the voice - nfl retiree newsletter, vol 1, issue 2

8/3/2019 The Voice - NFL Retiree Newsletter, Vol 1, Issue 2

1/14

Hausfe ld LLP & Zel le Hofmann* Volume I, Issue 2

December 2011

I N S I D E T H I S I S S U E : I. Legacy Fund, Pen-sion, Disability &Benefits

1-4

II. Retiree Litigation 5-6

III. Concussion Liti-

gation

7-10

IV. Dryer Litigation 11

V. NCAA 12

Retiree Sound-off 13

THE VOICE An Independent Publication Concerning NFL Retiree Rights & Benefits

I. Legacy Fund, Pension, Disability & Benefits

EDITOR'S NOTE

The Voice is in- tended to communi-cate to all retired NFLplayers, updates con-cerning key-issueseffecting NFL retireerights and benefits. Itwill provide an objec-

tive independent re-port of matters of sig-nificant interest to

those already retired.

In regards to what the NFLPA agreed to in the 2011 CBA for already retiredplayers, on August 11, 2011, the NFLPA through its counsel represented that re-tired players

[have been pouring in praise and thanks to the NFLPA for the new

benefits that have been agreed to.]Not So.

N O N - VE S T E D P L A Y E R S O F THE NFLPAD A L L A S C H A P T E R ARE D I S A P P O I N T E D WI TH

THE P L A Y E R S AS S O C A T I O N

By: Brian Duncan

At our November, 2011 chap-ter meeting, our non-vestedplayers were very upset and

voiced their negative feelingsabout the decision made by

the Players Association todistribute the legacy fund.Many former non-vested play-ers feel betrayed and used by

the NFLPA, not only becausethey are not being included inany monetary distribution of

the fund, but that the PlayersAssociation advocated sostrongly that they would notleave any former player be-

hind.

The motto One Team wascreated and circulated at theconvention last February and

throughout the year. We allreceived hats, pens, and othermaterials with the slogan ofOne Team, which we nowfind out only applies to theformer vested players. Thepre 1993, three year playersfelt like they were going to get

the same vesting rights as the

post 1993 players, only to findout that the Players Associa-

tion never put that option on

the table.

When the Legacy Fund was

created, the intent was toinclude all pre- 1993 formerplayers. Only after the PlayersAssociation re-certified as aunion, was the Legacy Fund

tied to the Bert Bell Retire-ment Plan. The Players Asso-ciation solely made this deci-sion so that the recents wouldcontinue to receive themoney, even after the currentagreement expires in tenyears. However, one of theproblems by doing this, is thenon-vested players are com-

pletely left out of the fund.

The Players Associationclearly has an issue with con-flict of interest. Not only does

this conflict exist between thecurrent players and the formerplayers, but between the for-mer vested and non-vestedplayers. The former, non-vested, members of theNFLPA in Dallas, feel their

leadership in Washington hasonce again let them down andare looking for ways to get in-cluded in the benefits that are

afforded other former players.

Brian Duncan

Vice President, NFLPA Dallas

Chapter

(1976-78 Cleveland Browns,

Houston Oilers)

See Retiree Sound-off Sec-tion on page 12 for moreon NFLPA counsel JeffreyKesslers statement regard-ing the expressions ofpraise by former playersfor the NFLPA concerning

the new 2011 CBA.


2/14

The Voic e Page 2

SO C I A L SE C U R I T Y AND

NFL D I S A B I L I T Y By: John V. Hogan

For the past several years, the Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Planhas accepted a favorable Social Security disability determination as proof that aformer player was totally and permanently disabled. If the player was otherwisequalified for entitlement to disability benefits under the Plan, (e.g., vested, not al-ready receiving retirement pension) he could be granted either inactive orfootball degenerative T&P benefits.

Under the terms of the new CBA, for claims filed after September 1, 2011, a playerwill no longer have to prove that his total disability is related to NFL football to ob-

tain the higher category of disability benefits, as long as his application is filedwithin 15 years of his last credited season. (Inactive A disability effectively re-places football degenerative) For players who retired more than 15 years ago, andfound entitled to disability, they will receive a lower paying benefit even if their dis-ability is totally football related.

In my experience in the past couple of years, the preferred way of qualifying for T&Pbenefits under the Plan is to first win Social Security disability. While it is never easy

to win a Social Security disability case, now that we do not have to be concernedwhether the medical conditions are football related, it makes even more sense togo the Social Security route first. No longer will we have to be concerned about try-ing to down play a former players obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, head-aches, depression, etc., in the quest to have his disability granted. (SSA regulations

require that they consider the combined effects of all of a persons medically deter-minable impairments when determining disability.)

In my opinion, going the SSA route first is preferable because they have numerouslaws, regulations and rulings which clearly set forth the criteria needed to obtaindisability. I know exactly what needs to be done to obtain a favorable decision.On the other hand, dealing with the neutral physicians of the Bell/Rozelle Planhas been nothing more than a roll-of-the dice.

The new CBA also called for further improvements to the NFL disability system, butat this point we do not know what those might be. Stay tuned!

John V. Hogan Law

1-888-259-4249http://www.johnvhogan.com

John V. Hogan Law specializes in the areas of Social Security Disability and NFL

Disability law. John has helped many retired NFL players receive benefits from the

Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Retirement Plan. John also sits on the Board of Direc-

tors of the national player advocacy organization Fourth and Goal, he is an Associ-

ate Member of the NFL Alumni, Inc., and a sponsor of the Buffalo Bills Alumni Asso-

ciation and the NFL Alumni Atlanta Chapter.

For moreinformation about

any of the matters

contained inThe

Voice, or if you

have any questions,

please contact

Hausfeld LLP at

(202) 540-7200



3/14

Page 3 Volume I, Issue 2


L E G A C Y FU N D AL L O C A T I O N

By: Robert Dezube, FSA

An important benefit in the agreement with the NFL is the Legacy Fund. The owners agreed toprovide $620 Million ($62 Million per year for 10 years) to fund pension benefit for pre-1993 vestedplayers. The Legacy Fund is not a separate fund, but rather is an additional contribution to the Bell/Rozelle Plan. The additional contribution is expected to pay the additional benefits.The NFL considered many proposals on how to allocate the Legacy Fund amoung the eligible play-ers. The proposal they adopted was one that the NFLPA recommended. It provides a floor of $500per month for all players who were vested before 1993. The players will also receive an additional$114 per month for each pre-1993 season played. These additional benefits are payable beginningat age 55, or right away if the player is over age 55.An alternative recommendation was put together by Carl Eller, Ron Mix, Bruce Laird, and WillieLanier at a meeting in New York on September 15, 2011. The alternative plan would have provideda floor of $750 and an additional per-season credit that depended on the time period and seasonsplayed. The per-season credit would have been higher for credited seasons prior to 1960 and would

have decreased slightly for later years.See the chart below (Figure 1) for a comparison of the two recommendations.

Rober Dezube is a consulting actuary with Milliman

Figure 1Allocation Adopted by League Alterative Recommendation

Benefit Credit $500 Floor $750 FloorCredited Seasons prior to 1960 $114 Per Credited Season $127 Per Credited SeasonCredited Seasons 1960 1969 $114 Per Credited Season $114 Per Credited SeasonCredited Seasons 1970 1979 $114 Per Credited Season $108 Per Credited SeasonCredited Seasons 1980-1992 $114 Per Credited Season $102 Per Credited Season


4/14



LE G A C Y FU N D C O N F U S I O N

By: NFL Hall of Famer Tom Mack

Dear Retirees:

Heres some more news for all of us who dont quite understand whos representing us and howwe are being represented!

It has come to my attention via an official letter from Roger Goodell dated November 11, 2011and an unsigned letter dated December 8, 2011 from the Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retire-ment Plan (BB/PR Plan), that the Plan appears to be intent on using actuarial increases on undis-

tributed (deferred) funds over the life of the legacy fund without addressing the passage of time,which inhibits retroactive actuarial increases to older retirees. It also appears, by examples used inother communications that the intent is to use the same actuarial increases that exist in the mainplan. While this is fine on the surface, I am confused as to why and or how these actuarial increasesmay be applied to only parts of the legacy fund while seemingly ignored in other parts of the fund?

I question both the legality and the wisdom of treating retired players to yet another bifurcation oftheir ranks. Specifically I mean that the actuarial multiplier used by the BB/PR Plan is 261.9% forthe 10 year period between taking funds at 55 yrs. of age vs. 65 yrs. of age. I can only assume thatthe reason for splitting planned Legacy funding into two categories (pre & post 1975 season) was toapply funds in retrospect to the most aggrieved retirees, who are older and have less time to partici-pate (actuarially). What is confusing are the no mention of actuarial increases and the flat 14.81%across the board increase (pre vs. post 1975) with no further escalators involved. Do they reallymean to drive another wedge between older and younger Pre-93 retirees?

I am taking the liberty to show you a short example of the problem:

A. Player 65yrs old played 10 yrs. from 1969-1978; 6yrs @ $124 + 4yrs @ $108= $1176/mo. = $14,112/yr. taken immediately (no option).

B. Player 55yrs old played 10 yrs. from 1979-1988 10 yrs. @ 108 = $1080/mo. = $12,960/yr.taken immediately or deferred 10 yrs. (at actuarial rate of 2.619) = $2828.52/mo. Or$33,942/yr. @ age 65.

Perhaps the answer lies in what has not been said nor explained to date. Is it the intension of theBB/PR Plan implementers to pass actuarial increases back into the plan to permit players who took

their pensions at dates later than 55years of age to enjoy the actuarial escalation that it seems theyintend for our younger, Pre93 retirees? Seemingly that would address and fix the problem of all leg-acy funds being treated in a similar manner with actuarial increases applied evenly for all parties. If

they want to say that older players got their actuarial increases and that is how we got to $124/mo.,it would mean that had you taken the money at 55yrs of age, you would have only gotten $47/yr.applied to your pension while anyone who played after 1975 gets $108/yr. I guess they dont thinkwe can read numbers and understand what they mean.

