OT - Congressional report says NFL waged improper campaign to influence government study
This is definitely not a good look for the NFL:
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/15667689/congressional-report-finds-nfl-improperly-intervened-brain-research-cost-taxpayers-16-million
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
NFL stadiums have costed taxpayers way, way more.
as a blanket statement, true, what are the impacts of these nfl stadiums for those tax payers? {{politics}}
I've read numerous articles about how those stadiums don't generate nearly enough revenue to make up for what the taxpayers put down for them. Cities and taxpayers often pay up because they don't wanna lose the team, not because it actually makes good budget sense.
So true, in fact I don't even consider it politics... citations of articles I found by quickly searching a few prominent sources with their generally accepted left/right affiliations
Brookings (left): http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/1997/06/summer-taxes-noll
The Atlantic (left): http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/09/if-you-build-it-the…
Cato (right): http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/governmentfunded-stadiums-n…
Reason (right): http://reason.com/archives/2015/12/01/economists-agree-publicly-finance…
Heritage Foundation (right): http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2002/07/taxpayers-prop-up-s…
And of course... john Oliver: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcwJt4bcnXs
"If you don't give X million dollars, we're moving your beloved team out of town"
When NFL teams have that leverage over fanbases, they basically have no choice but to cave. Makes me think it should be illegal because it'll never stop otherwise
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
They're not like other companies. They've gotten anti-trust exemptions. If they leave, their leagues make it difficult to replace them. That doesn't happen in other industries and they're using it to their advantage.
um, it shouldn't be up to those fanbases how the taxes of a million+ residents are spent. Sports has gone way beyond a harmless hobby at that point
Mike Valenti is that you? ;)
also not a good look
When the NFL understands the Ideal Gas Law and related concepts, it may be time for them to interfere with CTE research. We're not there yet.
Selective knowledge, yo.
The font hurts my eyes.
Those filthy fucking rats. No wonder people are trying to ban kickoffs in little league (I don't agree with that by the way). How can they get away with this kind of shit? No wonder Roger Goodell gets spit on.
the NFL concluded, and rightly so, if you read Stern's past views, that his mind is already made up, and any research results from him would likely be bad PR for the league, and possibly (if you buy their argument) biased results. Now, maybe Styern is 100% right in all his past opinions, who knows. But it's pretty common for both sides in any industry research to call into question the impartial nature of research given who funds it or who runs it.
that's not related to this research. This is a problem with all CTE research. Researchers have to play nice with the NFL and the players association. The same is true for NFL and CFB team doctors and trainers for that matter.
This whole issue is ef'd from a transparency POV. People aren't getting the truth. Who knows what is true anymore? Instead people are told it's getting better. That is true. But how bad is it? The NFL and the NFLPA have no interest in finding that out.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I am utterly shocked and aghast at this completely inconceivable development. Since when would an enormous body with vast financial resources and influence seek to employ those resources and influence in such a manner so as to preserve and expand upon said vast financial resources and influence?
Are you talking about the NFL or Congress? Weird how your comment seems to apply to both.
is just a factual document, rather than an opinion.
I didn't bother reading the article to begin with. My default expectation is that, unless someone explicitly indicates otherwise, they are going to act to promote their own self interests. Corporations, who are in the business of being profitable don't need that presumption since that is pretty much their purpose for existing. (even the non-profit ones).
As for congressional reports, like everything, it depends on the context--after an investigation, just to bring someone in for a high-profile tongue lashing, etc.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
This is about as likely as Ole Miss paying players. Many players, repeatedly, with the full knowledge of administration. Then trying to deny it and cover up. So, REALLY likely.
Why is there a congressional report about breaching a contract? Either the NFL failed to live up to the terms and should be sued or not. Right? Did the NFL break the contract or just break their PR promises outside the contract?
Also, is it lost on anyone that members of Congress are critical of someone else for exerting undue influence (and acting behind-the-scenes) to affect a government agency?
This story could have been written many ways:
1. NFL seeks to assert influence by failing to fund study if their guy was not chosen to head it up.
2. NFL refuses to fund study where lead researcher was chosen mainly because he was critical of the NFL.
3. Congress tries to explain why taxpayers have to pay for government study, which NFL had previously agreed to pay.
4. NIH contract poorly drafted, so Congress resorts to a report to shame the NFL.
5. Four left-leaning politicians, who receive heavy funding from attorneys/law firms, unhappy with NFL's attempt to stop research done by plaintiff litigation-friendly researcher.
6. NFL only concerned about future litigation and profits, not the safety of players implies report from champions of the little guy.
Etc...
To be clear, I think the NFL wanted to influence the study. I also think the four members of Congress have an agenda (maybe good, maybe not).
Anyway, a "congressional report" on this? Why is this a government issue?
A Non Profit that shouldn't be one, breaking a promise, be it even verbal/press release and not contractually obligating.
Take away their non-profit status, if they found it unprofitable to fund a study, they didn't want an actual study, they wanted one in the same realm of cigarettes are good for your health.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Then why criticize how the reporter framed the article?
I'm obviously not talking about sincerity in the abstract here, but rather the sincerity of a specific position the NFL asserted--i.e., that they take concussions seriously and want them adequately studied. Just because there may have been reasons to doubt that from the get-go doesn't mean it isn't newsorthy when proof emerges showing the NFL is being dishonest.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
... it's a government issue, because government can serve a purpose of informing its citizens about the risks associated with certain activities. Just like the government has funded studies on smoking, diet, exercise, climate change, etc... There is a role for an independent (I get it, they aren't really independent) authority to evaluate the unintended consequences of industry. God knows the people making bank aren't going to do it.
This isn't a story about the need for government research.
It is about shaming the NFL and wasting money on a report to shame them -- when the contract with the NFL could have just been stronger.
If the government wants to fund such a study, then great. But, it doesnt want to spend that money here and its agenda is to get the NFL to fund it.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
of any of these issues is assuming that government, which is made up of people, is any less self-interested or biased in it's approach than any other group of people. People that work in government are not one bit more moral or ethical than any other group of people, nor one bit less.
I simply point out what I think is a truism, that all people are motivated by self-interest, and that no collection of humans (in a society like ours) has a monopoly on virtue. It's a fallacy to assume that a politician is less self-interested than a business person--in fact, one could argue they are more so.
wait I forgot... God bless America.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad