August 31, 2011

There's some guys out there that have made bad business decisions," Brees said. "They took their pensions early because they never went out and got a job. They've had a couple divorces and they're making payments to this place and that place. And that's why they don't have money. And they're coming to us to basically say, 'Please make up for my bad judgment.'"

I don't see Mr. Pastorini's name mentioned in Mr. Brees quote, if he is being quoted acurately. But if the shoe fits, wear it. And I will take that $1,000 a month Pastorini is going to get if he thinks it isn't worth his time.

Upshaw was able to leave his wife $15,000,000.oo because of his salery as prez of the players union. Or at least it was a big factor in the amount. sheesh

I feel for the guys like Pastorini, but the choices you made after football are your own.

posted by steelergirl at 07:37 PM on August 31, 2011

That was a really stupid quote by Brees. The former players built this league, sacrificed their health, and were paid a pittance by today's standards. Since the ex-players weren't at the table, who really expected them to get a good deal?

posted by bperk at 08:51 PM on August 31, 2011

Ma, I agree with you about Upshaw selling out the players. I think old "Dante" is just jealous of any former player who is/was better off than him.

bperk Pastorini was drafted third behind Heisman trophy winner Jim Plunkett and Archie Manning. I don't think either one of them has filed bankruptcy, and they both have been married to the same women for a long time. I don't hear either one of them crying the blues about money either.

Maybe guys like Pastorini should be thinking about how to change that rather than what names to call strangers.

True, feloniousmonk but that would be the mature thing to do.

posted by steelergirl at 10:45 PM on August 31, 2011

Brees has a reputation for being smart, but he didn't help it by getting into a fight with bitter ex-players who squandered their money. It's just not a fight he's going to look good having, especially when some of those exes are battling expensive health problems.

posted by rcade at 12:28 AM on September 01, 2011

F@CK Dan Pastorini. He made and squandered more money than most of us will see in a lifetime. Am I to feel sorry for him that he doesn't have the common sense or self preservation instincts that are inate in the common three toed sloth?

Say what you want; I think he's just a whiny bitch.

posted by Tinman at 10:24 AM on September 01, 2011

Tinman - right on.

Pastorini is a jerk for saying that and signaling out Brees. Sure players made a lot less in his day, but he fails to mention he was still rich by the standard of the day and had every opportunity to parlay his football earnings into a lucrative and comfortable life. Instead he wasted a lot by any standard. He made top NFL money for most of his career and then in 1986 Pastorini was awarded $450K by the court to settle a contract dispute with the Raiders.

So if you invested $450K in 1986 (what were home prices then, the stock market, the cost of living?) Do the math that money would have produced a very comfortable retirement let alone all the money he squandered while playing and after. He is a cry baby and frankly if he were playing today he would probably be in the same situation, but instead of squandering a few million he would have squandered a few tens of millions. While I recognize there are tremendous risks for playing football and tremendous rewards, I hate it when players act like they are victims. They choose and actively pursue their careers of their own free and almost all have the services of agents, lawyers, a training and medical staff, and financial advisers. If their own bad judgement makes for a hardship later on, they only have themselves to blame.

posted by Atheist at 11:31 AM on September 01, 2011

If their own bad judgement makes for a hardship later on, they only have themselves to blame.

Despite article after article of football players making bad decision because their brains have been completely turned to mush, people still want to ignore all the evidence of the physical and mental toll of football. How you think someone could support themselves and their family off of $450,000 I can't imagine? Do they not have taxes or lawyers in that fantasy world you live in?

posted by bperk at 12:22 PM on September 01, 2011

Atheist wasn't saying that $450K would support the man and his family for life; he was saying that $450K, wisely invested almost thirty years ago, earning compound interest, could provide a pretty nice little nest egg.

And, I'm saying it was never $450,000. Lawyers and taxes would take that $450,000 and make it quite less than $450,000 in the real world.

posted by bperk at 01:12 PM on September 01, 2011

The fact that he referred to a $1000 per month extra in his pension as "big fucking deal" just shows that because of football, he has an extremely distorted idea of the average persons retirement situation probably due to the fact the NFL players make a ton of money and have great benefits. His complaints are ridiculous and do nothing in the way of gaining sympathy from a public that already sees players as making way too much money.

He wasn't comparing himself to the average person and why should he? He and the other former players helped build the NFL into a multi-billion dollar organization and the thanks they got was many of them being left nearly crippled. It's true that $12,000 a year (before taxes) is a big deal to a lot of people, but for someone with medical problems, it is chump change. I think it is a perfectly valid criticism that the CBA did little for such players considering the amount of money that was on the table, regardless of whether he made bad decisions (and who hasn't?). And, really, do you think it is fine for Drew Brees, someone who has made more in one year than Pastorini made in his career, to criticize the former players?

posted by bperk at 02:18 PM on September 01, 2011

do people really always need a graphic example to avoid a mistake?