It is my opinion that the BB/PR Plan needs to be implemented with greater consistency, in a waythat covers all retirement plans addressed by the collective bargaining agreement. Its safe to saythat a good number of 65yr and older players are all asking this same question about whether or notthe Union and the League have sold out the old players, perhaps this time inadvertently, once again!

Tom Mack is a former Guard for the Los Angeles Rams (1966-1978), and was inducted into the Pro

Football Hall of Fame in 1999.


5/14

The Voic e Page 5

By: Jim Mitchell

On February 4, 2010, the NFLPA held apress conference at the Super Bowl in Miami,Florida. During this event, NFLPA ExecutiveDirector DeMaurice Smith acknowledged that,when it comes to benefits for pre-1993 play-ers, the current system is not working. Smithalso stated that it would be an immoral deci-sion for todays players not to acknowledge

the players who came before them.

Likewise, NFL ownership indicated in anApril 4, 2011 letter to retirees that, [w]e arecommitted to making sure that when we doreach a new agreement it better addresses

the needs of our retirees. Its the fair thing to

do. Its the right thing to do and it recognizesand respects [retirees] contributions to the

game.

On March 11, 2011, the NFLPA walkedaway from the bargaining table, leaving behindan offer from the League that would have pro-vided substantial increases to retiree benefits.The NFLPA then relinquished its status as alabor organization and filed suit against theNFL on behalf of a class of current players,free agents, and rookies. The suit becameknown as the Bradysuit and did not include

the retired players interests.

Eller I

On March 28, 2011, four retired NFL play-ers joined Hall of Fame defensive end CarlEller and filed a class action suit in federaldistrict court in Minnesota against the NFLand its 32 member clubs. (Eller v. NFL CaseNo. 11cv648) Eller I sought to cover the voidleft when the Bradysuit chose not to include

the interests and rights of retired players.Eller I sought to protect the rights of retirees inany future negotiations with the NFL on a new

CBA.

Through Eller I, the retirees for the first timehad their own voice and were able to speak for

themselves in order to demand increases totheir pensions, health benefits, medical bene-

fits, and changes to the disability programswhich up to this point had not met the needsand rights of the retirees. Additionally, Eller Iwas necessary because if the owner lockoutwas successful, and the 2011 season wasshutdown, there would not have been suffi-cient new revenue for the League to meet itsmonetary commitments to the retiree commu-

nity.

II. NFL Retiree Litigation

When the lockout ended, the claims inEller I were mooted and the retiree class

voluntarily withdrew the Complaint withoutprejudice.

Eller II

For a most of the spring and summer of2011, the representatives of the Bradyplain-

tiffs negotiated the interests of retired play-ers. Retirees were kept in the dark as tosecret meetings held in Chicago, New York,Baltimore, and Washington, DC. When anagreement between the players and the own-ers was reached, improvements to and in-creases in retiree benefits were sacrificed in

favor of the interest of active players.

On September 13, 2011, 28 former play-

ers, including 25 Hall of Famers, filed a classaction suit on behalf of former NFL players infederal district court in Minnesota against

the NFLPA, NFLPA Executive Director DeMau-rice Smith, and NFL players Tom Brady, andMike Vrabel. (Eller v. NFLPA Case No.11cv2623) The suit seeks damages for

those improvements and increases to retireebenefits that were sacrificed by the Bradyplaintiffs and representatives during negotia-

tions. The suit also seeks to establish anindependent organization to represent retireerights, other than the Union. Eller II contends

that the defendants could not legally compro-mise the rights of retirees for the benefit of

active players and that retiree rights shouldnever again be jeopardized by an organiza-tion that has a history of antagonism towards

retirees and outright conflict of interest.

Gault

On October 13, 2011, former Super BowlChampion and Chicago Bears great WillieGault and 18 other former players includ-ing non-vested, vested, and Hall of Famerplayers alike, joined Carl Eller when they fileda class action suit on behalf of former NFLplayers against the NFLPA in federal districtcourt in Minnesota. (Gault v. NFLPA CaseNo. 11cv3012) The Gault case was consoli-dated with Eller II, on December 16, 2011,

and the combined Eller II action now includes47 former players, 27 of whom are Hall ofFamers, 26 of whom are listed in the NFLsofficial encyclopedia, Total Football II, asamong 300 of the greatest players in NFLhistory. Combined, the Plaintiffs in the Eller IIsuit have made 39 Super Bowl appearances,have been selected to a combined 201 Pro

Bowls, and represent every decade of pro


6/14

The Voic e Page 6

Special Thanks to Joe

Delamielleure foragreeing to be

featured on ESPNs

Outside the Lines.

This episode will

tackle the concussion

issue and focus on

helmet manufacturer

Riddell.

II. NFL Retiree Litigation

football since the 1940s.Consolidated Eller II

On December 2, 2011, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Eller II and Gault Complaints.

Defendants raise four arguments in support of their Motion. They claim:

1. They only did what they were compelled to do by the court;

2. That everything they agreed to in mediation was confidential and judicially immunized

from accountability;

3. They owed no fiduciary duty to retirees; and

4. The Bradyagreement cannot be subject to any claim for misconduct because it has been

incorporated in a Collective Bargaining Agreement and therefore protected under the

National Labor Laws.

Plaintiffs have until January 9, 2012 to respond to Defendants Motion, and Defendants will

have until January 30, 2012 to reply to Plaintiffs response. A hearing on the Motion to Dismiss

has been scheduled for February 15, 2012, in St. Paul, Minnesota.

The Eller II Complaint can be found at:

http://www.hausfeldllp.com/content_documents/9/EllerIIComplaintwithExhibits.pdf

Jim Mitchell is a Paralegal with Hausfeld LLP

Continued from page 4


7/14

The Voic e Page 7

III. Concussion Litigation

If you are a former

NFL player and are

suffering the

symptoms of

concussions such as

headaches, dizziness,loss of memory,

impulse control

problems, ringing in

the ears and/or

hearing loss, fatigue,

depression, sleep

problems, suicidal

thoughts, dementia,

Alzheimers, ALS,

CTE, and other like

conditions, pleasecontact Hausfeld

LLP atjmitchell@hausfeldllp.

com

By: Jim Mitchell

On October 11, 2011, the NFL filed Notices of Removal in three personal injury con-cussion cases filed in the Superior Court for California, seeking to have the cases heardin the United States District Court for the Central District of California. On/about Novem-ber 7, 2011, Plaintiffs filed Motions to Remand the cases back to State Court and at ahearing on the Motions on December 5, 2011, Judge Manuel Real ruled from the bench(without a request to do so) that the negligence claim in the personal injury cases is pre-empted by the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA). Because of Judge Reals ad-verse ruling regarding the California cases, Hausfeld LLP voluntarily dismissed the claimsagainst the NFL and helmet manufacturers in both the personal injury and medical moni-

toring cases then-pending in California, and are re-filing the claims in another jurisdiction.

On November 15, 2011, the NFL filed a Motion for Transfer and Coordination or Con-solidation with the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, seeking to have all of the Cali-fornia actions pending in the United States District Court for the Central District of Califor-

nia and the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, coordinated or consolidated in the EasternDistrict of Pennsylvania.

On December 5, 2011, another personal injury suit was filed against the League in theUnited States District Court for the District of New Jersey. (Finn v. NFL, Case No.11cv7067) This suit is similar to all previously filed concussion cases against the NFL butadds an additional claim involving the use of a drug called Toradol, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug available extensively in NFL locker rooms as an alternative pain kil-ler. According to 139-147 of the Finn Complaint, Toradol was administered both inoral form or by injection, to players without properly advising the receipient of the risksposed by with the use of Toradol. In 2002 a study was released warning against usingToradol if the drug recipient had suffered a closed head injury, The bleeding risk of Tora-dol is an utmost concern in collision sports such as football. Even a small increase inbleeding risk can exacerbate high-risk injuries such as concussions, spinal cord, spleen,

and kidney trauma. Players suffering from concussions while taking Toradol were atincreased health risk for multiple reasons: (1) because of the drugs pain masking fea-

ture; and (2) because of the drugs blood thinning properties.

According to a Bloomberg Law article dated December 5, 2011, counsel for the Finnplaintiffs, attorney Seeger Weiss, had been involved in direct good faith negotiationswith League officials for months prior to filing suit. Reportedly, during these negotiations,Weiss was urged by the League to hold off on filing the concussion claims in an effort tofind resolution through a collaborative effort between retirees and the League in forminga global traumatic brain injury compensation fund that would compensate [retirees] for

their injuries. According to Bloomberg, Weiss met several times with League officialsbut after the League reached a deal with the former Union on a new CBA that includedconcussion related benefits that were far less favorable than the terms discussed with

the [retirees], Weiss felt he had no choice but to file suit against the League. Said

Weiss, These [retirees] had patiently refrained from litigation based on their good faithunderstanding that their injuries would be fairly redressed by the League. Weiss wenton to say, Our clients were assured by the Leagues attorneys that senior NFL officials,including the Commissioner, were committed to forming a sizable compensation fund,but despite months of direct negotiations, the League ultimately chose not to honor their

commitment.



8/14

The Voic e Page 8

Return to Play Standards Still a Problem in NFL

By: Jim Mitchell

San Diego Charger Offensive LinemanKris Dielman

On October 23, 2011, San Diego Chargers offensive lineman Kris Dielman suffered an on fieldconcussion during a game against the New York Jets, in New York. The concussion took place at

the 12:30 mark in the fourth quarter when Dielman engaged Jets linebacker Calvin Pace. Afterthe play Dielman was slow to his feet and was apparently disoriented enough to cause CBS an-nouncer Jim Nantz to point out that Dielman was a little shaky and wobbly. Nantz wasnt theonly person to notice, as NFL Umpire Tony Michalek also looked to Dielman after the play and

appeared to be considering whether or not to blow his whistle for an injury timeout.

