Teams that opted out of the NFL coach pension plan, and how will it damage the NFL
by BigBlueShoe on May 8, 2009 9:14 AM EDT
in NFL General
62 comments
Well, now we know who the cheap bastards are:
A controversy is brewing among the league’s assistant coaches because of a change the owners made at the NFL meetings in March that allowed teams to opt out of the standardized pension plan that has been one of the best in professional sports and implement one of their choosing.The Texans are one of nine teams — including Dallas, New England, Atlanta, Jacksonville, New Orleans, Buffalo, Arizona and San Francisco — that opted out of the NFL pension. Owner Bob McNair plans to meet with his employees next week to explain to them why he opted out and what the new plan will be.
Some of these owners are no surprise. Jerry Jones (Dallas) and Bob Kraft (Patriots) have been and always will be scum. Their clubs make a ton of money, and there is no reason for them not to pay into the pension plan other than plain and simple greed. Wayne Weaver (Jaguars), Bill Bidwill (Cardinals), Ralph Wilson (Bills), Bob McNair (Texans), and Tom Benson (Saints) are known cheapskates who routinely make decisions that damage the franchises they own. I know fans of those teams might not like me ripping their owners, but you don't need to look far beyond those teams' track records to see my point. Pretty much all of them have been bad for the last ten years, with the Patriots being the lone exception.
It's worth noting that great owners like the Rooney family (Steelers), the Mara family (Giants), Jim Irsay (Colts), Pat Bowlen (Broncos), Clark Hunt (Chiefs), and the citizens of Green Bay (Packers) did not opt out; all great teams with proud legacies who are making good money regardless of the size of their market. We also know that the Colts continue to pay into the pension plan even though their franchise makes maybe 1/4 the revenue teams like the Cowboys do.
In short, if you team's owner opted out of the pension plan, then your team's owner is a greedy prick. And for you "BBS is an ass for calling out my team" crowd, shut your virtual pie holes for a moment and know that I would say this if the after effects had nothing to do with the Colts and their coaches, like Howard Mudd. If the Colts themselves had opted out of the pension plan, I'd be bashing them (and Jim Irsay) as well. In America today, many corporations and businesses are using the current economy as an excuse to slash pensions. In many cases, the cutting of pensions does little or anything to help the business. The management is doing it because, quite simply, companies do not want to take care of their older employees. If you listen to Houston's resident idiot, Bob McNair, he tries pathetically to explain himself:
It (resolution voted on by the owners) lets each club make our own decision about what type of pension plan we’ll have for (non-playing employees)," McNair said Thursday. "It’s a move to get costs under control. What we’re going to have is, basically, the standard pension plan in American industry."
The last sentence made me laugh because it is McNair essentially admitting that "Yeah, just like every other company in America today, we're going to screw our longtime employees over. Why? Because we can."
The NFL don't have a cost cutting problem, as McNair suggests. When you're talking about a Super Bowl is friggin London, you don't have a cost cutting problem. When a depressed city with a failing industry gives more money to a rookie than Tom Brady makes, you don't have a cost cutting problem. The NFL is making a TON of money, and a lot of that money comes from the play of star players (like Peyton Manning) who were coached up and made great by coaches like Howard Mudd and Tom Moore. Now, obviously, this type of pension plan cutting is nothing compared to the issues facing many working, retirement age folks across the country; people who were working decades for their pension only to see it vanish.
However, what this latest incident between the owners has shown is quite startling: Several idiot owners just don't give a crap about the coaches that have helped make this league great. And guess what, it is going to cost them.
There are reports that assistant coaches are considering forming a union, staging a walk-out and, in some cases, resigning to coach in college.
Another union for the owners to negotiate with. Another union that will likely side more with the players than owners. Another union that is going to demand (and likely get) more from the owners than they otherwise would if idiots like Kraft, Jones, and McNair had left the pension plan alone. Because if they don't, they'll either leave for the college ranks or find something else to do. Don't think younger coaches haven't taken notice of this. They see their future; to work 30-plus years and then to suddenly have your pension yanked with little or no warning. That's the kind of thing that unites people and makes them say, "Um, no. We're not going to let you do that. I'm with Local 12."
In the end, teams like our Colts will likely get to retain coaches like Mudd and Moore as "consultants." But, the damage done by these idiot owners I've listed above could make this upcoming labor fight even more ugly.
1 recs |
62 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Where does this sense of entitlement come from
You are NOT entitlted to a pension. It is not a part of your contract. No one is getting “screwed” by having it changed. It is a gift at the end of your career – as with all gifts you are not entitlted to demand a bigger gift.
A pension is completely different from something like a 401K that the employee contributes to and has ownership of. A pension is not something that is owned, controled, nor gaurenteed to the employee. Where this idea came from that an employee is ENTITLED to a pension is beyond me. Just like an employer can change the rate of compensation either up or down, just like an employer can change the benefits package, just like the employer can change the number of sick days or PTO they give, they can also change the benefits package.
This doesn’t make the teams any more of a “cheap bastard” than does cutting Marvin Harrison because he was due $13 million dollars this season and he wasn’t worth it anymore. There is no difference.
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 9:29 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah an employer has the right to cut a employee's benefits or pay
and then the employee has the right to tell them to go fuck themselves and quit. That’s what’s happening here.
Half the game too lazy
still sleepin' on me
but I'm 'bout to wake 'em
-Lil' Wayne "Fireman"
by shake n bake on May 8, 2009 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly.
It makes neither of them a villian or a victim. It means they are BOTH out after their best interests – as it should be.
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
but since it's more than likely hurting the product on the field
we can be pissed at whichever side we feel was being (more) unreasonable.
Half the game too lazy
still sleepin' on me
but I'm 'bout to wake 'em
-Lil' Wayne "Fireman"
by shake n bake on May 8, 2009 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is it more hurtful than any other move to
save a few bucks on cheaper players?
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Players are limited by the cap
coaches and scouts aren’t so they tell you how much a owner is really willing to spend.
Half the game too lazy
still sleepin' on me
but I'm 'bout to wake 'em
-Lil' Wayne "Fireman"
by shake n bake on May 8, 2009 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cap or no cap
Do you really think Harrison would have been paid $13 million dollars to stick around as the #3 WR? Honestly.
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Employer
An employer might have the legal right to cut pensions. However, there are consequences for doing so as such an act is often immortal and unethical.
SB Nation's Indianapolis Colts blogger at Stampede Blue. Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.
by BigBlueShoe on May 8, 2009 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Was it immoral or unethical
When the Colts unilaterally ended their CONTRACT with Marvin Harrison?
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It wasn't because the Colts were to poor to keep him
its because every team has a spending limit and to keep Marvin would have gone over that limit. Besides, its not like the Colts didn’t try to keep Marvin. They tried very hard to renegotiate with him, even gave him a generous offer with the restructured deal (can;t remember the exact numbers, but it was pretty good if you ask me).
by metal_militia on May 8, 2009 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
It was a business decission. You could also ask if Manning was a cheap bastard because he didn’t restructure his contract and take less so we could keep Harrison. The answer, of course, is no – he wasn’t.
This is a busienss people – these sorts of decissions are made all the time. Why is this one so much more emotional?
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Manning can't restructure.
As monstersbox has explained, he would have to sign a new contract.
"I throw, you catch. It's NOT that hard!"
Peyton Manning, SNL, 2007
by peytonsthebest on May 8, 2009 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, then sign a new contract
Was Manning a cheap bastard because he couldn’t spare a few million from his $20 million take this year to keep Harrison around?
Answer: Of course not. This is a business.
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow. Tell me how you really feel.
Or better yet, tell me who you know in the Colts’ oganization that informed you of the Colts’ offer of a new contract.
Then again, they probably didn’t because I have a feeling it would leave the organization with even less $$. Oh yeah, that’s right, its a business. Thanks for pointing that out for me, by the way…I don’t however, recall ever saying it wasn’t. Hm.
"I throw, you catch. It's NOT that hard!"
Peyton Manning, SNL, 2007
by peytonsthebest on May 8, 2009 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What on Earth are you talking about?
Exactly where did I ever claim a new contract was offered? I was making a point with a HYPOTHETICAL. Try to keep up.
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You should consider the same.
Listen, I appreciate your zeal, and if you read my comments, we agree on the issue itself. Having said that, here is a piece of unsolicited advice. Quit biting off everybody’s heads. You are arguing with people now who don’t really disagree with you in general. Peytonsthebest is a good example of this. She merely commented on Manning’s contract situation earlier, and was not attempting to take away from your greater point.
What you are arguing as a whole, while some of us agree, is unpopular and irritating to some others. And I am perfectly fine with that, as you are too, apparantly. However, don’t villify yourself to everyone, particularly the vast majority who remain neutral.
