NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE’S SYSTEM FOR

COMPENSATING RETIRED PLAYERS: AN UNEVEN

PLAYING FIELD?

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

COMMERCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

JUNE 26, 2007

Serial No. 110–88

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://judiciary.house.gov 

NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE’S SYSTEM FOR COMPENSATING RETIRED PLAYERS: AN UNEVEN PLAYING FIELD?

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

36–344 PDF 2008

NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE’S SYSTEM FOR

COMPENSATING RETIRED PLAYERS: AN UNEVEN

PLAYING FIELD?

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

COMMERCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

JUNE 26, 2007

Serial No. 110–88

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://judiciary.house.gov 

(II)

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan, Chairman 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

RICK BOUCHER, Virginia 

JERROLD NADLER, New York 

ROBERT C. SCOTT, Virginia 

MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

MAXINE WATERS, California 

MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts 

WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts 

ROBERT WEXLER, Florida 

LINDA T. SA ́ NCHEZ, California 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

HANK JOHNSON, Georgia 

LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York 

ADAM B. SCHIFF, California 

ARTUR DAVIS, Alabama 

DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida 

KEITH ELLISON, Minnesota 

LAMAR SMITH, Texas 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

DANIEL E. LUNGREN, California 

CHRIS CANNON, Utah 

RIC KELLER, Florida 

DARRELL ISSA, California 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia 

STEVE KING, Iowa 

TOM FEENEY, Florida 

TRENT FRANKS, Arizona 

LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas 

JIM JORDAN, Ohio

PERRY APELBAUM, Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

JOSEPH GIBSON, Minority Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

LINDA T. SA ́ NCHEZ, California, Chairwoman 

JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan 

HANK JOHNSON, Georgia 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts 

MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

CHRIS CANNON, Utah 

JIM JORDAN, Ohio 

RIC KELLER, Florida 

TOM FEENEY, Florida 

TRENT FRANKS, Arizona

MICHONE JOHNSON, Chief Counsel 

DANIEL FLORES, Minority Counsel 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

JUNE 26, 2007

OPENING STATEMENT 

Page 

The Honorable Linda T. Sa ́nchez, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of California, and Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Commercial and 

Administrative Law ............................................................................................. 1

The Honorable Tom Feeney, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Florida, and Member, Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative 

Law ........................................................................................................................ 2

The Honorable John Conyers, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the 

State of Michigan, Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, and Member, 

Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law .................................. 4

WITNESSES 

Mr. Dennis Curran, National Football League, New York, NY 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 8

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 11

Mr. Douglas W. Ell, Plan Counsel to the Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Players 

Retirement Plan, Washington, DC 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 16

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 18

Martha Jo Wagner, Esquire, Venable LLP, Washington, DC 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 38

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 40

Mr. Cyril V. (Cy) Smith, Zuckerman Spaeder LLP, Baltimore, MD 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 50

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 52

Mr. Brent Boyd, retired NFL player, Reno, NV 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 72

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 74

Mr. Mike Ditka, former NFL coach, Chicago, IL 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 90

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 91

Mr. Harry Carson, retired NFL player, Franklin Lakes, NJ 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 93

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 95

Mr. Curt Marsh, retired NFL player, Snohomish, WA 

Oral Testimony ..................................................................................................... 97

Prepared Statement ............................................................................................. 99

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

Prepared Statement of the Honorable Steve Cohen, a Representative in Congress from the State of Tennessee ...................................................................... 5

Article written by Barry Gordon, M.D., Ph.D., submitted by the Honorable 

Linda T. Sa ́nchez .................................................................................................. 80

Submission list on file with the Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee 

on Commercial and Administrative Law, from former National Football 

League players ..................................................................................................... 122

Page

IV

APPENDIX 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

Answers to Post-Hearing Questions from Dennis Curran, National Football 

League ................................................................................................................... 132

Answers to Post-Hearing Questions from Douglas W. Ell, Plan Counsel to 

the Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Players Retirement Plan ................................ 135

Answers to Post-Hearing Questions from Martha Jo Wagner, Esquire, 

Venable LLP ......................................................................................................... 137

Answers to Post-Hearing Questions from Cyril V. (Cy) Smith, Zuckerman 

Spaeder LLP ......................................................................................................... 140

Answers to Post-Hearing Questions from Mike Ditka, former NFL coach ......... 141

Answers to Post-Hearing Questions from Harry Carson, retired NFL player ... 289

Answers to Post-Hearing Questions from Curt Marsh, retired NFL player ...... 290

Answers to Post-Hearing Questions from Brent Boyd, Retired NFL player ...... 291

Letter from Douglas W. Ell, Plan Counsel to the Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle 

NFL Players Retirement Plan, to Linda T. Sa ́nchez, Chair, Subcommittee 

on Commercial and Administrative Law ........................................................... 309

(1)

NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE’S SYSTEM FOR 

COMPENSATING RETIRED PLAYERS: AN UNEVEN PLAYING FIELD? 

TUESDAY, JUNE 26, 2007

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCIAL

AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, 

Washington, DC.

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 1:07 p.m., in Room 

2141, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable Linda T. 

Sa ́nchez (Chairwoman of the Subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Representatives Sa ́nchez, Conyers, Johnson, Delahunt, 

Cohen, Cannon, Feeney and Franks. 

Also Present: Representative Waters. 

Staff Present: Eric Tamarkin, Counsel; Stewart Jeffries, Minority 

Counsel. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. This hearing of the Committee on the Judiciary 

Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law will now 

come to order. 

I will recognize myself for a short statement. 

Due to the numerous press accounts concerning the National 

Football League’s treatment of its retired players and the injuries 

many former players have suffered, we are holding today’s oversight hearing to provide Congress the opportunity to consider the 

complex process that must be navigated in order to obtain disability benefits. 

Specifically, the hearing will explore whether the process can be 

improved or streamlined. Additionally, we will explore the various 

requirements of the Retirement Plan, including in certain circumstances, arbitration-determined benefits. 

This hearing is also part of the Subcommittee’s larger examination of the role and impact of arbitration as an alternative dispute 

resolution process. In the 109th Congress, Mr. Cannon chaired a 

Subcommittee hearing examining how sports agents representing 

NFL players can be decertified under the NFL’s collective bargaining agreement and how a neutral arbitrator ultimately presides over a sports agent’s appeal; and earlier this month we held 

a hearing on mandatory arbitration agreements in consumer contracts. 

After announcing this hearing and subsequent research, it has 

become clear that the NFL disability and pension benefits plans 

2

have sparked a significant amount of passionate critics. The various stories relayed by the retirees demonstrate concern not only 

with how the plan is structured but also about how it is administered. 

The NFL is considered to be the most brutal major American 

professional sports league. Half of all players retire because of injury, 60 percent of players suffer concussion, at least one-fourth of 

players suffer multiple concussions, and nearly two-thirds suffer an 

injury serious enough to sideline them for at least half a football 

season. 

To be sure, these retired football players not only choose this career but they actually dedicate themselves to training and competing for jobs in this elite sports league, knowing full well about 

the game’s violent nature. I have heard from many former players 

who said they would still choose to play football, even knowing of 

the physical toll that the game took on them. However, only 284 

former players out of nearly 10,000 currently receive long-term disability benefits. That translates to less than 3 percent of retired 

players, a very small number for any industry, much less one as 

physically demanding as professional football. 

The fundamental question then becomes whether this disability 

process is fair for the retired employees of the NFL. The evidence 

suggests that the vast majority of former players needing benefits 

do not receive them. What is even more troubling is that through 

projects such as the NFL films, the NFL continues to profit off 

those very same players who are denied benefits. Essentially, is the 

NFL, a multibillion dollar organization, fairly treating the employees who helped build it? 

I was heartened to learn last week that the NFL and the NFLPA 

have reportedly taken steps to make it easier for some disabled 

players to collect disability benefits. As initially reported, a retiree 

who has qualified for a Social Security disability benefit would 

automatically qualify to receive an NFL disability benefit as well. 

While I hope this eliminates some red tape in the process, I am reserving judgment as to whether retired players will actually benefit 

until I have had an opportunity to carefully review this change. 

To help us learn more about this issue, we have several witnesses with us this afternoon. We are pleased to have Dennis 

Curran, Senior Vice President and General Counsel for the NFL 

Management Council; Douglas Ell, a principal at Groom Law 

Group and today’s representative for the NFL Players Association; 

Martha Jo Wagner, a member of the Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation Group, Venable LLP law firm; Cyril Smith, 

partner at Zuckerman Spaeder and lawyer for the late former NFL 

player Mike Webster; Mike Ditka, television commentator and 

former NFL player and coach for the Chicago Bears; Harry Carson, 

former NFL player for the New York Giants; Curt Marsh, former 

NFL player for the Oakland Raiders; and Brent Boyd, former NFL 

player for the Minnesota Vikings. 

Accordingly, I look forward to hearing today’s testimony; and, at 

this time, I would now like to recognize my colleague Mr. Feeney, 

for the minority opening comments. Mr. Feeney. 

Mr. FEENEY. Thank you, Madam Chairman; and I am grateful 

for this opportunity. 

3

I am sitting in for the Ranking Member, Mr. Cannon, who would 

like me to read into the record Mr. Cannon’s opening statement. 

Today marks the second time in 6 months that the Subcommittee 

on Commercial and Administrative Law has met to hear complaints by current or former NFL players about their union representation, the NFL Players Association, or NFLPA. I say that not 

to take sides but only to note the frequency with which these concerns seem to arise. 

Today’s hearing is about the process former NFL players must 

undergo to receive disability compensation under the NFL’s Bert 

Bell/Pete Rozelle Retirement Plan. Those former players have a 

number of complaints including that the NFLPA only represents 

the current players’ interests, often at the expense of former players. They argue the disability payments to former employers are 

very low, particularly in a league that makes billions of dollars annually. They also contend that the disability application process is 

unnecessarily complicated and that it encourages doctor shopping 

by the NFL and NFLPA. 

For their part, the NFL and NFLPA contend many of the procedural hoops and hurdles that the players are concerned about are 

required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 

otherwise known as ERISA. Broadly speaking, ERISA and the regulations promulgated by the Department of Labor provide minimum due process requirements that employers are required to develop in establishing their plans. 

ERISA is a highly complicated area of the law and one over 

which the House Judiciary does not have jurisdiction. I am pleased, 

however, that we do have an expert on ERISA here today to testify, 

Ms. Wagner. Ms. Wagner can speak to the NFL compliance with 

existing ERISA laws and regulations and also provide some context 

as to the other types of procedures, including the use of arbitration, 

that are permissible under ERISA, the use of disability plans, the 

use of arbitration that gives rise to the Committee’s jurisdiction. 

It seems that these former players’ complaints have already 

begun to have some effect, as the NFL and NFLPA have recently 

announced they have a plan to help streamline the disability 

claims process. I look forward to hearing their testimony in this regard. 

I am also pleased that the league has started to take steps to 

limit the kind of traumatic brain injuries that afflict former players 

such as Mr. Mike Webster and Mr. Brent Boyd. How the NFL and 

NFLPA choose to compensate past players for their injuries, however, is a different matter and one that we will hear a lot about 

today. 

Finally, I want this hearing to obtain the facts in this situation. 