Dielman made no effort to leave the field of play, which is often the case with NFL players who

suffer concussions but wish to remain in the game. However in todays concussion climate andaccording to the memo issued by the NFL prior to the 2011 season, teams are instructed that ifthere is, any suspicion about a player being concussed, remove him from the game. Always erron the side of caution. The decision for a player to remain in a game or return to a game after ahead injury is not the players to make. The title of section 3 of the memo reads, in all capitalletters, WHEN IN DOUBT LEAVE THEM OUT. Coincidentally, according to Sports Illustrated, the

Chargers were out of offensive lineman at the time due to other injuries.

The fact that Dielman was not officially diagnosed with a concussion until after the game isirrelevant. Every NFL team has coaches, assistant coaches and many other team personnel allresponsible for watching their group of players: linebacker coaches watch the linebackers, secon-dary coaches watch the secondary, running backs coaches watch running backs, etc. Nary an onfield move can take place without somebody watching. Dielmans wobbling and disoriented be-

havior after the play should have raised suspicion, but it did not.

On the team flight home after the game, Dielman suffered a concussion related seizure. TheAssociated Press reported that an ambulance met the team plane when it arrived in San Diego,

and that Dielman was admitted to a local hospital where he stayed overnight. Doctors diagnosedDielman as having suffered agrand mal seizure on the plane, and directly attributed the seizure

to the concussion he suffered earlier in the day.

Cleveland Browns QuarterbackColt McCoy

The NFL is reportedly investigating the mishandling of a concussion suffered by ClevelandBrowns Quarterback Colt McCoy in a game against the Pittsburgh Steelers on December 8, 2011,

in a Thursday Night Football game aired on the NFL Network.

The incident occurred when Steeler Linebacker James Harrison leveled McCoy with an illegalhelmet-to-helmet hit which sent McCoy to the turf for several minutes. Despite the viscous natureof the hit and the aftermath that left their Quarterback on the turf, the Cleveland Browns report-edly not only did not perform the SCAT2 Concussion Test, but did not perform ANY kind of concus-

sion evaluation before sending McCoy back into the game.Browns head coach Pat Shurmur insisted the next day that the team followed the correct proto-

col on the sidelines when McCoy was evaluated. Shurmur reported that his Quarterback did not

exhibit any signs of having a concussion until after the game.

The following day McCoy was evaluated and diagnosed as having suffered a concussion.

McCoys father has reported that his son told him he had no memory of going back into the game.


III. Concussion Litigation


9/14

Harry Jacobs is from theold school, a middle line-backer who played in the veryfirst and the very last AFLgames, and called all of thedefensive plays during that

time.

Now age 74, Jacobs timespent hitting opposing run-ning backs, quarterbacks andoffensive linemen has takenits toll on both his body and

brain.

In Jacobs day on the grid-iron, the word concussionheld no meaning. Dingers,stingers, and/or bell-ringers,were the terms used to de-scribe the vicious hits thatcaused players to blackout orsee stars. Today we call

these same things concus-sions or more correctly stated,

brain injuries.

Many former NFL playerswill identify with Harry Jacobsstory and the times they came

to the sideline during a gamefeeling woozy or loopyafter a big hit. Jacobs recalls

times when he couldnt focuson the opposing playersbecause of wavy lines in [his]eyes, and other times when[his] eyes were wide open,but [he] was nowherearound. It was during theseoccasions that the standardsideline test was performed,how many fingers am I hold-ing up?, was the question

that most former players

heard after experiencing anon-field concussion. Accord-ing to Jacobs, they wouldalways hold up two [fingers],and since he never wanted tocome out of the game, [he]always answered two so [he]

could get back in the game.

After his years spent onthe football field playing the

game he loved, Jacobs settleddown and started his ownbusiness. The Jacobs Team(www.thejacobsteam.com), acompany designed to helpothers succeed in business

through financial planning,risk management and leader-

ship training.

During these years afterfootball, Jacobs began to ex-perience anger managementproblems, depression, mem-ory loss and other physicaldifficulties such as joint prob-

lems.

As Jacobs problems wors-ened, he sought out psycho-logical help and was pre-scribed medication for his

depression.

Jacobs recalls an incidentyears ago when he wasafraid to drive to Buffalo, 14miles from [his] home, aroute he drove for work theprevious 40 years, because

[he] was afraid [he] would notknow how to get home.

After seeking help, Jacobswas referred to the BannerInstitute in Phoenix, AZ, anddiagnosed with mild cogni-

tive impairment. When hereturned home, Jacobs fol-lowed-up with Dent Neurologi-cal in Orchard Park, NY,where he was found to have agene associated with Alz-

heimers disease.

After hearing about a new

medical treatment calledhyperbaric oxygen therapy, heand his wife Kay traveled toCalifornia to visit Dr. Amens,Amen Clinic. Dr. Amen diag-nosed Jacobs with CTE andsuggested a new diet, exer-cise, vitamin, supplement andmedication regimen, along

with hyperbaric treatments.

To-date Jacobs has re-

ceived forty Hyperbaric treat-ments, twenty in Naples, FL,at Dr. Perlmutters clinic, and

twenty at Dr. Spiegels clinic

in Palm Harbor, FL.