There's a famous George Best line: "I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." But Best was just the most prominent of a generation of players, after the abolition of the maximum wage in 1961, who got more money than they knew what to do with at a young age and ended up with a lot of hangers-on. The clich of the retired footballer with a pub and a drinking problem wasn't far from the truth.

Modern footballers still have their hangers-on and their kiss-and-tell scandals and nightclub incidents, but there's also an infrastructure in place to try and keep them from pissing away the money they earn -- as well as a post-retirement environment that provides much greater opportunity to stay close to the game through coaching or punditry. (Consider Paul Mariner and Steve Nicol's post-playing careers.)

So while I'm not excusing Pastorini of personal responsibility for his current situation, I do think that, whether they like it or not, Brees and the current generation of players are beneficiaries of the equivalent generation to Best's in the NFL -- and to some extent, beneficiaries of the "bad judgement" of those players.

(Pastorini was drafted exactly 30 years before Brees; exactly 30 years before Pastorini, this was the NFL draft.)

posted by etagloh at 02:26 PM on September 01, 2011

While I recognize the contribution the players of old made to the sport of football, I don't think it is fair to say they built the league into the mega billion dollar business it is today. I am not trying to deny their talent, but they were guys who were good at football. Good enough for some visionary businessmen to pay for their services. Something most of them did for love of the game even if they did not get paid. It is the league of owners who have built their businesses over generations to make the league and its revenue what it is today. What the players can take credit for, is that they have organized and created a situation in which they now share in that revenue and they deserve to. NFL football did not happen because there were guys who were great football players and liked to play football. It happened because business men decided to try to build a league and market it to the public and they did a great job. All a bunch of good football players can give you is a good game. Good businessmen created a league that offers talent a showcase and the opportunity to make money. I will think differently when NFL players union tries to take care of players of old who only played college ball or USFL ball because in truth those players also paved the way for players today. The fact that other leagues with very talented players did not succeed is a testament to what the business & ownership side of the NFL has created for itself and the players. It was people like Art Rooney, Lamar Hunt, Al Davis, Pete Rosell etc who are really responsible for what we have now. Whether or not Jim Brown, OJ Simpson, Dan Pastorini or any other individual ever played or not, would have little effect on what we have now. It is the game that allows greatness to shine, the talents of the players did not create the game.

It is because of the guys who invested in and developed the league that a guy who is big, fast and skilled can make millions playing football, not the other way around. Without the record business, Elvis would have just been a talented kid with a guitar that few people would have known about.

Players deserve to make all they can. Individual players are short term and make a very short term contribution to the scenario. That is why they deserve to be paid extravagantly while they play. Keeping a business model viable and growing for generations, through economic cycles is really what is the success of the NFL. That is why I tend to side with ownership. The truth is most NFL team owners are successful in business without football regardless of what they choose to do. There is always a lot of money to be made by smart businessmen. On the other hand without the NFL, running a 4.3 forty, having good hands, and bench pressing 400 lbs would have little market value. The players should be thanking the NFL and its business model not acting like they are the sole reason for its success.

posted by Atheist at 03:59 PM on September 01, 2011

This thread is about one individual's statements, and if you want to bring up the "brains have been completely turned to mush" argument here, you really need to point to some evidence that this is the case for this individual.

Bullshit. I don't have to ignore all the evidence of what chronic traumatic encephalopathy looks like in players while they are still alive to believe that it contributes to former players making bad decisions. I didn't say Pastorini had it anyway. Brees made a general statement about former players making bad decisions, so all the recent evidence about the brains of former players and the behavior caused by the damage is relevant.

I bet Brees and the other current players are probably sick of hearing from guys like this trying to ride the coat-tails of actually injured, actually poor former players. Guys like Pastorini fuck things up for everyone else.

Really? Pastorini is the reason the CBA didn't include medical expenses for former players in the CBA? You can believe that if you want to. Pastorini is an easy target, but the CBA speaks volumes. They made the health benefits more generous for the current players, but didn't extend that generosity to most of the former players (check out the neuro-cognitive disability benefit which will allow players to collect the benefit without proving it was caused by football - how great - but only for players since 1994).

posted by bperk at 04:40 PM on September 01, 2011

Bullshit. I don't have to ignore all the evidence of what chronic traumatic encephalopathy looks like in players while they are still alive to believe that it contributes to former players making bad decisions. didn't say Pastorini had it anyway. Brees made a general statement about former players making bad decisions, so all the recent evidence about the brains of former players and the behavior caused by the damage is relevant.

Mm, that's somewhat fair, I guess, but I still think your logic is faulty. Chronic traumatic encephalopathy leads to diminished mental capacity which would sure seem likely to lead to bad decisions, but you can't look at a former football player who made a bunch of bad decisions (either a particular case or in general) and automatically conclude that that's how they got there. There are many paths that lead to the same end.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 04:59 PM on September 01, 2011