As someone once said, “people might not like you for your position, and that is fine. But they ought not dislike you for your disposition”. There are a couple people on this site and on the other side of this issue who ought to consider that as well. Just sayin’.
by coltsfanawalt on May 8, 2009 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Quit biting off everybody’s heads.
“She merely commented on Manning’s contract situation earlier, and was not attempting to take away from your greater point.”
I didn’t take it that way at all. She responded in a flipant attituded to a hypothetical and got the same right back. I never start the attitude, but I have no problems reciprocating.
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 10:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
o rly
I never start the attitude, but I have no problems reciprocating.
Actually, ulike some people on here who are younger than me, there was no “flipant attitude” I was actually only stating a fact.
Get over yourself.
"I throw, you catch. It's NOT that hard!"
Peyton Manning, SNL, 2007
by peytonsthebest on May 11, 2009 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey Iowa Hawkeye...
Keep it up brother!!! I am with you 100%. There are no greedy bastards here…nobody is getting screwed. Everyone feels they should be entitled to everything. You know people, retirement has only been around less than a century!! Take care of yourself….which is what the owners did and is what the coaches are doing. Personal accountabiltiy…maybe the Amish have it right…don’t pay into social security….get nothing out of it….do they bitch…no they take care of themselves. Also, the 401K argument below is absurd. If you are close enough to retirement that the stock market can affect your investments you need to change investments. Quit blaming everyone else.
by TRDean on May 8, 2009 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Educate
I agree with both TRD and Iowa. With this there needs to be a reeducation of people. People need to stop relying on others to manage their lives. Learn to think for yourselves and learn how to take care of yourself and stop relying on others to do a job that you should be doing yourself
by jesusjagfan2009 on May 9, 2009 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah 401K's...
Because of a lack of pensions in America people have been forced to really on 401K’s which is sticking your hard earned money into the hands of corrupt people on Wall St. like Bernie Madoff. Yeah that really went well! Now MILLIONS of Americans don’t have enough $$$ for retirement. Stop siding with greedy management.
by MasterRWayne on May 8, 2009 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Listen to yourself
People are being “forced” to provide for their own retirement. No kidding. It is YOUR life. YOU should be taking care of it. Where did this notion come from that someone else should provide for your old age?
And if you understood a single thing about proper investments then you wouldn’t make ignorant comments about losing money with any one bad investment like Madoff – who scamed INDIVIDUALS, not 401k fund managers.
And I’m not siding with either the greedy managers OR the greedy employees.
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you, BTW.
Personal accountability is a rare occurance in this day and age.
"I throw, you catch. It's NOT that hard!"
Peyton Manning, SNL, 2007
by peytonsthebest on May 8, 2009 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well said
could comment but this one was so well put that the headline will suffice.
by jesusjagfan2009 on May 9, 2009 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmm.
Nobody is forcing you to put your money into a 401k. You sign up for it and you have complete control over it. The 401k manager can’t put your money into investments that you didn’t approve of first and second if you don’t trust the company then opt out of the 401k and put it somewhere else
by jesusjagfan2009 on May 9, 2009 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Explain this to me...
Something is unclear. If only certain owners opted out of the pension plan and the Colts did not, then why are Mudd and Moore upset and considering retirement? They wouldn’t do so unless their pension plan had changed. Did the league vote to change the pension plan for the entire NFL despite the votes of Irsay and others or what?
by Genghis Sean on May 8, 2009 9:30 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Another note
From your post-
“It (resolution voted on by the owners) lets each club make our own decision about what type of pension plan we’ll have for (non-playing employees),” McNair said Thursday. “It’s a move to get costs under control. What we’re going to have is, basically, the standard pension plan in American industry.”
The last sentence made me laugh because it is McNair essentially admitting that “Yeah, just like every other company in America today, we’re going to screw our longtime employees over. Why? Because we can.”
No, what he is talking about is removing the option to take the entire pension in one lump sum, a practice that is EXTREMELY unique to the NFL. I’ve never heard of it being done anywhere before. So what they are looking to do is change the pension to the more traditional pension of receiving a defined regular payment at regular intervals – an annuity.
I have to ask BBS, how old are you and how much experience have you had with benefit packages, employers, employees, etc. I’ve been both an employee, employer, receiver of benefits, provider of benefits, and even someone who sold benefit packages to various employers as well as employees. What is your background in benefit packages?