It is understandable that this issue can engender strong feelings on 

both sides of the argument, but it is not helpful for either side to 

say, as Mr. Upshaw reportedly did recently of a certain former 

player, that he was going to quote, break his damn neck, end of 

quotes. 

With any luck, all parties can learn something from this hearing 

and move forward with a plan which is satisfactory to all involved 

and will help take care of the needs of all former players. 

With that, I yield back the balance of my time. 

4

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. I thank the gentleman for his statement. 

I would now at this time like to recognize Mr. Conyers, the Vice 

Chair of this Subcommittee and the Chairman of the Committee on 

the Judiciary. 

Chairman CONYERS. My congratulations to you, Chairwoman 

Sa ́nchez, for holding this hearing in which we look at the compensation system for retired football players and raise the question, 

an uneven playing field? 

Arbitration is supposed to give parties an alternative means of 

settling differences with the help of an impartial decision making 

at less burden and expenses than full-blown litigation, but, to work 

effectively, the process has to fairly protect everybody’s rights. Last 

December, this Subcommittee examined issues concerning whether 

the arbitration procedures employed by the National Football 

League Players Association meets this standard. Today, we examine how the League’s system compensates its retired players and 

further considers the potential impact of arbitration not being readily available in cases of disability claims. 

Now, there are three disturbing concerns I would raise to all of 

our distinguished witnesses. First, the NFL’s treatment of its retired players with respect to disability and pension benefits is problematic. As many of us know, the average football athlete is not a 

marquee player but plays in the league for less than 4 years and 

often retires because of injury. Upon retirement, he receives only 

$14,500 in pension benefits, less than half the amount received by 

an average retired Major League baseball player. 

Of 10,000 retired NFL players, it is estimated that less than 300 

receive long-term disability payments. Several recent well-publicized cases highlight the resulting problems. 

For example, Pittsburgh Steelers center Mike Webster. The court recently awarded his estate more than $1.1 million in disability 

payments that the NFL’s Retirement Plan administrators claimed 

he was not entitled to receive. 

Or take Brian DeMarco, former offensive lineman for the Jacksonville Jaguars. According to the Denver Post, Mr. DeMarco’s 

back was broken in 17 places and he retired due to severe health 

problems after the 1999 season. But he has never been able to get 

NFL disability benefits. His disabilities were so extensive that he 

can’t hold a telephone to his ear. In the last 4 years, Mr. DeMarco 

and his family have been homeless on three occasions. 

Then there is the problem of brain concussions suffered by NFL 

players, which have justifiably received significant recent attention 

just last week. Sporting News ran a cover story on this distressing 

problem. According to a leading neuropathologist, brain damage resulting from numerous concussions suffered by Philadelphia Eagles 

safety Andre Waters during his career led to his depression and 

suicide. 

Former Chicago Bears linebacker Larry Morris suffers from severe dementia, largely as a result of concussions suffered while 

playing football. Mr. Morris is a former teammate of one of our witnesses today, Mr. Ditka. 

Finally, I am concerned about the extent to which these issues 

are attributable to the administration of the NFL Retirement Plan, 

and I am troubled by the fact that arbitration is not readily availVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:09 Jul 15, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\WORK\COMM\062607\36344.000 HJUD1 PsN: 36344
5

able in cases of disability claims. The process for resolving disputes 

concerning player benefits and submission of disputes to a benefit 

arbitrator does not usually apply to retirement or disability benefits. Rather, the plan’s Retirement Board hears appeals of its own 

decisions instead of submitting appeals to an arbitrator, and this 

practice has drawn significant criticism. 

So this Subcommittee has recognized the importance of arbitration as an alternative dispute mechanism and has considered its 

use in other contexts as well, and the problem we are considering 

today may present an opportunity for expanded use of arbitration. 

I welcome all of the witnesses, and I lift my hat in a salute to 

those players who have given their blood and sweat and tears to 

the National Football League, and I thank the Chairwoman for her 

indulgence. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. I thank the gentleman for his statement. 

Without objection other Members’ opening statements will be included for the record. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Cohen follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE STEVE COHEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TENNESSEE

Football is almost as hallowed a national pastime as baseball. Much of the sport’s 

status and popularity is due to the athleticism and talent of professional football 

players, and the growth of professional football as a business can be attributed to 

their hard work. Sadly, evidence suggests that many older retired players—like 

some of our witnesses today—are not being adequately taken care of by the groups 

that they helped to grow, like the National Football League and its Players Association. Many of these retired players suffer from physical injuries that they sustained 

during the course of their professional football careers, yet the NFL’s disability and 

retirement plans do no sufficiently support these retired players’ needs. I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today to determine how we can improve the 

compensation system for retired players.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Madam Chair? 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Yes, Mr. Delahunt. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. I don’t want to make an opening statement, but 

I note the presence of our colleague from California who serves on 

the full Committee, as you are aware, but is not a Member of the 

Subcommittee. I would ask for unanimous consent that she be allowed to participate in the Subcommittee hearing today and be 

given the privileges of a Subcommittee Member for the purposes of 

this hearing. 

I would also note for the record that I note her distinguished 

spouse is here, and I am aware of the fact that he was a former 

player himself in the NFL. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Without objection, so ordered. 

Mr. FEENEY. Madam Chairman, I object. As the Chairman has 

been advised——

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. The gentleman will state his objection. 

Mr. FEENEY. The objection is that the rules of the full Committee 

provide that only Members of the Subcommittee can participate 

without unanimous consent. The position of the minority has been 

so far this year and on behalf of the Ranking Member of the full 

Committee, Mr. Smith, I am objecting today to the participation. 

This is certainly not, as the gentlelady, my friend from California, 

knows, anything personal. I know she has a keen interest in this. 

6

But the truth of the matter is that we had a practice from the 

beginning of the year to objecting to the participation of any Member. Setting a precedent that would allow one Member of a Subcommittee to participate could lead to a situation where 10 other 

Members might also want to participate. That would not serve the 

Committee well. 

And, again, this is a rule adopted by the full Committee, Republicans and Democrats; and we are simply asking that the rules be 

followed today. House rule——

Chairman CONYERS. Would my colleague yield to me? 

Mr. FEENEY. I would be happy to yield. 

Chairman CONYERS. Thank you, Mr. Feeney. 

I just wanted to remind you that in most of the other Subcommittees in Judiciary, this is a routine courtesy that we extend 

to Members who have a deep concern and interest; and in the case 

of the gentlelady from California, Maxine Waters, her husband is 

a former professional football player. I mean, give me a break. 

Mr. FEENEY. Well, Mr.——

Mr. DELAHUNT. Would the gentleman yield to me for a moment? 

Mr. FEENEY. Not until I respond to my friend, the Chairman of 

the full Committee. 

The truth of the matter is, as I stated earlier, I have been asked 

by the Ranking Member of the full Committee to enforce their objection of the rules today. I don’t have any authority to undermine 

his request of me, because I promised him that I would do my job 

and uphold his understanding of the Committee rules. 

In addition, I understand that, while I am not a Member of every 

Subcommittee, that the precedent may or may not be as you described it. In fact, every opportunity that we have needed to object 

to the participation of any Member—so this is not directed at anybody today—every opportunity the minority has. 

Again, at the request of the Ranking Member, we have objectively asked that the rules be followed. 

So, with that, I would ask that the Committee sustain my objection. 

I would be happy to yield to my friend from Massachusetts. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. I can assure the Ranking Member that—he alluded to the fact that maybe 10 other Members would show up to 

participate; and if that would be the case, I would register an objection myself. But I think for the reasons that I and the Ranking 

Member articulated, that as a matter of common courtesy, and 

given—I am sure presented with these facts to the Ranking Member of the full Committee, one can assume that he would extend 

that courtesy to Ms. Waters, and I would hope that you would——

Mr. FEENEY. Reclaiming my time to answer my good friend from 

Massachusetts. I would hope that there would be a possibility that 

if a specific Member in a unique situation had, knowing full well 

the Ranking Member of the full Committee, Mr. Smith, had objected repeatedly, that they would go make that request. Because 

I have been asked to enforce the Committee rules today. I don’t 

have any authority—having committed to do that—to do anything 

else. 

As the gentleman from Massachusetts knows, we don’t play 11 

on 11 here. The minority has very few things that can protect it, 

7

and the rules are about it. So we are in the routine of enforcing 

the rules, this being one of them. And if the gentlelady in the future would like to go speak to the Ranking Member, I certainly 

would yield to the discretion of the Ranking Member. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. The Chair is prepared to rule. The Member correctly states the House rule and the interpretation of the House 

rule by the House parliamentarians. I am going to sustain your objection. But I do, however, want to point out a few things that I 

think are noteworthy. 

Mr. FEENEY. Before the Chairman goes, could I make one—what 

I have asked is that if the gentlelady from California would like to 

either propound questions in writing or make a statement that I 

would not object to that request because I know she does have a 

specific interest here. It is more the process of the Committee in 

the 5 minutes and the time constraints and the fact the minority 

can’t be everywhere at once. We have had to play zone defense. So 

if somebody would make that motion, Madam Chairman, I would 

not object to that. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Do I have a motion from a Member of the Committee? Okay. 

Then I would ask unanimous consent that the gentlelady from 

California, Ms. Waters, be allowed to participate in the form of a 

written statement and questions to the witnesses, although she 

will not be allowed to participate verbally in the proceedings today. 

Before we move on, though, I do want to note for the record that 

I did receive prior consent from the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee to allow Ms. Waters to participate in the hearing today. 

She obviously has an interest in this issue, as her husband is a 

former NFL player. And no pun intended, but I think that the minority doesn’t seem to be playing in a very sportsmanlike manner 

today. But the objection is a proper objection, and it is sustained. 

We will allow, as I said, Ms. Waters—there was no objection to 

the unanimous consent request that she be allowed to participate 

in the form of written questions and written statement. 

Without objection, the Chair will be authorized to declare a recess of the hearing; and I am now at this time pleased to introduce 

the witnesses for the first panel of today’s hearing. 

The first witness on our panel is Dennis Curran, Senior Vice 

President and General Counsel for the NFL Management Council, 

the bargaining representative of the 32 members of the NFL. Mr. 

Curran and his staff administer the various player benefit plans, 

including the NFL severance plan, annuity plan, retirement and 

disability plans and second career savings plan. 

Prior to being appointed General Counsel, Mr. Curran—am I pronouncing that correctly? 

Mr. CURRAN. Yes, you are. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you—served as Labor Relations Counsel to 

NFL Management Council from 1980 to 1990, and he was Labor 

Relations Counsel to National and then Pan American Airways. 

We thank you for your presence today. 

Our second witness is Douglas Ell, a principal at Groom Law 

Group. Mr. Ell specializes in legislative tax fiduciary and collective 

bargaining issues arising from the design and management of employee benefit plans. Mr. Ell has also aided the NFL Players AssoVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:09 Jul 15, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\WORK\COMM\062607\36344.000 HJUD1 PsN: 36344
8

ciation in improving player benefits in four collective bargaining 

agreements. 

Our third witness is Martha Jo Wagner, a member of Venable 

LLP’s Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation Group. Ms. 

Wagner focuses her practice on benefit and fiduciary claims resolution and litigation, process review and redesign and lawful plan 

compliance. Ms. Wagner currently serves as the management coChair of the ABA section of Labor and Employment Law Employee 

Benefits Committee. 

We welcome you, Ms. Wagner. 

