Quote:
Originally Posted by Literature
Knowing long-term consequences isn't a doctor-level understanding. There does have to be some fully informed consent standard in this employee relationship.
There has to be mandatory clinics all players attend during training camp. The club basically needs to tell them, "There's a 50/50 chance you're going to be mentally ****ed up if you play for longer than 2 years when you're 40."
|
And it would still likely be considered a contract of adhesion; afterall it's hardly an arms-length transaction. It's a document written by trained attorneys and presented to a guy that either gets to play football for millions or flip burgers for a living.
Once again, I know the argument will be 'well they just didn't have to play', but I can tell you that a jury's not going to buy that when they have actual corpses in front of them.
Besides, the beautiful thing about waivers is that there are very few of them that I can argue are both 1) specific enough to be clear as to what they're addressing and 2) broad enough to cover all contingencies.
Put me in a room with any document you draw up, give me enough time, money and manpower and sooner or later I'll figure out a way to attack one of those 2 problems.
It's nowhere near as straightforward as vailpass or Donger are trying to make it. If it were, the NFL would've dealt with stuff like this, injury settlements or even Free Agency a long long time ago. The NFL can't just say 'here it is, take it or leave it', or we wouldn't have FA or exorbitant salaries now would we?