What a dichotomy for NFL

Some players are suing the NFL for not protecting them during their careers and saying the NFL turned a blind eye to safety.

Very very soon (Jonathon Vilma) Players will be suing the NFL for taking action for making the NFL SAFER.

So, which group will win?

Looks like the two groups are fighting against each other.

Plus, if you don't punish these guys what does that say to the guys they were trying to hurt?

They've got a real mess there.

Vilma doesn't stand a chance of winning. He's only looking for publicity and to get his suspension reduced. Any lawyer who takes this case knows that he/she won't win either, but their main goal is to reach a settlement, get 33% of said settlement, and make a name for themselves.

Of course a certain other member of this board will say that NFL players know the risks going into it and don't need to be regulated...

And certain other members of this forum act like assholes when people don't agree with them.

When did I ever say it should be regulated? No one should try to intentionally hurt someone, but injuries happen in the course of good fair play. Head injuries happen.

fishgoblue22 wrote:

Head injuries happen.

But they don't need to happen. That is my point. So you are saying that Vilma, et. al were correct in their actions because "Head injuries happen"? Should part of uniforms now be requiring that there is a "SHIT HAPPENS" bumper-sticker on the back?

The only way they won't happen is if it is touch football, and then they still could because people fall.

How are you going to stop them from happening? Cut off the heads? Have the teams play Madden 13?

So life-devastating injuries are justifiable as long as you get some enjoyment on watching the sport? The NFL realizes that there is no way to eliminate all injuries, but eradicate the preventable ones is a good start.

As for your Madden 13' comment, the world looks like it may be going that way. Now-a-days kids would rather stay inside and play video games than through the ball around.