Our final witness on our first panel is Cyril Smith. Mr. Smith 

is a partner in Zuckerman Spaeder LLP, specializing in complex 

civil, criminal cases and employment and labor litigation. Mr. 

Smith has handled a variety of plaintiffs’ cases including the lawsuit of Mike Webster, former NFL player for the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Kansas City Chiefs, against the National Football 

League for disability payments. 

I want to thank you all for your willingness to participate in today’s hearing. Without objection, your written statements will be 

placed into the record in their entirety; and we would ask that you 

limit your oral remarks to 5 minutes. 

You will note that on the table there we have a lighting system 

that starts with a green light. At 4 minutes, it turns yellow. That 

is your warning that you have a minute. Then it will turn red 

when the 5 minutes are up. If you should still be testifying by the 

time the red light comes on, please finish your last thought to wrap 

up your testimony so that all of the witnesses will have a chance 

to testify. 

And I want to remind our witnesses that, although we are not 

requiring sworn testimony, the criminal penalties relating to false 

statements before Congress do apply to your comments today. So 

keep that in mind. 

After each witness has presented his or her testimony, Subcommittee Members will be permitted to ask questions subject to 

the 5-minute limit. 

So, with that, everybody understands the rules. 

One more rule that I will impose is, when you begin your testimony, make sure that you turn your microphones on so that the 

proceedings can be recorded. 

Mr. Curran, you are up first. Would you please proceed with your 

testimony. 

TESTIMONY OF DENNIS CURRAN,

NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE, NEW YORK, NY 

Mr. CURRAN. Congresswoman Sa ́nchez, Congressman Feeney and 

Members of the Committee, I appreciate the invitation to be here 

on behalf of the National Football League today. 

My name is Dennis Curran, as was just mentioned. I have been 

with the League for 27 years. As a Senior Vice President, I have 

been in charge of negotiating player benefits for the League with 

the Players Association, beginning in 1982 and then in 1993, 1998, 

2002 and 2006. 

With me today is Valerie Cross, our Director of Player Benefits, 

who has been with the League 25 years. She is also very familiar 

9

with the administration of our plans, and I hope between the two 

of us we will be able to answer any questions you might have. 

If you take a look at how this is set up, all these retirement and 

disability benefits are sent through collective bargaining. The Management Council of the League sits down with the union, and in 

each of these years we negotiate these benefits, and we have continuously improved them. 

They are set by, again, the bargaining parties. The trustees that 

administer the plans have no discretion to change those rules. They 

couldn’t say that age 55 is the wrong year; let’s make them wait 

until 60. They can’t say that this disability criterion is wrong; let’s 

ignore it. The trustees have to follow what collective bargaining 

gives them, and we think they do that very well. 

The NFL is proud of its comprehensive post-career benefits, a lot 

of which you just mentioned, Madam Chairwoman, in your opening 

statement. From leaving football when you receive severance pay 

to age 55 when you receive your retirement, there is a variety of 

post-career benefits now available to our players. 

If you look back at the collective bargaining history, what comes 

through again and again is that this union and this League continue to improve existing benefits and add benefits to the post-career funds. As an example, if you look at the Bert Bell Plan, which 

is the funding vehicle for retirement and disability benefits, in 

1982, when I started, there was $88 million in there. Now there is 

$1.1 billion done through club contributions. We don’t require player contributions to retirement or disabilities. Why has it gotten so 

big? Because we keep on taking on more and more. 

Before, players that played before 1959 had no pension, and 

there was no legal obligation to give them a pension. But this 

union and this League brought them into the Retirement Plan and 

have continuously improved their benefits over time. 

You look to see how the players qualify in the first place. Initially, you had to have 5 years in the League. This union and this 

League brought down the qualifications to 3 years. So those players 

who have 3- and 4-year careers are now covered for pension and 

for disability benefits. 

We have continuously raised the amount of the retirement credits, most recently by 25 percent, for those people in the League before 1982 and by 10 percent thereafter. And although not in the 

Bert Bell Plan, it bears mention that we have established a dementia plan called the 88 Plan which gives benefits for medical conditions dealing with dementia both at home and in institutions. 

Now all of the funding for these things, all the funding that goes 

into this plan comes from the NFL clubs. We put in $126 million 

for pensions and disabilities last year; and, over the next 6 years, 

we are going to put $700 million more into this plan in order to 

fund those benefits that we promised to give. 

That $826 million is committed dollars. That is what it is going 

to take to fund these benefits over time, and we are happy to do 

that. 

And it should be pointed out that, once the money is in the fund, 

it cannot revert to the League. The monies in these funds must go 

for the benefit of the participants. The money we put in again 

under no circumstances comes back to us. There is no motivation 

10

for us not to give benefits or retirement because it never returns 

to us. 

Nor is this fund static. Last year alone, $55 million in pension 

was given out and about $20 million in disabilities. 

And if you look at the level of the disabilities themselves, they 

have been continuously improved. The active football has gone from 

$100,000 to $224,000; active nonfootball from $90,000 to $134,000; 

and football degenerative from $75,000 to $110,000. 

Again, we fund all these benefits willingly, and we are happy to 

do it, and we think that that is a very generous overall system for 

our former players. 

To talk briefly about the red tape that has been discussed, the 

alleged red tape in the application process, again, it is run by six 

trustees which are fiduciaries of the plan. None of them are current 

players. Three appointed by the NFL, three appointed by the Players Association. Their job is to see the money is spent, but it is 

spent correctly on players who are either eligible for retirement or 

eligible for disabilities. 

The fiduciary duty that they exercise is a personal one. They 

have to determine a series of classifications to see if disabilities are 

appropriate. They have to look a lot of times at the medical to see 

whether a person is able to play or whether he gets the requisite 

level of percentage disability. They have to look at why that occurred; was it football related or not? They have to look to see what 

time the benefit is appropriate. All those things they do with a fiduciary responsibility. 

I think you will hear today from everyone here that the time limits that are observed are well within ERISA, well within Federal 

laws. Now, from time to time, some cases do require more time. 

What happens is that the medical evidence isn’t clear. Perhaps the 

causation isn’t clear. And sometimes experts have to come in or 

more than one doctor. 

So if you don’t qualify at the initial level, we appeal to the Retirement Board. You will have another doctor by Federal law. So 

now we have two doctors, and if it is still vague or confusing or not 

clear, then we have what is a tiebreaker, a medical advisory physician who will be binding on the trustees as to the medical condition. 

Unfortunately, when it gets——

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Mr. Curran, your time has expired. It goes quite 

quickly. But if you could finish that last thought. 

Mr. CURRAN. Can we improve? Yes. We are trying to look at 

ways of speeding up the process. We have adopted the Social Security T and P standards, and we are looking to form an alliance with 

many other funds, the Players Assistance Trust, the Dire Need 

Fund, and NFL Charities to get money to those players who don’t 

qualify for total and permanent disabilities but have financial 

needs, either medical or nonmedical. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you, Mr. Curran. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Curran follows:]

11

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DENNIS CURRAN


DC-1.eps
12


DC-2.eps
13


DC-3.eps
14


DC-4.eps
15


DC-5.eps
16

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Mr. Ell, your time begins now. 

TESTIMONY OF DOUGLAS W. ELL, PLAN COUNSEL TO THE 

BERT BELL/PETE ROZELLE NFL PLAYERS RETIREMENT 

PLAN, WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. ELL. Good afternoon. My name is Douglas Ell. I am with the 

Groom Law Group, and I have the privilege of serving as Plan 

Counsel to the Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan. 

I am here today on behalf of the NFL Players Association. We appreciate the opportunity to appear and provide testimony. 

I am also pleased to have here with me today Michele YarasDavis, head of the Benefits Department of the NFLPA, who has 

helped players get benefits for many years. 

I also wish to acknowledge the presence here today of David 

Duerson. Mr. Duerson serves as one of the six voting members of 

our Retirement Board. Mr. Duerson played 11 seasons in the NFL; 

four of those years he was all pro. He has two Super Bowl rings. 

Mr. Duerson is a successful businessman and has a Masters from 

the Harvard Business School. 

Madam Chairwoman and Members of this Committee: Unfortunately, much of what has been said or written about the benefits 

available to NFL players is either wrong or misleading. I have described the benefits in some detail in my written statement, which 

also contains a variety of data. I hope we will answer many of your 

questions. 

In my brief time here now I would like to just go over some brief 

points. 

First, benefits from NFL players come from collective bargaining. 

Together, the Players Association and the NFL decide on the formula for benefits and the eligibility requirements and benefit levels 

for disability benefits. The collective bargaining agreement allocates a percentage of revenues for players’ salaries and benefits, 

and all of the player benefits come out of that piece of the pie. 

But the parties do not run the plans themselves. Claims are decided by the fiduciaries of the benefit plans. In other words, when 

someone says that the NFL refused to pay disability benefits or 

that the Players Association rejected a disability claim, you know 

immediately that statement is not accurate. Perhaps that person 

does not know that the plans exist. 

Let me just offer a few comments on retirement benefits. 

Players receive a monthly pension based on the years that they 

play, not on how much they earn. If they are paid for three or more 

games in a season, they earn a credited season; and if they have 

three or more credited seasons, they are vested and entitled to a 

pension. I understand there are 2,387 retirees currently who get an 

average of $1,536 a month, or $18,440 a year. 

Since 1993, the Players Association has fought for and achieved 

benefit improvements in bargaining. In 1993, the Retirement Plan 

was expanded to include the League’s founding members, the Pre59ers, over 700 strong, who were not previously in the plan. 

Pensions were increased in 1993, 1998, 2002, and 2006. In each 

case, the older players got the largest increase. These increases are 

unprecedented. 

17

In 2002, when the pensions of the older players were doubled, 

the head of the Pension Rights Center noted that ‘‘nobody has 

reached back and given a pension raise to retired workers of anything approaching this magnitude.’’

It is true that a number of former players receive small pensions; 

and when you look at the individual cases, I think you will find 

that it is often because of the voluntary choices they made. Many 

started at age 45, many elected to take the lion’s share of their 

pension prior to age 62, and some have had all or a portion of their 

benefits assigned to their ex-spouse in divorce. 

Please let me turn now to disability benefits. We believe these 

are the most generous disability benefits in professional sports, 

perhaps in the entire business world. Vested players can get total 

and permanent disability benefits if they are unable to work for 

any reason at any time, even decades after their career ends. Benefits can be as large as $224,000 a year for life. 

I will let Ms. Wagner describe ERISA’s rules for processing and 

claims. 

We have 317 players on disability. I would like to emphasize that 

Mr. Duerson and his fellow fiduciaries are required by Federal law 

to follow the terms of the plan. They get to interpret the rules. 

They don’t get to make them up. 

I am amazed by some of the things written about our disability 

benefits. The collective bargaining process is an ongoing process, 

and the parties are looking for ways to improve benefits in the system. Our new 88 Plan for players with dementia is one example. 

Of over 45 decided cases so far, more than 90 percent of the players 

have received the benefit. 

Allowing Social Security determinations as a separate, alternate 

way to get total and permanent disability benefits is a second improvement. 

I would like to conclude with three points. 

First, all injured players are strongly advised to file claims for 

workers compensation. The Players Association has a panel of lawyers to help them. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. The time of the gentleman has expired. If you 

could just wrap up the final thought. 

