overnight and players won't be able to cycle off their PEDs or flush out their recreational drugs in time.

[Hooper]

Right now the owners want the players who take less -- significantly less -- than the last CBA.

They're also pretending to be worried about things like concussions while asking for two more games a year.

It's madness.

The NFL has never been bigger. Most NFL teams have tripled in value -- at least -- since their owners bought them. Here in LA, Farmers Insurance just paid 700 million dollars for the naming rights to a NFL stadium that doesn't even exist yet.

The whole thing is insane and the players are screwed because the owners somehow got the networks to agree to pay them even if there isn't a season next year.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

The whole thing is insane and the players are screwed because the owners somehow got the networks to agree to pay them even if there isn't a season next year.

If you are one of the people that just wants a season and doesn't care how it happens, you are going to miss Gene Upshaw in a few weeks. Gene would have collapsed in a week and still managed to convince the union that he got them the best deal he could.

DeMaurice Smith is an attorney and this is his first negotiation with the league. He's not going to back down easily, because it will be the end of his tenure.

By the way, I just learned via Wikipedia that Sam Huff was one of the players who originally organized the NFLPA. Now, that's a real coal miner's son.

[Hooper]

If you are one of the people that just wants a season and doesn't care how it happens' date=' you are going to miss Gene Upshaw in a few weeks. Gene would have collapsed in a week and still managed to convince the union that he got them the best deal he could.[/quote']

I am not one of those people.

Of course, I want football.

But if there isn't football next year, it will be because of the owners greed, not the players.

And I agree with you about Gene Upshaw.