Skip to content

Retired players file another lawsuit against NFLPA*

BernieParrish

The pro football litigation explosion of 2011 continues.

Retired players who took a large chunk out of the non-asterisked NFLPA’s coffers a couple of years ago resulting from the union’s failure to try hard enough to turn marketing deals with those retired players into dollars and cents have filed another lawsuit, according to Carl Prine of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

“We’re just getting started,” former NFL defensive back Bernie Parrish said.  “We’re going to finish the fight we started in 2007.”

Parrish and four other former players allege that the NFLPA* and its separate licensing operation “defrauded thousands of former players of lucrative royalties when video games, apparel companies, football-card manufacturers and others used their images.”  Because Parrish reportedly was dumped from the prior lawsuit because he hadn’t signed a licensing agreement with the non-asterisked NFLPA, the specific basis of his claims is unclear.  Quite possibly, Parrish and the other players will claim that the non-asterisked NFLPA permitted the names and likenesses of retired players to be misappropriated without compensation via, for example, the use of past teams in the Madden franchise with players who were intended to simulate the retired players.

“We are not a union,” NFLPA* spokesman Carl Francis told the Tribune-Review.  “So as to how the case will be handled, I am not sure.”

The decertification of the union, which was done for the sole purpose of obtaining maximum leverage in the labor dispute against the NFL, should have no relevance to the lawsuit.  The claims presumably don’t arise from anything the group did as a union.  Like the prior lawsuit, this one undoubtedly relates to the separate efforts of the non-asterisked NFLPA and its separate licensing operation to generate revenue based on the names and likenesses of current and former players.

We’ll defer any further discussion of the situation until we get a copy of the complaint.  Partially because we know that most of you have had enough legal talk in the last six weeks to last a lifetime.

Permalink 15 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Rumor Mill, Union
15 Responses to “Retired players file another lawsuit against NFLPA*”
  1. FinFan68 says: Apr 19, 2011 9:38 AM

    Wait, so the NFLPA didn’t actually try to get the best deal (that included former players) with the video game licenses and instead chose to pocket the money themselves? That sounds vaguely familiar. I could swear the NFLPA was crying foul (rightfully so) when the owners did the same thing with the TV contracts. The difference is, the owners were prevented from actually doing it while the players did it and seem to feel it is OK, as long as it happens to somebody else.

  2. chapnastier says: Apr 19, 2011 10:01 AM

    @ finfan

    Seems to be the trend of this sham of a union

  3. hedden93 says: Apr 19, 2011 10:05 AM

    Everybody should go to hulu and watch a documentary called Blood Equity. Really good film about hot the NFLPA turned its back on the former players.

  4. poweredtoast says: Apr 19, 2011 10:29 AM

    The former players need to stop trying to make others pay for them today. If they are bitter about their pay in years past, that is their problem to deal with – no one owes them anything. The entitlement some people have is astonishing… go figure these ideals tend to come from people out of union pension bankrupt states, aka idiots.

  5. tomcous says: Apr 19, 2011 10:38 AM

    I’m going to start a petition myself …

    Everyone is crying about money being taken away from them. With $9 Billion to share, can we “The Fans” get some refund on this utter non-sense …

    Ochocinco novelty jerseys … T.O. jerseys for 1 year rental … Season-Ticket donations (oh, including pull price pre-season tickets … wahoo!)

    Billionaire Owners ~ GET OVER YOURSELVES!!!
    Millionaire Players ~ GET OVER YOURSELVES!!!
    (granted not all are millionaires)

    … the only ones winning here are the now … MILLIONAIRE LAWYERS!!!
    ~ Get Over … (well I guess I can save my breath there)

  6. dexterismyhero says: Apr 19, 2011 11:14 AM

    @poweredtoast says:
    Apr 19, 2011 10:29 AM
    The former players need to stop trying to make others pay for them today. If they are bitter about their pay in years past, that is their problem to deal with – no one owes them anything. The entitlement some people have is astonishing… go figure these ideals tend to come from people out of union pension bankrupt states, aka idiots.
    =================================

    Really? So if a company/union you don’t work for anymore uses your likeness to sell something that has made probably a billlion dollars in its time you wouldn’t complain about that?
    You sound more like powdered toast….

  7. jagssb11 says: Apr 19, 2011 11:41 AM

    Don’t the current players realize they are going to eventually be retired players themselves? Helping the retired players now will only help the current players down the road.

  8. mightymightylafootball says: Apr 19, 2011 11:50 AM

    Welcome to the 21st Century NFL:

    Never Forget to Litigate

  9. whitetail28 says: Apr 19, 2011 11:55 AM

    If they are not a union than they players can sign, play, do whatever they want. May as well start negotiations back up with the FAs and start trading, right??? no??? why not??

  10. radrntn says: Apr 19, 2011 12:08 PM

    beam me up scottie, she’s busting apart from all sides

  11. endzonezombie says: Apr 19, 2011 12:16 PM

    @chapnastier and finfan: I’m sure that you two are hoping the lockout will last all year so you don’t have to go back to cleaning stadium latrines. After the new CBA is signed, you will be on here whining about losing your jobs to a union cleaning service. ^O^

  12. angrycorgi says: Apr 19, 2011 12:26 PM

    @FinFan68

    I couldn’t agree more with your comments. The sham marches on…

  13. angrycorgi says: Apr 19, 2011 12:29 PM

    “If they are not a union than they players can sign, play, do whatever they want. May as well start negotiations back up with the FAs and start trading, right??? no??? why not??”

    Because the NFLPA* is “advising them” not to? If there is no union, yet all the players are still operating under one voice and collecting money from the non-existant NFLPA to keep their mouths shut, how in the world will the NLRB NOT find the decert a sham?? Collusion amongst the players is OK and not a sign of unionization, yet collusion amongst the owners is a violation of anti-trust laws?? Pot, meet kettle.

  14. dikshuttle says: Apr 19, 2011 12:38 PM

    Not being a Union isn’t a meme.

    “We are not a Union” should be.

  15. bunjy96 says: Apr 19, 2011 1:39 PM

    In this particular instance, the former players have a legitimate beef.

    The union has been stealing from them for years.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!