Jacobs tells The Voice thatthe time investment in receiv-ing the treatments is signifi-cant, but well worth it. Hisfirst two weeks of treatmentconsisted of two treatmentsper day, five days each week.Each treatment takes aboutan hour and a half to com-plete, with a 15 minute period

to get the chamber down tothe proper barometric pres-sure, followed by an hour of

treatment and then another15 minute period to bring thebarometric pressure back to

normal.

The results of these treat-ments have been amazing.Jacobs reports that his brainhas begun healing and thathe is more vibrant, energized,and mentally capable then he

has been in decades.

In addition to the medicaltreatments and strict adher-ence to his daily diet and ex-ercise program, Jacobs also

credits his amazing turn-around to his faith in God and

daily prayer.

This player profile is thestory of Harry Jacobs, as toldby him. By telling his story,Jacobs hopes that other for-mer NFL players will becomeproactive in their own livesand not be afraid to seek outmedical treatment. Jacobshopes that his story will in-spire others to get the help

they need and the treatment

they deserve.

Page 9

RE T I R E D PLAYER SP O TLIGHT

Volume I, Issue 2

#64 Harry Jacobs1964-65 AFL Champion

Harry Jacobs,LBPatriots, Bills, Saints (1959-70)

Message from HarryJacobs:

Any former player who

decides they want to start the

process of his own journey to

health, I would be glad to

have them contact me for

additional details

Harry Jacobs

4001 Legion Drive

Hamburg, New York 14075

716-649-4460

coach-

[email protected]


10/14

The Voic e

Like most former NFL players,George Visger began his footballcareer at a very young age. Alsolike many other football players,Visger suffered numerous bell-ringers both on the field andduring practice and was expected

to play through the ensuing men-

tal fog.

Like most former players,Visger was never told that theblows to the head he sustainedwere actually brain injuries re-ferred to as concussions. Andlike most former players, Visger

was never told that concussionscould have long term negative

effects on his brain.

Visger recalls a concussion hesuffered in 1980, during hisrookie season with the San Fran-cisco 49ers. In a game against

the Dallas Cowboys, Visger tellsThe Voice that he suffered a blow

to the head so severe that it re-quired the use of between 25-30smelling salt tablets throughout

the course of the game to keephis head clear. Each time Visgercame to the sidelines, the train-ers would go through a handfulof smelling salts so he could

remain in the game.

Early in the 1981 season,Visger developed hydrocephalus,or water on the brain caused bysevere head trauma. The condi-

tion was so severe that it requiredemergency VP Shunt brain sur-gery to remove spinal fluid thathad built-up on his brain. AsVisger reports, they drilled a holein my skull, ran a perforated tubeinto the ventricles in the middle ofmy brain, and ran that tube to apressure valve in the back of myhead. From the pressure valve, a

tube was plumbing into my abdo-

men to permanently drain spinalfluid from my brain. Visger was22 when he underwent this pro-

cedure.

Today George Visger is 53 andhas undergone 9 emergency VPShunt brain surgeries. He hasalso suffered numerousgran mal

seizures, the result of which hasleft him with major long and short

-term memory loss.

Visger has been living withTraumatic Brain Injury (TBI) forover 30 years now. Having foundno success at improving his short-

term memory, Visger has learnedto live his life through countlessnumbers of little yellow notepadswhere every detail of his daily lifeis recorded. As Visger tells it, Iwrite down my entire days, some-

times with up to 15 - 20 pages ofnotes in a single day, and haveconditioned myself to read

through the prior weeks notesevery other night. After readingabout what I did several daysprior three or four times, I knowwhat I did, even if I dont actuallyremember doing it. Ive alsoleaned to place Post-It stickynotes on my mirror in the bath-room, dashboard of my truck andother areas I will see them atdifferent times of the day to re-mind me of things on my sched-ule. Alarms go off on my com-puter 2 wks, 1 wk, 5,4,3,2 and 1day prior to appoints. The day of

the appointment I have alarms onmy computer and phone pro-grammed to beep at 5 hrs, 3 hrsand 1 hr prior to my appointment

and at 15-minute increments thefinal hour, then at 10, 5 and 2minutes. Ive learned to do thisas even with a reminder 1 hourprior, I will get busy writing re-

ports or on the phone and forget.

In October 2009 Visger under-went 3 days of intensive neuro-psychological evaluations, SPECTscans and micro-cog memory

tests at Dr. Amens clinic in NewPort Beach, CA. George recalled,after 3 days of testing Dr. Amenstated it was a miracle I couldeven function with the amount of

brain damage I had.

Dr. Amen recommended Visgerbegin Hyperbaric Oxygen treat-ments. At the same time, Dr.Barry Sears recommended Visgerbegin taking Omega 3 fish oil anddrink antioxidant juice. In Decem-ber 2009, Visger began receivingHyperbaric treatments at theSacramento Hyperbaric Oxygen

Treatment Center.

According to Visger,[Hyperbaric Oxygen] treatments

for head injuries invl9oves lying in aclear pressurized tube breathingpure oxygen at 1.5 times normalatmospheric pressure for an houreach day. Visger also indicated

that the procedure is painless otherthan your ears popping a little as thepressure goes up and down, you

dont feel a thing.

