Comments on: Agents have cheaper option for malpractice insurance

By: ntr0py

ntr0py — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 18:56:58 +0000

“You mean the NFLPA is “greedy and cares only about making money” (either kickbacks or straight commissions)off THEIR policy instead of protecting the players the best they could? Whoda thunk it?”

Uh, NO. The NFLPA has CHANGED its policy to permit agents to purchase insurance from other carriers.

If the NFLPA wanted to force agents to get insurance through them, they would not have changed the rules.

By: jefftberg

jefftberg — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 18:56:54 +0000

I can get “news” from any of a number of sources. PLEASE keep these types of articles coming. If someone whines, they can skip the article; or perhaps you can create a separate feed of off the field content.

By: CKL

CKL — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 18:11:42 +0000

You mean the NFLPA is “greedy and cares only about making money” (either kickbacks or straight commissions)off THEIR policy instead of protecting the players the best they could? Whoda thunk it?

By: depotnator

depotnator — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 18:03:45 +0000

“Since all of the agents read PFT, this is the easiest way to get the word out.”

Exactly why would agents read second hand info?

By: waitingguilty

waitingguilty — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:45:49 +0000

If only teams could only buy malpractice insurance for front office/GM types.

An underwriter’s view as compared to insuring actors on movie sets:

Bill Pollian = Tom Hanks

Vinny Cerrato = Gary Busey

By: jw731

jw731 — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:32:15 +0000

The teams should have……Mal”content” insurance, in case they give Haynesworth 100 million or something…

By: kevinfromphilly

kevinfromphilly — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:21:02 +0000

What, did Comcast just buy Chubb too?

By: ironhawk

ironhawk — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:17:24 +0000

I was going to ask why the NFLPA cares whether or not agents have malpractice insurance, but it suddenly occurs to me that is probably to ensure the agent has the money to pay whichever player is suing them.