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 9:48 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Pensions are going extinct...
except for federal employees. Why does a company have to take care of someone when they leave…are people not paid to do the work when they were there?
by TRDean on May 8, 2009 6:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
With funding shortfalls
Expect pensions to go extinct for Gov employees too
by jesusjagfan2009 on May 9, 2009 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent article, BBS.
I am curious as well, if the Colts (and other clubs) are continuing to pay into the fund fully, then why are our coaches being affected? One would think that only the coaches of the teams that decided to “opt out” would be affected.
Regardless of the reason, this is total and complete BS. We have a great organization with a great owner and our awesome (understatement) coaches should not be afftected.
"I throw, you catch. It's NOT that hard!"
Peyton Manning, SNL, 2007
by peytonsthebest on May 8, 2009 10:16 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
There's not enough information...
…for people to make all these definitive statements! Who can know whether it’s the NFL, the owners or the assistant coaches in question that are “right” or “wrong.”
Speaking from extensive experience in the corporate / for profit and not-for-profit worlds, I believe that, without having access to the contracts in question, it is impossible for anyone to know definitively whether something is or is not included. Contracts (or offers of employment) normally include salary, benefits and other specific conditions relating to that position. Normally, the contract or “offer” will also state that the employee agrees to all items as listed in an employee manual of policies and procedures which is, routinely, signed by the employee as a condition of hiring. Given this, a rush to judgement by proponents of either position would be rather ill-informed or, at least, premature.
As far as Iowa-Hawkeye’s statement that lump sum payments of retirement or pension funds are “extremely unique to the NFL,” I can assure you that they are NOT uncommon in the corporate world. For example, Corning, Inc., a major Fortune 500 corporation has provided that option for its retirees for many years.
I find it difficult to empathize with this situation as I expect that none of the involved parties are finding themselves in particularly difficult financial positions.
by skycolt on May 8, 2009 10:44 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
On Corning
That well could be – but it is at the very least unusual and out of the norm.
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your last sentence..
is dead on!!! These coaches are not going into the poor house…unless they invested solely with Madoff. Hard for me to cry a river for them.
by TRDean on May 8, 2009 6:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the coaches forming a union
is a great idea. i think they should. at least they would have had some input on the changes being made.
by MARVININDY on May 8, 2009 11:26 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Oh my!
Just because what Corning, Inc does is “unusual” does not mean that we should demand it to be the standard. The “usual” practice in corporate America has been to screw over workers and give more and more money to upper management. That’s why we have CEO’s making 20 MILLION dollars and then “saving” money by slashing workers making 30K a year. How the hell can you defend people like that? Not only is it enuethical, but its bad business and its bad for our economy.
by MasterRWayne on May 8, 2009 11:27 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Ahhh...
the corporate hater!!! Are you kidding me? I guess big bad business is the cause of everything that is wrong in the world. Consider this master…making 30K a year puts you in the top 90% of wage earners in the world. How about we have the federal government come in and guarantee that everyone in this country will be entitled to a fantastic life!! You don’t have to work hard or anything…everyone will be treated to the milk of uncle sam!! I think that has been tried and failed.
by TRDean on May 8, 2009 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Ethical" is a slippery slope
First off…I’d kill for a pension as opposed to my retirement benefits.
Pensions are a dying commodity. Just look at the Amrican automotive industry if you think long-term entrenched liabilitity is a good thing. I mean, these guys coach football…The only way a pension fund works is if it is used as capital for re-investment in other types of things (real estate, index funds, etc).
There is an argument that CEO’s are somewhat over compensated (especially when that compensation has no “hooks” in regards to the overall health of the company, Bob Nardelli of Home Depot comes to mind personally ), but these aren’t people that were born rich CEOs….they had to work HARD to get there. I can guarantee you that they have worked 5 times as hard in their formative years, (education, work related exp, self-improvement) then your typical 30K a year Joe. I’m not slighting those Josephs, hard working is hard working…but “value add” is something else. I mean, that’s just a fact. Hate the Paris Hiltons, don’t hate people who prove the American Dream is real! I mean, pro athletes who can’t even SPELL make 20 million a year!!!!! Redirect your angst MASTERWAYNE…. :)
Anyway, Jim Irsay owns Jerry Garcia’s 2nd fav guitar…that guy PARTIES!!!!!!!