Visger explains how the treat-ments work, by infusing all yourfluids with concentrated oxygen,delivering massive doses of oxygen

to all your cells, even those withpoor or no blood circulation. Treat-ments also increase, mitochondrialactivity in all your cells, not just yourbrain cells. Mitochondria are yourcells engines supplying energy.When the mitochondria in your braincells are stimulated, it causes

growth of new neurons to areas ofyour brain not damaged, or not be-ing used. Treatments combinedwith mental exercises cause newneurons to grow in areas of the brainnot being used. This process iscalled Neuroplasticity, and was

recently discovered.

Since beginning hyperbaric treat-ments in two years ago, Visgersmicro-cognitive memory tests haveimproved from a low of 56 to anamazing 64 on his last evaluation inSeptember 2011. Visgers memoryhas increased a staggering 14.3%,which is a substantial increase for a

53 year old man.

In 1986, Visger won a workerscompensation case against the SanFrancisco 49ers. All of his hyper-baric treatments have been coveredby workers comp. Visger encour-ages other former players to checkinto a legislation recently passed inCalifornia allowing NFL players to filea workers compensation claimregardless of where your home teamwas based. Visger adds, if youwere injured while playing a Califor-nia team in California, you can file aCalifornia Workers Compensation

claim.

Volume 1, Issue 2

RE T I R E D PLAYER SP O TLIGHT

George Visger,DBJets, 49ers (1980-81)

#74 George VisgerSuper Bowl XVI Champion


11/14

The Voic e Page 11

IV. Dryer Litigation

Retirees seek nothing

more than to obtain their

fair share of the revenues

the NFL has earned,

and will earn, by the use

of the retired players

identities

-Dryer Complaint

Dryer Fred Dryer, et al v. NFLBy: Bob Stein

In Dryer v. NFL, 0:09-cv-02182 (D. Minn.), a group of retired football players (ledby Fred Dryer, Jim Marshall, Elvin Bethea, Joe Senser, Dan Pastorini, and EdWhite) allege the NFL, including its NFL Films division, has used retired playerslikenesses without permission in order promote the league and earn substantialrevenues (an estimated $6.9 billion in 2008 alone).

The complaint alleges that while the league was allowed to use players names,images, and likenesses during their playing days, no such usage was allowed after the players contracts expired particularly for those players who were with theleague during the glory days prior to 1993. For example, the complaint focuseson the fact that the NFL uses extensive film productions to promote the league -complete with scripts, music and editing as opposed to re-broadcasts of NFLgames - for which it has generally offered no compensation to retired playerswhose images are used throughout these films. The retired players have broughtclaims for unjust enrichment, violations of the Lanham Act, and for violations oftheir rights of publicity due to these unauthorized uses of their likenesses.

In January 2010, the court denied the NFLs motion to dismiss the lawsuit andallowed the plaintiffs to move forward with their claims. The case is now in activelitigation. On September 13, 2011, the Court appointed Hausfeld LLP, Bob SteinLLC, and Zimmerman Reed as the 3 co-lead counsel in this matter.

The suit continues to progress, with hundreds of thousands of pages of discoveryexchanged and reviewed. An Amended Complaint was filed on November 15,2011, to reflect modifications including consolidation of a number of similar law-suits, and counsel continue to work closely with our experts to analyze the strong-

est positions to argue and support.

The new CBA, effective August 4, 2011, helps support the view of retired playerpublicity rights in that it addressed player publicity rights AFTER an individualplayer contracts end. For the first time, the CBA requires every NFL Player Con- tract to include language giving the NFL the "right and authority" to use playerpublicity rights after the term of the Agreement. The addition of this languagesupports the claim in the Dryer case that the NFL did not have these rights in prior

CBA's.

The Complaint can be found at:http://www.retiredfootballplayerslawsuit.com/pdf/NFL-A-Complaint.pdf

Bob Stein is an attorney and former NFL linebacker with the Chiefs, Rams, Charg-

ers, & Vikings (1969-76)


12/14


By: Ramogi Huma (Founder and President ofthe National College Players Association)

Soon after I began playing football for UCLA,I realized that student-athletes are subject

to significant financial challenges and lackmany basic protections. I started a student-athletes advocacy group called the NationalCollege Players Association (NCPA) after theNCAA suspended my teammate for accept-ing a few bags of groceries. An agent left

them anonymously on his doorstep afterlistening to a radio interview during whichmy teammate mentioned that he didnthave money to buy enough food during theseason. At the time, his jersey was beingsold in stores across the nation, but NCAArules didnt let him receive one penny of

those revenues. Later that year, my team-mates and I were told that the NCAA prohib-ited schools from paying for any sports-related medical expenses resulting frominjuries suffered during summer workoutssince such workouts were deemed

voluntary.

While college football and basketball playersgenerate billions of dollars per year, collegeathletic programs can choose to leave themwith sports-related medical expenses, re-fuse to renew their scholarships if they areinjured, leave them with tens of thousandsof dollars in educational-related expenses,and can hold their eligibility and scholarshipopportunities hostage when they try to

transfer schools.