Mr. ELL. My final thought is that there are many players and 

beneficiaries who are grateful for what has been done here; and in 

that regard I would like to note the presence today of Stan White, 

Brig Owens, Doc Walker, Jean Fugett, Andre Collins and Ray 

Schoenke. 

Thank you. I will be pleased to answer questions. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ell follows:]

18

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DOUGLAS W. ELL


DWE-1.eps
19


DWE-2.eps
20


DWE-3.eps
21


DWE-4.eps
22


DWE-5.eps
23


DWE-6.eps
24


DWE-7.eps
25


DWE-8.eps
26


DWE-9.eps
27


DWE-10.eps
28


DWE-11.eps
29


DWE-12.eps
30


DWE-13.eps
31


DWE-14.eps
32


DWE-15.eps
33


DWE-16.eps
34


DWE-17.eps
35


DWE-18.eps
36


DWE-19.eps
37


DWE-20.eps
38

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Ms. Wagner, you are up. 

TESTIMONY OF MARTHA JO WAGNER, ESQUIRE,

VENABLE LLP, WASHINGTON, DC 

Ms. WAGNER. Thank you. 

Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman, Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to testify today. 

As noted, my name is Martha Jo Wagner and I am a partner in 

the Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation Group of 

Venable LLP in Washington, DC. I have practiced law in the area 

of employee benefits for 25 years. Throughout that period, I have 

advised plan administrators about their responsibilities under the 

laws and regulations that apply to benefit claims review and have 

litigated benefit claims cases nationwide. 

I was asked to testify today regarding whether the disability 

claims procedures described in the Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL 

Player Retirement Plan and the NFL Player Supplemental Disability Plan were required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended. My written testimony addresses 

the review procedures in both the retirement and supplemental disability plans, but my oral testimony today will address only the disability claims procedures described in the current Retirement Plan 

documents. Neither my oral nor written testimony addresses how 

the disability claims procedures have been implemented. 

My oral testimony will cover two areas: first, the claims procedure required by ERISA and the claims procedure regulation promulgated by the Department of Labor; and, second, several of the 

significant claims review procedures in the Retirement Plan. 

ERISA sets out very broad parameters for reviewing and granting or denying claims for benefits. ERISA requires a benefit plan 

to provide adequate written notice to every claimant whose claim 

for benefits has been denied. ERISA also requires that every claimant whose benefit claim has been denied be provided a reasonable 

opportunity for a full and fair review of the denial by the appropriate fiduciary named in the plan. Finally, ERISA requires benefits be granted or denied only in accordance with the terms of the 

plan and other governing plan documents. 

Effective January 1, 2002, for plans such as those at issue here, 

the Department of Labor issued a significantly revised claims procedure regulation setting forth minimum requirements for claims 

review, including at least two levels of mandatory review. The regulation includes detailed time frames for decision making, detailed 

requirements for the contents of adverse benefit determinations 

and other detailed procedural requirements. In addition, ERISA 

permits plans to supplement the claims procedure required by the 

regulation and, for practical reasons, plans generally do so. 

I will now briefly highlight five of the significant provisions of 

the Retirement Plan relating to disability claims review. 

First is arbitration of certain deadlocked disputes. The Retirement Plan includes a two-step review process involving initial review of a disability claim by a Disability Committee and review on 

appeal by the Retirement Board. If the two voting members of the 

Disability Committee are deadlocked, the claim is deemed to be denied. In contrast, if the six voting members of the Retirement 

39

Board deadlock, three members of the Retirement Board can affirmatively vote to submit the matter to binding arbitration. 

These arbitration positions are not specifically required by 

ERISA or the regulation. However, I believe the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, commonly referred to as the Taft-Hartley Act, requires arbitration of trustee deadlocks concerning administration of a benefit fund. 

Second is retroactive limits on claims. Under the Retirement 

Plan, disability benefits will not be paid for certain periods that 

precede receipt of a written application for benefits unless the player is physically or mentally incapacitated in a manner that substantially interferes with the filing of the claim. Such limits are not 

specifically required or precluded by ERISA or the regulation. 

Third is required medical examinations. A player may be required to submit to periodic medical examinations by a medical dispute arbitrator or a competent physician selected by a reviewing 

entity. These provisions are not required by ERISA or the regulation but are commonly included in disability plans. 

Fourth is a claims review process. The Retirement Plan includes 

detailed timetables for review of claims, detailed requirements for 

the content of adverse benefit determinations and other procedural 

requirements. These provisions conform to the minimum requirements of the regulation with two exceptions which are discussed in 

my written testimony. 

Fifth is the application of the standard of review. Reviewing 

courts either apply the de novo standard of review or the abuse of 

discretion standard of review, depending in part upon the language 

of the plan and other governing plan documents. Based on the 

grants of discretionary authority to both reviewing entities under 

the plans, I would expect their determinations to be reviewed 

under the abuse of discretion standard of review. Neither ERISA 

nor the regulation require or preclude such grants of discretionary 

authority. 

In summary, the initial claims review process and the review 

process on appeal described in the Retirement Plan is for the most 

part specifically required by the ERISA claims procedure regulation. The provisions requiring arbitration of certain deadlocked disputes, retroactive limits on claims, required medical examinations, 

and grants of discretion in the Retirement Plan are not specifically 

required or precluded by ERISA or the regulation. However, arbitration of certain deadlocked disputes in the Retirement Plan may 

be required by the Taft-Hartley Act, and other plan provisions may 

be necessary for practical reasons. 

I thank the Subcommittee for its time and attention, and will be 

happy to take questions when appropriate. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you for your testimony, Ms. Wagner. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Wagner follows:]

40

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARTHA JO WAGNER


MJW-1.eps
41


MJW-2.eps
42


MJW-3.eps
43


MJW-4.eps
44


MJW-5.eps
45


MJW-6.eps
46


MJW-7.eps
47


MJW-8.eps
48


MJW-9.eps
49


MJW-10.eps
50

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. I would like to welcome Mr. Smith to begin his testimony at this time. 

TESTIMONY OF CYRIL V. (CY) SMITH,

ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP, BALTIMORE, MD 

Mr. SMITH. Madam Chairwoman, Ranking Member Cannon, 

Members of the Subcommittee, thanks for the opportunity to testify 

today. 

As you know, I am Cy Smith; and I am an attorney in private 

practice in Baltimore at the firm of Zuckerman Spaeder. I have 

represented a number of individuals and pension plans in disputes 

over pension benefits under ERISA, but for the last 3 years I have 

had the honor of representing the family of Mike Webster, his estate, in finally obtaining full disability benefits from the NFL’s pension plan. 

I note that Mike—who is no longer with us—that Mike’s son, 

Garrett, is with us today. 

As many of you probably know, Mike played center for the Steelers. He was on their Super Bowl teams. He was named to the 

NFL’s all-time team, and he was both a great player and person. 

It was very clear the violent world of NFL football had given him 

repeated concussions and disabling brain injuries. Unfortunately, it 

took him 7 years from the time that his first application was filed 

with the pension plan to a final court ruling which awarded him 

full benefits. Four years of that were just to get a final decision 

from the plan, even before he got to Federal court, to the point that 

he died in 2002 before he actually got a final decision from the 

plan. 

In his case, there was unanimous medical evidence about whether he was totally and permanently disabled, why that happened 

and when it happened. A psychologist, a psychiatrist, a neurologist 

who were appointed by the pension plan all found that he had multiple head injuries. 

But, despite this overwhelming evidence, the pension plan refused to pay him full benefits. They refused to credit what his 

treating physician said. They relied on observations by Mike’s 

oncologist, his cancer doctor, about whether he had a brain injury. 

They tried to discredit their own doctor, who is a board-certified 

neurologist. 

The bottom line in my experience was that at every turn the plan 

delayed and erected barriers to prompt and fair consideration of his 

claim. He had no choice but to go to Federal court in Baltimore in 

2004. 

Over the next 3 years, four different Federal judges agreed that 

the plan was not just wrong but had abused its discretion. One 

judge said that, given the overwhelming evidence, the plan’s decision indicates culpable conduct, if not bad faith. Mr. Ell said that 

statements that he had heard about the plan were wrong or misleading. I will let the judicial record speak for itself. 

Another judge said it would require a leap of faith to rule for the 

plan. 

In the end, Mike Webster won, although he died before he could 

actually enjoy that victory. But, along the way, the plan spent hundreds of thousands of dollars for attorneys fees, both their attorVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:09 Jul 15, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\WORK\COMM\062607\36344.000 HJUD1 PsN: 36344
51

neys fees and Mike Webster’s. That is money that could have gone 

to player benefits but was used to try and defend against Mike’s 

meritorious claims. 

It would be terrific if I could say to all of you today that the 

NFL’s pension plan learned a lesson from this review, that it is on 

the way to reform. Sadly, that is not the case. The day after the 

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Mike and his estate, Gene Upshaw, who picks one-half of the members on the Retirement Board—the other half are picked by the NFL—said that 

he would do exactly the same thing the next day. It is unfortunate 

that Mr. Upshaw can’t be here today to explain his remarks. 

Since the courts ruled in Mike Upshaw’s case, I have reviewed 

dozens of other claims. All too often, I see the same pattern of obstruction by the plan in the case, in many cases much worse than 

other disability benefit schemes that I have reviewed: lengthy 

delays, doctor shopping, a system whereby one objection can deny 

benefits for an individual, a refusal to consider the testimony of 

treating physicians or a clear majority of the medical evidence. 

Ms. Wagner in her remarks properly noted that she wouldn’t address implementation of the plan, but that is one of the big problems that we have here. In many ways, Mike Upshaw’s case was 

a warning sign, a warning bell and a loud one, that the disability 

plan here is broken, badly broken and that it urgently needs repair, as the former players who will testify today will tell you. 

How can the plan be fixed? There are some basic changes that 

are needed for starters. 

One would be a short deadline for the plan to decide claims, not 

4 years but maybe 45 days. Many other disability plans are able 

to do that. They should give deference to what treating physicians 

tell them, and they should increase the use of neutral arbitrators 

to decide issues. 

With respect to changes that have been recently discussed in the 

way the plan works, the Social Security standard, the devil is always in the details. Of course we don’t know what those details 

are. But let me tell you one thing. It is absolutely clear that if you 

had the Social Security standard in effect, it wouldn’t have changed 

the result in Mike Webster’s case because it is a question of how 

the plan is implemented. 

What is really needed is something that can’t be accomplished 

through either litigation or legislation, and that is to have new 

leadership on the Retirement Board that is genuinely committed to 

giving players a fair shake here. Whatever it costs, it costs. The 

NFL can afford to honor the commitments that are in the plan document already without having to change them. 

Let me just sum up by saying that I am here on a panel with 

other lawyers. Some of my best friends are lawyers. Many of you 

are lawyers, and I like practicing law. And there are going to be 

more lawsuits, there is going to be more litigation, but nothing will 

change the fundamental problem here until the league and the 

union decide that they want to come through on the commitments 

that are already there in the plan document, spelled out in the 

plan document. I hope that this Committee’s hearings are an important first step in that effort, and I would be happy to answer 

any questions. Thank you 

52

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you, Mr. Smith. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CY SMITH


CS-1.eps
53


CS-2.eps
54


CS-3.eps
55


CS-4.eps
56


CS-5.eps
57


CS-6.eps
58


CS-7.eps
59


CS-8.eps
60


CS-9.eps
61


CS-10.eps
62


CS-11.eps
63


CS-12.eps
64


CS-13.eps
65


CS-14.eps
66


CS-15.eps
67


CS-16.eps
68


CS-17.eps
69


CS-18.eps
70


CS-19.eps
71

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. The Chair is going to declare a brief 5-minute recess, which will be 5 minutes, so don’t wander off, so we can impanel our second panel of witnesses. So we will be in recess for 5 

minutes. 