Howard Mudd is going to be all right (unless he is a profligate gambler) and so is T. Moore. Their money is in the bank…..(or should be)….We may not be alright in the S/T but change is inevitable….The Colts are changing…..
As for the NFL coaches forming a Union…Bad Idea and NO!!!!!! The Professional Players Union is what is going to destroy the NFL eventually….Mark my words…
PS I Vote “Union Yes”…btw…..
PSS Shake N Bake…Dude, show some form and use $#%&^ when you swear on here….it’s more clever and comic book like…..
by peterbones on May 8, 2009 12:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If I'm going swear, I'm going to actually swear
I hate censored and euphemism swears. Though if it bothers people I’ll work on phrasing stuff in a way that doesn’t use them at all when I can.
Half the game too lazy
still sleepin' on me
but I'm 'bout to wake 'em
-Lil' Wayne "Fireman"
by shake n bake on May 8, 2009 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love swearing.
It reflects passion, imo.
"I throw, you catch. It's NOT that hard!"
Peyton Manning, SNL, 2007
by peytonsthebest on May 8, 2009 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It also reflects a lack
of ability to express yourself in any other way.
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You haven't been around that long, have you?
I suppose I must put (just joking) or hahaha or lol or whatever.
Everybody needs to lighten up a little bit. Its Friday, for crying out loud. We’re fans of the same team…although sometimes its difficult to see. :-)
"I throw, you catch. It's NOT that hard!"
Peyton Manning, SNL, 2007
by peytonsthebest on May 8, 2009 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
so does never swearing
or did I just completely blow your mind
Half the game too lazy
still sleepin' on me
but I'm 'bout to wake 'em
-Lil' Wayne "Fireman"
by shake n bake on May 8, 2009 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey shake...
swearing in itself is not a huge deal…but it is pretty juvenile. My son and daughter read this site and we do more laughing at the $%#$** that is spewed and have a hard time taking it seriously.
by TRDean on May 8, 2009 7:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly!
It doesn’t take much thought to belch out a few curse words. It does take thought to put together a decent argument.
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 10:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
this is the internet,
if you’re taking anything here seriously, you’re doing it wrong!
by hahasound on May 11, 2009 3:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It takes quite a bit more
than a mindless swear word to blow anything
by the_iowa_hawkeye on May 8, 2009 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think you followed that one
the comment body was a joke referring to the comment title
Half the game too lazy
still sleepin' on me
but I'm 'bout to wake 'em
-Lil' Wayne "Fireman"
by shake n bake on May 8, 2009 10:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rip the ownership in general all you'd like.
How about all the times that entrepenuers get messed over? I mean, starting a business and becoming successful is no easy thing. For every story of the guy who becomes a wealthy and greedy dog, there are many more who lost their shirts and their credit trying to start businesses. Then there are those who made it but lived in extreme conditions for a long time trying to stay afloat, making lifestyle sacrifices for sustained periods of time and barely maintaining sanity. All for the hope of their dream and all without the promise of a payoff for their sacrifice.
There are many times when a person does make it successfully, only to have their future drastically affected by outside sources who come in to impose on things that they never labored to sacrifice or build. I have seen employees enter a company under the guise that the terms of their employment were acceptable, only to turn around once they were in to stir up discontentment and attempt to force their employers hands in ways that would’ve prevented their hiring if they would’ve been honest when applying. Stockholders have also harmed the individuals who gave their livelihood to found and build their companies. Unions have been far from angelic and ungreedy as well.
I am not posting this to discuss the particularities of the NFL situation or our coaches and owners. My point is being aimed at a couple people here who have this attitude of hate against “the man” and those who would take a balanced look at the situation. There are greedy and corrupt owners, and there are greedy and corrupt employees. And there are also parasite organizations that come along to leach and draw from what others risked everything to build.
Not everyone who owns or heads big corporations were born with a silver spoon in their mouth. There are many who were a part of a large number of people who struggled with nothing but became part of the minority who saw their hard work and sacrifice pay off. If only for awhile.
Don’t be so quick to lump one side as the entire problem. Greed in all men is the problem. The love of money truly is the root of all evil.
by coltsfanawalt on May 8, 2009 1:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
+1
Great perspective and life is, afterall, about perspective. Thanks.
"I throw, you catch. It's NOT that hard!"
Peyton Manning, SNL, 2007
by peytonsthebest on May 8, 2009 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
*SIGH*
I’ll leave it with this.