Football and basketball players spend about40 hours per week in their sport alone at

the expense of their graduation rates, whichhover around 50%. In addition, the NCAAcaps every full scholarship in the nation be-low the cost of attendance leaving unsus-pecting players with about $3000-$4000/year in out-of-pocket expenses. While theaverage football and basketball player isworth six figures, about 85% of them livewell below the federal poverty line. Mean-while, NCAA rules violations are rampantand show no signs of slowing down. Forreasons such as these, over 14,000 Divi-sion I athletes from all sports have joined

V. NCAA - How We Can Bring Justice For College Athletes

the NCPA to fight for basic protections.

There is much hope for turning this around.New TV deals signed by five of the major con-ferences and the NCAA are generating approxi-mately $775 million dollars in new annual reve-nue, and can play a major role in addressing

these problems. The NCPA has begun a high-profile campaign to direct a portion of new TVrevenues to bring forth the following necessary

reforms:

Cover players sports-related medical

expenses.

Ensure that injured student-athleteshave their scholarships renewed, evenif they can no longer participate in their

sport.

Increase scholarships equal to the full

cost of attendance.

Re-establish an educational trust fund(the NCAA recently allowed one to ex-pire in August). This educational trustfund or lockbox would provide funds

to former players who dont graduateso they can continue their educationand to players that earn their degree.

Players would only gain access to thisfund if they abide by NCAA rules.Graduation rates go up, NCAA viola-

tions go down.

Prevent schools from holding transfer-

ring players eligibility hostage.

Those of us that have played college footballcan be the difference of the success or failureof these important reforms. Current and futurecollege athletes need us to speak out becauseno one else will. Current and former NFL play-ers, in particular, have a powerful voice that

can bring forth much needed change.

Ramogi Huma is Founder and President of the

National College Players Association (NCPA),

and a former UCLA football player (1995-99).

The NCPA is the only independent voice for

college athletes.

To show support for thereform efforts proposedby the National College

Players Association(NCPA), please visit theNCPA website at:www.ncpanow.orgYou can follow the NCPAon Twitter: @NCPANOW,or on Facebook.For more informationplease contact the NCPAat: 951-898-0985


13/14

The Voic e Page 13

The NFLPA through its attorney Jeffrey Kessler told Judge Susan Nel-son at a hearing on August 10, 2011, that retired players, have been

pouring in praise and thanks to the NFLPA for the new benefitsthat have been agreed to.

- Jeffrey Kessler, Attorney for the NFLPA to Judge Susan Nelson at a hearingAugust 10, 2011. (Transcript of Record at 52-53, Brady v. NFL, No. 11-cv-639 (D. Minn. Aug.10, 2011)).

To Sound-off & Be Heard:

Fax this page to 202-540-7201

Comments:

Please Sound-off: We want to know if retirees agree with theNFLPA, that the new benefits agreed to by

the NFLPA are praised by all retirees.

Do you agree that the new benefits agreed to by theNFLPA for retirees are praiseworthy?

YES, the benefits secured by the NFLPAduring negotiations of the new CBA areadequate and praiseworthy.

NO, the benefits secured by the NFLPAduring negotiations of the new CBA are notadequate.

I have no opinion on this issue

Name:

Team(s) Played For:

Years Played:

RETIREE SOUND-OFF SECTION:


14/14

The Voic e Page 14

* Hausfeld LLP and Zelle Hof-mann are legal counsel repre-senting retirees in issues rangingfrom union misconduct effectingretiree pensions and disabilitybenefits; health consequences offootball related concussions; andeconomic rights of retirees withrespect to their names, images

and likeness.

Hausfeld LLP

1700 K Street, NWSuite 650

Washington, DC 20006

Phone: (202) 540-7200

Fax: (202) 540-7201

www.hausfeldllp.com

Zelle Hofmann

500 Washington Avenue SouthSuite 4000

Minneapolis, MN 55415

Phone: (612) 339-2020

Fax: (612) 336-9100

www.zelle.com

DISCLAIMER

The materials and information within this newsletter are made available by HausfeldLLP and Zelle Hofmann, LLP for informational purposes only and should not be con-sidered legal advice. The transmission and receipt of information within this newslet-

ter do not form or constitute an attorney-client relationship. Persons receiving theinformation via this newsletter should not act upon the information provided without

seeking professional legal counsel.

Some links within this newsletter may lead to other websites. Hausfeld LLP and ZelleHofmann, LLP do not incorporate any materials appearing in such linked sites by ref-erence, and the firms do not necessarily sponsor, endorse and/or otherwise approve

of such linked materials.

Please Visit Our Unified NFLRetiree Groups on the Web at:

Retired Players Associationwww.nflretiredplayersassociation.com

Gridiron Greatswww.gridirongreats.org

Fourth and Goalwww.fourthandgoalunites.com

Dignity After Footballwww.dignityafterfootball.org

Independent Football Veteranswww.davepear.com

Jeff Nixon Reporthttp://blog.nflalumniassociation.com

the voice - nfl retiree newsletter, vol 1, issue 2

Documents