[Recess.] 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. I would please ask the media to clear the well so 

we can begin. 

Mr. COHEN. Madam Chair? 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Yes. 

Mr. COHEN. I would like to request that Congressman Waters be 

allowed to be on the taxi squad. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Pardon me? The Chair is unfamiliar with the term 

‘‘taxi squad.’’ could you enlighten her? 

Mr. COHEN. Well, that is for folks who can’t officially be on the 

team, but they kind of hang around the team, and if there is an 

injury, they get to come in sometimes. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. I believe that that issue will be allowed shortly, if 

you will indulge the Chair. 

Mr. COHEN. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. It is now my pleasure to introduce our second 

panel of distinguished witnesses. We have with us this morning—

this afternoon rather, Brent Boyd, who will be our first witness. 

Mr. Boyd was drafted by the Minnesota Vikings in 1980 and remained with the team until 1986. Mr. Boyd has sought disability 

payments from the NFLPA for injuries suffered during his football 

career, and has become an advocate for fellow players with problems resulting from head trauma. 

Mr. Ditka was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 

1988. He is a former NFL player and coach. He is the only person 

in the 75-year history of the Chicago Bears to have won Super 

Bowl championships as both a player and a head coach. He is currently a commentator on ESPN’s NFL Live and CBS Radio 

Westwood—pardon me, CBS Radio Westwood One’s Monday Night 

Football Pregame Show. I want to welcome you. 

We also have with us today Harry Carson, former NFL player for 

the New York Giants. During his 13-year stint with the New York 

Giants, one of the longest tenures in club history, Mr. Carson won 

the NFL Super Bowl championship in 1986 against the Denver 

Broncos. He is currently a member of the New York Giants preseason broadcasting team, and is a regular season broadcast analyst and cohost of Giants Game Plan. 

Lastly we have with us Curt Marsh. In 1981, Mr. Marsh was a 

first-round draft pick of the Oakland Raiders, and with that team 

won the Super Bowl in 1983. Mr. Marsh’s career was cut short in 

1987 due to a severe ankle injury, which eventually led to the amputation of his right foot and ankle in 1994. Following his NFL career, Mr. Marsh worked for the city of Everett in Washington, retiring from that service as superintendent of recreation. He is currently a motivational speaker and writer. 

I want to thank all the witnesses on our second panel for their 

willingness to be with us this afternoon and testify today. 

Mr. Boyd, would you please proceed with your testimony at this 

time? 

72

TESTIMONY OF BRENT BOYD, RETIRED NFL PLAYER,

RENO, NV 

Mr. BOYD. I can try to work this. Madam Chairwoman, Ranking 

Member, and Members of the Committee, hopefully before my clock 

starts, I would like to take a moment for explanation. I do have 

brain damage, and when under stress the damaged part of my 

brain receives less instead of more blood. And this qualifies as 

being under stress, testifying before Congress. But as the doctors 

say, the harder I try, the harder it gets. So I beg for your patience 

and understanding. I have a lot to tell you. It shouldn’t be much 

more than 5 minutes. So am I on the clock? 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. We understand. We will begin your time now, and 

if you need a little extra time, be assured that you will receive it. 

Mr. BOYD. Thank you. 

Well, now that they put the lipstick on the pig, I want to tell you 

what the reality is for the NFL disabled players. First of all, thank 

you for inviting me, and thank you for having the courage to take 

on the rich and powerful NFL. It is my hope that these are the first 

of many hearings, with the end result being a punishment of the 

corruption of Gene Upshaw, Tom Condon, and Groom Law, and 

drastic changes ordered upon the National Football League. 

My name is Brent Boyd, and I played for the Vikings from 1980 

to 1986. I am on Social Security disability for football-related concussions. I am here today with my wife Gina, a mechanic for the 

U.S. Postal Service, and my 18-year-old son Anders couldn’t make 

it. He is a firefighter in training, and is fighting wildfires this summer for the BLM. And I think he is up at that big Tahoe fire right 

now, so I am more scared about that than anything else. My son, 

however, has been the biggest victim of this crime. 

Tom Condon and Doug Ell have purposely, maliciously caused 

great harm to us, using their tactics of delay, deny, and hope that 

I put a bullet through my head to end their problem. My written 

statement gives great detail about the travesty of this fraud and 

corruption, so I hope you read it, and I recommend to those listening to read my written statements. 

I was always an overachiever, straight A student in La Habra, 

California, graduated with honors from UCLA. I was drafted in the 

third round by the Vikings. These accomplishments took a great 

deal of hard work and dedication, and full mental capacity, qualities that would be washed away by NFL concussions. 

The NFL is hoping I go away and die, delaying and delaying benefits, while all the reports were in my favor. Meanwhile, I want to 

point out to everyone it was a group of Major League Baseball 

players who came together to keep a roof over my son and I when 

my son was in elementary school and then kept us alive. Baseball 

agent Barry Axelrod gathered a group of baseball greats, including 

Mark Grace, Rick Sutcliffe, Jeff Bagwell, as well as former Bruins 

Bill Walton of the NBA and his brother Bruce. And I was kept spiritually alive by North Coast Presbyterian Church of Encinitas, 

California. 

There are too many details to fit in this 5 minutes, but it took 

in 1999 for doctors to link my symptoms to concussions. Brain 

scans have located the exact location of that brain damage. The 

NFL is trying to distance themselves from liability for all the carVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:09 Jul 15, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\WORK\COMM\062607\36344.000 HJUD1 PsN: 36344
73

nage left behind by our NFL concussions, just as tobacco companies 

fought like hell to deny links between smoke and cancer. I filed my 

claim, and I was told by the NFLPA not to bother filing, and here 

is the quote, because the owners will never open that can of worms 

by granting a claim for concussions. Shortly after that statement, 

my Vikings medical files disappeared. I believe Groom Law had destroyed any contemporary—that word——

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Contemporaneous. 

Mr. BOYD [continuing]. Contemporaneous evidence to clear the 

path for their manipulation of this process. Just for time I am 

going to leave out—I hope you ask me details of the first two NFL 

doctors they sent me to, because they both enthusiastically approved my claim. So I will cross that out because of the time. But 

they sent me to their own neurologist; totally approved my claimed, 

checked the boxes, yes, that my concussions were NFL-caused. And 

the second psychiatrist was equally enthusiastic. And I understand 

their own neurologist voluntarily called me back for a second day 

of testing because he suspected I had vertigo as a result of my concussions, and on his own he brought me back a second day and confirmed that I do have vertigo. 

Condon and the NFL were told that, but that meant absolutely 

nothing to the Disability Board. They only seek reasons to deny a 

claim, not to approve a claim. They did agree on I am totally and 

permanently disabled, but despite the overwhelming evidence before them to the contrary, they only gave me the lowest nonfootball-related disability. 

After an 8-month lull, which I was reliant on charity, they insisted I see Barry Gordon of Johns Hopkins and only Barry Gordon 

of Johns Hopkins. They wanted this expert in autism to act as a 

concussion expert and give me a very complex neuropsychological 

exam. But Gordon didn’t give me this exam I was flown coast to 

coast for. Instead, this is important, this was a test that was going 

to decide the fate of me and my son. It was given to me by a young 

linguistic student named Laura Atalla, who told me she had never 

seen this neuropsychological test until the day before, took it home 

and practiced it on her boyfriend. This is a test that should be 

given by a Ph.D. and neuropsychologist. Her tests were paired with 

Barry Gordon’s written opinion, ridiculous as it is, that concussions 

could not cause headaches, concussions could not cause depression, 

dizziness, or fatigue. 

Now my case, which at this point had stretched out for years, 

while all doctors’ opinions were in my favor, was denied within 

days. After the ninth circuit, I found a medical journal from 1990 

with an article by our same Barry Gordon of Johns Hopkins. This 

time he wasn’t paid by the NFL. This was an independent medical 

research. His research says that my same symptoms, right there in 

the first paragraph, are the most common symptoms of concussions. And he makes it easier for you by creating table 1, a chart, 

and all my symptoms that he wrote for the NFL weren’t possible 

to be caused by concussions, when he is writing for a review by his 

medical peers are now suddenly the most common symptoms of 

concussion. If that is not proof of fraud and corruption, then we 

need to remove the words ‘‘fraud’’ and ‘‘corruption’’ from our vocabulary. 

74

I hope to answer questions and thank you. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you, Mr. Boyd. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Boyd follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF BRENT BOYD

Madam Chairwoman, Ranking Member Cannon, Members of the committee 

My name is Brent Boyd. I played for the Minnesota Vikings from 1980–86. I am 

a native Southern Californian, was raised in La Habra, CA, graduated WITH HONORS from UCLA and am a proud resident of Reno, NV since 2002. I am here today 

with my wife Gina, who is a mechanic for the U.S. Postal Service. My 18 year old 

son Anders couldn’t come, he is home fighting wildfires for the BLM. I am on social 

security disability due to my post concussion injuries from the NFL, but receive only 

the minimum ‘‘non-football related’’ disability benefits from the NFL. 

First of all, Thank you for having the courage to hold these hearings. It’s long 

overdue and I am sure what you hear today will lead to immediate further hearings 

and big changes demanded by Congress onto the NFL leadership. It’s high time to 

expose the corruption of the NFL Disability Board, especially with Groom Law 

Firm’s absolute power and members like Tom Condon, whose unforgivable co-chairmanship is responsible for all this needless suffering that lead to you calling this 

hearing. 

I would also like to thank Jennifer Smith and the Gridiron Greats for making my 

travel here today possible. We could never have afforded to be here and I am grateful for their assistance. 

I am here today because I have a remarkable but true story about my claim denial, doctor shopping and fraud. And betrayal by the League I love. My case also 

involves the subject of concussions. Just like the tobacco companies fought like hell 

to deny any link between smoking and cancer, the NFL is desperately fighting to 

avoid any liability for all the carnage left behind by these NFL concussions. 

Joe Montana was recently asked about my NFL concussions disability claims denial by Mike Sullivan of San Diego’s North County Times, 

‘‘Once they say there’s an issue, then they have to fix it,’’ Montana said. ‘‘As long 

as they never admit that there’s one, then they never have to fix it. 

‘‘They’re never going to admit it because then they have to go about and try to 

correct it.’’

End quote 

I am here to illustrate for you how the NFL disability process is corrupted, how 

Tom Condon, Gene Upshaw, the NFL, and Doug Ell of Groom Law orchestrate these 

fraudulent decisions, and I am sure if I can walk you thru my experience you will 

get a feel for the travesty that has befallen countless other disabled players. 

Before I get to the details of my case, I would be remiss if I didn’t point out to 

you that another loser when we are denied benefits are the hard working American 

taxpayers. These 32 NFL billionaire team owners hire their ‘‘dream team’’ of attorneys to get them out of paying their legal obligation. So we are then cast upon the 

taxpayers, thru Social Security and Medicare, and our communities through local 

charities and churches. The same Taxpayers who are already paying for the stadiums they can’t afford to go watch a game in, are the poor people stuck with the 

bill every time the NFL’s money buys them a disability denial in court. 

Plus, our court cases set legal precedents that make it harder for the average 

truck driver, saleswoman, office worker, mechanics and so on to ever collect a disability claim. The NFL Disability Board isn’t just sticking it to football players, they 

are sticking it to the American workers and taxpayers as well. 

My concussions started in August 1980 . . . that was one of only God knows how 

many concussions I suffered. This one sticks out in my memory because I temporarily lost sight in my right eye and became very frightened. We didn’t even count 

concussions or keep track of them back then, a concussion was not considered a serious injury, as opposed to an injury to a weight bearing bone. A concussion was a 

‘‘nuisance’’ injury, like getting hit in the funny bone. It’s a pain in the butt, hurts 

like heck for a while. But like a hit to the funny bone the symptoms faded away 

soon and you never considered it again once it subsided . . . you surely didn’t think 

getting ‘‘dinged’’ was going to affect you the rest of your life, and in fact in my case, 

destroy my life 

A little background info about myself first, 

I was an ‘‘A’’ student growing up in La Habra, CA. 

A month prior to going to my first NFL training camp, I graduated WITH HONORS from UCLA, June 1980. That took a tremendous amount of drive and determination. I was drafted in the third round to Minnesota, a feat which also requires 

75

a great deal of effort and self sacrifice. My whole life up to that point was of hard 

work, dedication, and an ability to set goals and successfully reach them. 

As a rookie, we had only nine days between the start of training camp and our 

first exhibition game. We didn’t have all the off-season practices they have today. 

In those nine days as a rookie I was able to learn and play all five offensive line 

positions, something I’m told hasn’t happened often if at all in the NFL. 

The end of that month was when that first concussion occurred in a preseason 

game in Miami, that’s the concussion I remember most because of going temporarily 

blind, but there were so many more in the seven years that I played. 

When I complained to the medical staff about headaches, I was told it was from 

the anti-inflammatory medications I was taking for my knees. Mainly a drug called 

Indocin, which was notorious for giving headaches but worked miracles on injured 

knees. I kept asking for a brain scan because of my headaches. . . . I think I was 

more afraid I had a brain tumor, because I was never told my concussions would 

have these long lasting effects. I was always denied the brain scan. 

Upon being released mid-season 1986, I was given an ‘‘exit exam’’. I was released 

because of poor performance and lackadaisical effort. I had been complaining of a 

sore leg all season, and was told it was just shin splints. On my exit exam I asked 

for both a leg x-ray and a brain scan. 

Again, I was denied a brain scan for headaches, but was granted the x-ray. The 

leg x-ray showed I had been playing eight weeks on a broken leg. This was never 

announced to the media or my coaches or teammates, they were left to think I was 

dogging it, physically with my leg and mentally with my inability to retain plays 

and keep the energy and focus required to play in the NFL. 

I continued to take Indocin until the mid to late 1990’s, dealing with the headaches but still believing it was from Indocin. When I stopped taking Indocin, my 

headaches never subsided. 

I tore my knee again around 1996 while playing with my son at Disneyland, and 

had more surgery. A friend told me about the NFL disability plan and said if anyone qualified, I might because of my knee. In 1996 or 97, I called the union, Miki 

Yaras-Davis helped me write a letter, and they sent me to a doctor, who said I 

didn’t qualify. I left it at that, I thought this was some informal process between 

ex-players and NFLPA. I don’t believe I even submitted my own doctor’s reports, 

it was not presented to me as any legal thing, I was never told to get an attorney 

or about this behemoth called ERISA that a few years later would rule my life. I 

simply asked if my knee qualified, they said no, and that was that. I didn’t even 

know I was allowed to appeal. 

After a life of hard-driven success, suddenly the 1980’s and 1990’s were nothing 

but one failure after another for me. I couldn’t concentrate, I always felt sick—dizzy, 

a little nauseous, and always very tired. I had a splitting headache that never went 

away, but was eased through self medication. In the 80’s, before the news my son 

was conceived, I was like many 20-somethings and used cocaine, in my case I was 

desperate for the energy to make up for my fatigue. (my cocaine use was stopped 

for good in 1987 with news of a son on his way.) 

And the alcohol numbs my headaches and physical pains. 

I spent years searching for a medical answer, doctors could find nothing wrong 

below the neck. They were also trying to treat depression, which they came to believe was the cause of my fatigue . . . over the years I took every anti-depressant 

in every dosage and in every combination with other drugs. 

I stopped drinking for many years with no positive change in my symptoms. 

From mid to late ’90’s I was checked for every form of cancer, and had every 

organ x-rayed, MRI’d and ultrasounded. I had tubes and cameras stuck up both 

ends. 

After years of hoping to find relief but not getting any better, one day one of my 

psychiatrists told me a probable reason NONE of these drugs had any effect could 

be if I had an organic brain injury. He then asked if I ever had a concussion? That 

was in 1999, and that was the first time any doctor had ever asked me about concussions. 

I was sent to neurologists and had brain scans and SPECT scans and all kinds 

of testing done. The scans showed the exact location of the brain injury, and they 

explained how the areas damaged correlated to the symptoms I was having, both 

the temporary loss of sight in 1980 and the lingering symptoms of depression, headaches, fatigue, dizziness. They said the concussions also gave me ‘‘trauma-induced 

A.D.D.’’

I was relieved to find a medical cause after all those years. For over 15 years I 

had been stung by words like ‘‘lazy’’, ‘‘crazy’’, ‘‘alcoholic’’ , ‘‘failure’’, and all this was 

from my loved ones! My employers were even harder on me. Worst of all, I came 

to believe it myself. I thought my failures were from a character flaw. 

76

I lost my home , my car, my first marriage, and job after job after job. I was then 

a single father, and we were scrambling for a roof over our heads. (I divorced in 

1992, and was a single Dad until marrying Gina in 2004) We lived in some nice 

places sometimes, but we were homeless at others. We lived in cheap motels and 

even had to pitch a tent in a campground more than once. 

My son went without getting his needs met, my son Anders is the REAL victim 

of this crime. Even in the years after we filed our disability claim, and the NFL 

knew we were in dire straits, my son lost teeth because of lack of basic dental care, 

he had a significant vision problem that needed surgery in kindergarten and glasses 

thereafter. He went to school every day with old beat up scratched glasses that no 

man could see thru. He has learning disorders that I could not afford tutoring help 

for, and he was always grading poorly in school. 

But this kid has tenacity, he still showed up to school everyday with a smile, did 

homework without argument, got straight ‘‘O’s’’ for Outstanding citizenship but D’s 

and F’s for the class grade. He never quit, never gave up, never gave in and took 

up drugs or any of the temptations of this era . . . and he is now a fine young man, 

a high school grad in 2006 and a fireman in training. He is spending this summer 

fighting wildfires for the BLM. My son Anders has suffered so greatly , so much 

of it purposefully at the hands of Tom Condon and the NFL, and I love and admire 

him for his perseverance. 

When I think of what the corrupt NFL Disability Board needlessly put my child 

through is when I get my angriest! We did get help from the NFL Players Assistance Trust, but it was $5,000 that 

could not be given directly to me. It helped pay past doctor bills, yes, but it did not 

alleviate the stress and fear of where would we sleep tomorrow and how was I going 

to feed and clothe my son. 

Now to what I’m here to describe, the fraud and corruption of the NFL Disability 

process. 

Once my team of treating doctors concluded clearly that I had suffered organic 

brain damage from NFL concussions, and that I was total and permanently disabled, we filed my claim with the NFL. I was helped by a good friend and fellow 

UCLA alum Barry Axelrod. Barry is both an attorney and a prominent sports agent, 

but he was neither to me. He was just a friend helping a friend, for free. We submitted piles of doctor’s reports and brain scans. 

Upon filing my claim, I was told by Miki Yaras-Davis of the NFLPA not to bother 

filing, her exact words were ‘‘the owners will never open that can of worms’’ by 

granting a claim for concussions. 

Shortly after that, my Vikings medical files mysteriously ‘‘disappeared’’. The 

courts were never made aware of this. Medical files are sacred to a player, we were 

not ever allowed in the same room with them. We had to trust that after our career 

the NFL would store the files and present them in the event of a claim. 

In essence, they destroyed the evidence that would have easily proven my claim. 

The 9th circuit would mistakenly hold that against ME, not them, and said without 

any contemporaneous notes the disability board could send me from one doctor to 

another. 

There were contemporaneous notes, I believe Groom Law destroyed them to clear 

their path for manipulation of the process. 

Now starts the process of seeing an NFL doctor to see if he agrees or disagrees 

with my claim. I am living in San Diego, they send me to an NFL chosen neurologist in San Diego, Dr J Sterling Ford. Dr Ford not only totally agrees with my doctor’s and approves my claim, this NFL doctor voluntarily asks me to come back a 

second day to test for vertigo, which he suspected I was suffering as a result of the 

concussions. His testing confirmed his suspicions; according to the NFL’s own neurologist I do have vertigo caused by head injury. 

So at this point we have several of my treating physicians and the NFL’s own 

doctor all agreeing, we feel that will mean automatic approval. 

Barry Axelrod organizes a group of his Major League Baseball clients and friends 

and other UCLA alumni to create a charity to move my son and I out of the cheap 

motel we were living in and into an apartment near his school. They believe, with 

all of this overwhelming evidence in my favor, it will only be a matter of weeks until 

the next Board meeting that they will need to support me. There was no way I could 

be denied my claim! These guys were not doing this for publicity, quite the opposite. 

The individual identities of this group from 2000–2002 was not known to me, other 

than Barry Axelrod, until last February’s ESPN report. 

The group included the great baseball players Mark Grace, Rick Sutcliffe, Jeff 

Bagwell; actor Mark Harmon, NBA legend Bill Walton and his ex-NFL player brother Bruce, and many others. Without the help of these guys, I would not have survived to be here today. Along with Pastor Don Seltzer and the folks at North Coast 

77

Presbyterian Church in Encinitas, CA. They cared about my son and me, . . . while 

at the exact same time the NFL didn’t give a damn if we died, in fact they hoped 

I would put a bullet in my head and solve their problem, and were busy scheming 

a way to deny my benefits. 

The NFL decided not to listen to their own first doctor, because his opinion was 

in favor of a player, so the NFL selects a second doctor of their own choosing, this 

time a psychiatrist in Long Beach, CA. His name is very long, Dr. Branko 

Radisavljevic, but he says to call him Dr. Branko. 

Dr. Branko enthusiastically supports my claim, and joins every other doctor to 

this point . Every doctor had the same opinion, it was all one voice that included 

my own doctors and now TWO NFL doctors. Unfortunately for Condon and Ells, all 

these reports were FAVORABLE to a disabled player . . . that’s no good. . . . The Board meets every 90 days, we know there is no way they can delay approving my claim any longer . . . but instead my case is ‘‘tabled’’ at their next meeting, 

meaning 90 more days of stress. Only the next meeting doesn’t bring approval either. That means 6 extra months now of relying on charity to survive. 

They DO decide at this point that I AM totally and permanently disabled and begin giving me the $1500/mo ‘‘non-football’’ related disability, Despite the glaring 

fact that every doctor had said it was concussions that caused my suffering. But remember, they don’t want to admit it is concussion-related, they ‘‘don’t want to open 

that can of worms’’. 

So after an eight month delay to give them time to buy a doctor, and 8 more 

months of relying on charity to survive, I am forced to travel from San Diego to Baltimore to see Barry Gordon at Johns Hopkins. The reason given is they wanted me 

to take a sophisticated neuropsychological exam. I can take this test at any 

neuropsychologist in San Diego , as Social Security sent me to when they approved 

my disability claim for post-concussion . . . but they insisted I see Gordon and 

ONLY Gordon. If I refuse or hold out for another doctor, I am told, I am denied. 

Gordon is not on the list of pre-approved ‘‘neutral’’ physicians normally used by 

the Board, he is hand picked by Doug ells of Groom Law. Gordon is also walking 

distance to NFL Benefits headquarters in Baltimore. Axelrod and I smell a rat, but 

we have no choice, if I don’t go I am denied anyway, they will not agree to a doctor 

in Southern California. 

So, I arrange for care for my son, they fly me coast to coast, pay for taxis, meals, 

hotels, even replaced clothes when my luggage was lost. 

They went to ALL that expense, but they didn’t go to the most important expense, 

HIRING A NEUROPYSCHOLOGIST to give me the test. This test takes years to 

understand the nuances and complexities, and, especially in cases with legal ramifications, should only be given by someone with a PhD, . . . a neuropsychologist! 

I thought Gordon was going to be giving me the test himself, that’s why all the 

bother to fly across country. But I wind up seeing him for only about 30 minutes. 

He bangs my knee with a hammer, tickles the bottom of my feet, and conducts tests 

I now am told by neurologists were just for show and his tests only tested the 

NERVE ENDINGS, not the brain. 

Barry Gordon writes in his report that ‘‘the records available to me are incomplete 

in ways that may be relevant for my impressions.’’ He also admits he didn’t bother 

to look at the existing brain scans and ordered none of his own. This is like diagnosing a broken leg without seeing an x-ray—he was deciding my fate by opining 

on a body part he never bothered to look at! 

Instead of hiring a neuropsychologist to give me this neuropsychological test they 

deem SO important to deciding my case, this neuropsychological test was instead 

given to me unsupervised by a young grad student in LINGUISTICS, with no medical background. Her name is Lara Atella. 

Lara Atella keeps apologizing and laughing, she keeps telling me she had never 

seen this test until the day before, and she took it home to practice on her boyfriend. 

I spend 99% of my time in Johns Hopkins with Lara, and am sent home wondering 

why I didn’t see much of Dr Gordon. 

Atella’s test result was paired with Gordon’s ridiculous report stating that my 

symptoms of headaches, depression, dizziness, and fatigue COULD NOT BE 

CAUSED BY CONCUSSIONS! 

Let me repeat in case you didn’t grasp that—concussions COULD NOT cause 

headaches! 

Does anyone REALLY believe that? 

This process has been stretched out years when all the doctor’s reports were in 

my favor. 

Armed with a report unfavorable to a player, Within DAYS I am immediately denied my claim by a unanimous vote. Upshaw and his appointees, Tom Condon and 

Jeff VanNote, and Len Teeuws, my advocates in those Board meetings, never said 

78

a word of protest . . . at this point they should have been screaming bloody murder, 

crying out this is a bunch of bull, and insisting this fraud stops right there. You 

know, advocating! Doing their appointed duty! 

None of this could have been possible without the FULL knowledge, cooperation, 

and participation from all sides on the Board. Commisioner Taglibue, Upshaw, the 

NFLPA, and especially Tom Condon and Jeff VanNote. And it was all masterfully 

orchestrated by Doug Ell of Groom Law Firm, located at 1701 Pennsylvania Ave 

across the street from the White House. 

What’s worse, as my only advocates allowed in Board meetings, Condon and Upshaw and Upshaw’s other appointees never once, including to this day, returned my 

phone calls, letters or emails. Or made any effort to understand my case. They simply followed orders from Doug Ell and Groom Law. 

They will tell you they found the first two NFL doctor’s reports ’equivocal’’. I have 

spoken with those two NFL doctors since, and they are furious I was denied and 

furious they were characterized as equivocal. I hope you can subpoena them. These 

doctors will tell you NO ONE , not even my advocates, had ever called for clarification. The NFL couldn’t risk clarifying, they didn’t want the truth. It was easier to 

wait 8 months and fly me cross country than to pick up a phone? 

As they teach in law school, don’t ask a question if you don’t want the answer. 

If you read Dr Gordon’s report, you will find a gold mine of equivocalization. The 

fine tooth comb used by Groom Law to play semantics with doctors who approved 

my claim is suddenly missing when a report supports denial 

Not only that, but the first two doctors filled out the required NFL questionnaire. 

This is where they avoid confusion and are asked to check boxes simply yes or no. 

Both Ford and Branko checked ‘‘yes’’ to the questions ‘‘ am I disabled from an injury’’ and ‘‘was this injury a result of playing football’’ Both checked Yes. Period. 

Case closed. 

Despite many demands on record from NFL Benefits Office to Gordon to attach 

his questionnaire to his invoice or he wouldn’t get paid, he never filled that form 

out. And he was paid. That leaves HIS report incomplete. Gordon never answers 

the question ‘‘is my disability ‘‘football-related’’!!! 

Gordon’s report gives possible alternative reasons for my symptoms, which included chronic pain and other football-related causes, so maybe he still could have 

checked the box ‘‘yes’’ when asked if my disability was football related . . . all he 

said was it was impossible to link headaches with concussions. We still don’t know 

Gordon’s answer to that question! 

Wait, you think this is bad enough already? Here’s where it gets even better. . . . The most important and most damning proof of fraud and doctor shopping comes 

from Dr. Gordon himself. After my 9th circuit case, I found this 1990 medical journal, containing an article by our same Barry Gordon. It’s titled ‘‘postconcussional 

syndrome’’. You only need read the first paragraph to see he is adamant that my 

symptoms, headache, depression, dizziness, and fatigue are THE MOST COMMON 

SYMPTOMS of post concussion. He even makes it easier for the reader, he creates 

a chart, table 1, titled ‘‘most common symptoms of post concussion’’ . . . right there 

in that list are ALL of my symptoms, the same symptoms, that when paid by the 

NFL he wrote were impossible to link to concussions. 

His article also says he orders a brain scan ‘‘in essentially all patients’’. He didn’t 

go to that bother with me. 

If that’s not proof of fraud and corruption, than we need to remove the words 

fraud and corruption from our vocabulary. 

The only reason they aren’t in jail is that there are some holes in Federal Laws 

that you in Congress need to fix to help EVERY American worker, mainly the ‘‘full 

discretion’’ allowed to the Board, and you need to return the ‘‘treating physician 

rule’’ removed from law by Grooms Law Firm’s secret intervention in Supreme 

Court ‘‘Nord v Black and Decker’’ (my attorney was on the losing end of that decision). 

The NFLPA fiercely tries to claim no responsibility in our claim denials. Here is 

a quote from Feb. 11, 2007 ESPN article on my case by John Barr and Arty Berko, 

that accompanied their story on me on ESPN TV’s ‘‘Outside the Lines’’, catching 

Gene Upshaw in flat out lies: 

‘‘While nobody from the NFLPA would speak with ESPN about Boyd’s case, 

NFLPA Executive Director Gene Upshaw did address Boyd’s allegations at a recent 

news conference. 

‘‘To say that the NFLPA is ’doctor shopping,’ we don’t have anything to do with 

it, with the process,’’ Upshaw said. 

The facts say otherwise. The retirement board, the ultimate authority on disability cases, is made up of three league and three union representatives. To say 

the union has nothing to do with the process is simply untrue. 

79

Upshaw went on to say, ‘‘If a doctor determines that a player is entitled to a disability and he meets the standards he gets it.’’

But in Boyd’s case, two doctors, chosen by the retirement board, determined his 

disability was football-related and his claim was still rejected.’’

End quote 

The NFLPA is quoted recently as saying they were only doing what ERISA demands them to do. In other words, ‘‘The devil made them do it!’’ Nonsense. ERISA 

demands that they look EQUALLY as hard for evidence to APPROVE a claim as 

they look for evidence to DENY a claim. That clearly is not happening in the NFL. 

The real ‘‘devil that made them do it’’ is in reality Doug Ell and Groom Law, with 

their scorch and burn , leave no witnesses, win at all cost strategies. 

This NFL Disability Board has blinders on and only seeks reasons to DENY. 

Courts are hogtied by the ‘‘full discretion’’ wording, and the absence of discovery 

and depositions in ERISA cases. Only you in Congress, with your oversight of the 

NFL, and your gifting of anti-trust exemptions, and your power of subpoena under 

oath, can fix this scam. 

ERISA gives the Board ‘‘full discretion’’, which is the opposite of what they are 

claiming now in public. Instead of LIMITING their options, ‘‘full discretion’’ gives 

the Board the widest possible range of options possible. The only restrictions on 

their ‘‘discretion’’ are what their stomachs and conscience had handle. 

ERISA does not ‘‘force’’ the Board to ignore evidence supporting players’ claims, 

nor to draw up elaborate doctor shopping schemes to defeat them, as Dave Duerson 

recently hinted. (Duerson is the newest robot member of the Board) 

Congress gives the Board ‘‘full discretion’’ through ERISA, which gives the Board 

absolute power. AND WE ALL KNOW THAT ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS!

Please eliminate the ‘‘full discretion’’ wording in ERISA. 

A 1994 OSHA study said life expectancy for NFL players is 55 years, 52 for linemen . . . that is why Condon and the Board’s tactics are to ‘‘delay, deny, and hope 

we die . . .’’

I beg this Committee to hold further hearings, subpoena Tom Condon, Gene Upshaw, Doug Ell, Paul Tagliubue, and Barry Gordon. Clean house in the NFL Disability Board, punish Groom Law and Tom Condon and Gene Upshaw for their conflicts of interests and selfish greedy actions 

And most of all, someone FINALLY hold the NFL/NFLPA accountable for all the 

needless suffering that their blatant doctor shopping and fraudulent claims denials 

have caused countless NFL retired players. 

I also welcome questions regarding ‘‘88 Plan’’. 

I have emailed several attachments to my testimony and ask that they all be officially included in the record. 

Thank You,

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. And I am going to ask unanimous consent that the 

article that was written by Dr. Gordon be included in the record 

as well. 

[The information referred to follows:]

80

ARTICLE WRITTEN BY BARRY GORDON, M.D., PH.D., SUBMITTED BY THE HONORABLE

LINDA T. SA ́ NCHEZ


L-1.eps
81


L-2.eps
82


L-3.eps
83


L-4.eps
84


L-5.eps
85


L-6.eps
86


L-7.eps
87


L-8.eps
88


L-9.eps
89


L-10.eps
90

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. At this time I would like to recognize Mr. Ditka 

for his testimony. You may begin. 

TESTIMONY OF MIKE DITKA, FORMER NFL COACH,

CHICAGO, IL 

Mr. DITKA. Thank you, Chairwoman Sa ́nchez and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee. 

Listen, I am Mike Ditka. I am here on behalf of one thing: the 

retired players that need help, in dire need. Mike Ditka Hall of 

Fame Assistance Trust is one part of it; the Gridiron Greats is another part of it. There is other parts of it. All we did was put together a couple groups to try to help people who need help. 