It was a horrid idea to frame this issue as something similar to what happened/happens to industrial workers, GM employees or steel workers. It’s not in the same ball park. It’d be one thing to chastise the owners who have opted out of the system for being cheap bastards, maybe they are, it’s another to turn it into an ethical/morality tale which should be lumped together with some of the worse employee benefit disasters that have happened in this country’s history.
No one is losing their pension, no assistant or position coach is going to go broke because of this move. Even with the changes these employees will receive one of the best pensions offered anywhere in this country. Yet somehow this has turned into a “GOD BLESS THE UNION” speech which has taken us from talking football to getting into heated arguments about politics.
I’m disappointed.
I’ve never said anything like this on this board before because I respect everyone on it and I enjoy this forum very much but, this is the most disappointing post, and most disappointing mis-caricature of an issue that I’ve seen on this board. It’s unfortunate.
I have strong feelings on the issue and will struggle to just look away, which doesn’t make me feel very good because I usually like to share my ideas. In this case it will only cause an argument, name-calling, hurt feelings and potentially will forever alter the opinions that people who frequent these boards have about eachother. A sad result considering we call came here to discuss Colts football, we all came here to enjoy the camaraderie of being around other Colts fans. This taints that environment. I don’t even want to be on this forum right now. With that…
by bamock on May 8, 2009 2:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
youre probably right.
its become another topic for another blog. its a topic thats easy to get caught up in because EVERYONE can relate to going to work everyday and trying to make some money.
by MARVININDY on May 8, 2009 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Weaver Cheap part 2
First of Big Blue i must compliment you on this post you do have some valid points. But I must remind you on this. We live in a capitalist society and no where does it say that a company is required to pay a person a pension. It is their job to prepare themselves for retirement in what ever way they see fit (401k’s CD’s Mutual Funds etc) not the job of the organization to provide it for them. As for coaches going to coach collage they will be in for a rude awakening considering that collage teams are doing more cost cutting them pro teams are. And as for calling Jacksonville owner Wayne Weaver a cheap greedy person research and see the charity work that him and his wife do down here and get to know them before putting them in the same bracket as Jerry Jones and co.
America is a free market society and nobody is guaranteed nothing for those who don’t like that get use to it cause it is the truth
have a nice day
by jesusjagfan2009 on May 9, 2009 12:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Known cheapskates?
Opting out of the system doesn’t necessarily mean worse pension terms. The NFL’s overall pension terms are getting worse—that’s why Colts’ coaches are thinking they have to retire now before they get screwed.
High revenue teams like the Cowboys, Patriots and Texans can actually offer BETTER terms than the standard pension if they choose to.
BTW, Bob McNair is not known as a cheapskate. Look at his expenses as reported by Forbes. His coaches regularly note that he gives them as many resources as they want, and he has purchased one of the largest coaching staffs in the NFL and didn’t do layoffs like a lot of organizations did.
Glass houses a little bit on this post. Ask the people in Baltimore if they think the Irsay’s have a “proud legacy.”
by StephS on May 10, 2009 9:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I can see it from both sides,
Obviously, the first instinct (of some, at least) is to look at this story and get pissed off at the money-grubbing owners. The rich employer screwing over the poor employee, yadda yadda.
On one hand, yeah… the NFL had a pension plan in place, and the long-time assistants who had been guaranteed this pension for years are suddenly seeing it ‘yanked from under them’.
Argue if you will about the merits of pensions, but the fact is that the NFL assured these coaches it’d be there at the time of their retirement.
On the other hand, this may be a bit premature. The article stated that those who opted out were doing so in order to “implement one of their choosing”.
I’m not 100% sure that this means owners MUST maintain a working pension, but the implication seems to be that there will still be a pension plan for those who meet the requirements.
Only when we see owners flatly eliminating pension plans can we (fairly) label them as dishonest and greedy.
Furthermore, I personally find it hard to be sympathetic to the employees in this case. These assistant coaches have not been making a pittance— the ones who qualify likely have been making hundreds of thousands of dollars per year; I’m guessing that they were not living paycheck-to-paycheck.
by hahasound on May 11, 2009 3:41 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
one thing to consider
The NFL pension was outstanding in past years, but the economic downturn has shrunk the pool considerably. Before passing such harsh judgment, it might be fair to see what these nine teams are offering to its coaching staff in place of what is currently available to them now.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on May 11, 2009 9:15 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