It came to my attention that we had a lot of Hall of Famers who 

were in dire need, including John Mackey, which they finally implemented the ’88 plan, and, before he passed away, Ernie 

Stautner. And I can go on and on with people, Joe Perry, Doug Atkins, Pete Hollis, all basically dementia. 

I am not a newcomer to the game, as some would like to say. I 

started in this game 47 years ago as a player, an assistant coach 

under Coach Landry, a head coach, and then now I guess I am an 

expert because I am an analyst for TV. So I am not a new player 

in the game. And that was brought up by somebody else. I have 

been around for a long time. I have seen the changes. I saw the 

beginning. I understood why the organization called the Players 

Association was put in place in the first place. My roommate, Mike 

Powell, was one of the first presidents of that union. And we know 

why it was put in place. So when we talk about that, we understand that. 

All we are here for is to see that the system gets fixed. The system does not work. Now, you can talk about all the terms you want 

to. There is a difference between perception and reality. What is 

perceived to be means absolutely nothing unless it is real. The reality of the situation is if you make people fill out enough forms, 

if you discourage them enough, if you make them jump through 

hoops, eventually they will say, gees, I don’t need this. I can’t do 

all this. This is ridiculous. And they are going to walk away from 

some of these situations. 

And this basically is a lot of what has happened to these people. 

They are frustrated. These are proud people. They played in this 

game. They played this game heroically. And they have as much 

right to say that they are a part of this game as anybody playing 

in the game today, anybody who played in the 1980’s, anybody who 

played in the 1970’s. 

You can go back through history. The people in the game today 

are not the makers of the game. They are only the keepers of the 

game. The game was made a long time ago, and it will be made 

after these people are gone. And hopefully these players today understand that the treatment former players are getting could come 

to them, regardless of what they may think. 

So, you know, the disability system to me is broken. Fix it. Do 

the right thing. That is our model. Just do the right thing. 

Why did this all start? I don’t know why it all started. Why are 

we in front of Congress? I think we are in front of Congress because we feel something is wrong, and it can be fixed. And there 

91

is a lot of people involved in this. Every party understands what 

the problem is. Now we got to find a solution. 

We got the NFL. We heard all the kind words that were said 

about the NFL Management Council. Whether they are right or 

wrong, I don’t know. We know about the owners. The owners have 

made a lot of money recently. We know about the Players Association. That has been documented. There has been a lot of money put 

in there. What we don’t know about is why do retired players who 

have disability needs are not being taken care of? Why can’t this 

be taken care of? 

That is all we are asking. I don’t care whose fault it is. We are 

not pointing the finger at one or the other. There is money, there 

is resources there. Take care of the people who need it, and that 

is all we are asking. 

In closing, you know, I don’t know that you can find fault with 

what we want to do. I mean, there is those who point the finger. 

There are those who attacked us individually. They will talk attack 

Brian DeMarco. This is not what it is all about. You know, God forbid any of these people who are doing the attacking would get in 

the position where they would need this kind of help, and we would 

hope that somebody would have some compassion and understanding. 

Now, I hear all this stuff about all the laws. Hey, gang, you 

know, laws are laws, and we understand that, but it is time for 

some solutions. It is time for some action. 

I appreciate your time. I hope some of what I said made sense. 

But this is not about Mike Ditka. Football owes me nothing. Nothing. I owe my whole life to football, and I want you to understand 

that. I am not asking on my behalf. I am asking on behalf of people 

who really need help. Thank you. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you, Mr. Ditka, for your testimony. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ditka follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MIKE DITKA

Mr. Chairman and esteemed members of the Committee, I am Mike Ditka, and 

I thank you for the opportunity to appear before this committee today. 

Professional Football is an American institution and I am here to represent the 

players who built the NFL, which is now a billion dollar industry. Many of these 

former NFL players have late onset football related injuries and many exhibit a pattern of symptoms consistent with repeated serious brain injury over time, primarily 

pugilistic dementia and short term memory loss, along with other related traumatic 

medical injuries. They are currently suffering in silence with inadequate levels of 

help from the institutions that were put in place to help them. These players are 

not being appropriately protected or materially assisted by the NFL player’s union. 

I find it incomprehensible that the common man and the common fan knows that 

these former NFL players are being treated like dogs in a callous and uncaring 

manner while the NFL Player’s Union endlessly debates the issue and does nothing 

material to help these guys. I feel that this is a real problem that has not gotten 

the attention or the resource allocation it deserves. 

As a result of seeing multiple examples of this grave injustice firsthand, the The 

Mike Ditka Hall Of Fame Assistance Trust Fund was created in 2004 to help former 

NFL Hall of Famers and players, especially those with acute financial, medical, and 

other needs. The remainder of our funds are dedicated to disabled children at 

Misericordia. 

The Mike Ditka Hall Of Fame Assistance Trust Fund and the Gridiron Greats Assistance Trust Funds share the same goals and have the same serious concerns for 

the well being of former NFL players, many of whom suffer from a wide range of 

football related ailments that we believe are directly or indirectly responsible for 

their current conditions. Furthermore, we believe that the institutions (NFL PlayVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:09 Jul 15, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\WORK\COMM\062607\36344.000 HJUD1 PsN: 36344
92

er’s Union) that have been put in place to help them have fallen short in the past 

despite the fact that they have more than adequate resources to help. We feel they 

can do more than they currently do to help. 

Many former NFL players with the most acute current needs played in the early 

days of league, where documentation of medical problems was less diligent than 

today. 

Recognizing that former players are hurt should not be seen as an attempt to 

point fingers or blame anyone in particular. Our goal is to be part of the solution 

rather than accept the status quo, which is the problem. It is our goal and our mission to create public awareness which helps us raise the funds that can then be directly allocated to help these guys who need assistance. Our mission is to stand up 

for the guys who are no longer able to stand up for themselves in order to act in 

a timely manner on their behalf. Endless debate, running in circles, studies and 

meetings have accomplished little to help while former players suffer. 

Constructive goals are frustrated by a closed Player’s Union bureaucracy that 

seems out of touch with the real day to day needs of the oldest of former NFL players upon whose blood, sweat and pain the league has built a billion dollar industry. 

The Mike Ditka Hall Of Fame Assistance Trust Fund and the Gridiron Greats Assistance Trust Fund are working for the same goal and believe that the NFL Player’s Union’s prior lack of attention on this matter represents a substantial step 

backwards and abdicates the NFL’s leadership in representation, communication 

and concern for the well being of its current and former players. 

The following summarizes our concerns with the issue at hand. We believe members of the Subcommittee should examine the following points closely in order to 

gain a better understanding of this issue and take the appropriate steps to rectify 

this unacceptable state of affairs.

1. Why and where did this all start and why are we in front of Congress?

2. The numbers of former players in need is documented and identified—there 

are under 300—with the collective resources of the parties involved why can’t 

we solve this problem?

3. There are the resources and numbers—the problem has been identified and 

the problem can be rectified if the powers that be want to solve it—it can 

be done.

Please help us relieve burdensome circumstances. 

In addition, to ensure that former players in need get the support and are provided with the resources they need, the Mike Ditka Hall Of Fame Assistance Trust 

Fund recommends that the U.S. House of Representatives:

1. Investigate the circumstances of former NFL players with specific focus on 

why they are experiencing such serious problems being turned down for disability/medical care when they need it.

2. Investigate delayed onset dementia, short term memory loss and the causality, correlation and relationship to repeated prior head injuries like those 

commonly experienced in football.

3. Investigate why this problem hasn’t been solved in light of the tremendous 

financial resources of the NFL owners and Player’s Union.

4. Investigate why there is a 12 year statute of limitations on player disability 

claims.

5. Investigate who made the determination that 12 years should be the limitation on claims for disabilities.

6. Investigate why so many former players are being turned down when they 

apply for help.

It all boils down to the difference between what is right and what is wrong. These 

are our people and we are asking for your support for a group of proud, dignified 

men who suffer greatly as a result of their injuries, many of which are directly or 

indirectly related to their careers in professional football. 

We thank Congressmen Conyers and Smith and all members of the Committee, 

particularly Congresswoman Sanchez of California, for their leadership on these 

issues and look forward to working with members of the Subcommittee and the Full 

Committee to resolve the important, outstanding issues of health of former NFL 

players. 

In summary, The Mike Ditka Hall Of Fame Assistance Trust Fund supports 

proactively addressing this issue. However, we have serious concerns with the NFL 

Player’s Union’s lack of action on behalf of injured former players who need help. 

It seems to me that we need a new approach. 

93

Our objective is not find fault and lay blame. It is to have an open an honest discussion with all concerned parties and to create a solution that helps these guys 

today. In our view, the challenge is for all parties to recognize the situation and 

take appropriate actions to help the guys in need. Certainly between the resources 

all of us bring to bear we can find a solution that works for these guys. 

I am proud to be part of this dialogue and my foundation and I want to continue 

to engage in productive dialogue with all parties interested in being part of the solution. 

All that matters is seeing these guys get the help they need. The current structure has does not meet the needs of these guys and time is of the essence—now is 

the time to act, before it is too late. 

Football does not need Mike Ditka. Mike Ditka needs football, and it has propelled me into places I never thought I would go in my life. With that, ladies and 

gentlemen of Congress, I submit to you that I’m not here for myself, which I have 

just expressed. Please take it upon yourself to help these people in need. 

It’s up to you. 

I thank the Subcommittee again for its interest in this important issue. We look 

forward to working with Congress and the members of this committee on this issue. 

Thank you very much.

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Mr. Carson, you are now recognized for your testimony. 

TESTIMONY OF HARRY CARSON, RETIRED NFL PLAYER, 

FRANKLIN LAKES, NJ 

Mr. CARSON. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. In the interests 

of time, you have my statement, I am going to abbreviate it so that 

I can fall within the 5-minute time frame. On August 5th, 2006, 

I joined the ranks of the greatest football players to ever play the 

game with my induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. While 

it was a very proud moment for my family and my friends, I viewed 

it as a culmination of a journey that began many years ago as a 

youth growing up in Florence, South Carolina. My football career 

was great. I enjoyed the experience. I enjoyed the relationships 

that I built. 

Since the end of my professional football career almost 19 years 

ago, I tried to live the best life that I could, accepting the aches 

and pains that come along with what I did as an athlete. Occasionally I have to deal with back pain brought on by degenerative disks 

in my neck and lower back that press against my spinal column 

that causes me pain in my lower back and legs. But the one area 

that causes me the greatest concern is living with postconcussion 

syndrome, a condition I was diagnosed with 2 years after leaving 

football. 

Aside from the physical wear and tear on my body, I sustained 

many concussions during my career that I was able to play 

through. I was very good at what I did as a player. Others might 

say I was the best inside linebacker and goal line linebacker to 

play the game, but there is a price that you pay for being the best. 

Part of the toughness of being able to play the game is to be physical with opposing linemen and running backs at the point of attack on the football field. A player risks his body and limbs to 

make the big tackle or to make the big play to win the game, not 

always understanding the cumulative effects on his body afterwards. 

I knew something was wrong with me while I played, but I was 

so in tune with my physical body, I just couldn’t put my finger on 

what the problem was. I, like many other players at that time, igVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:09 Jul 15, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\WORK\COMM\062607\36344.000 HJUD1 PsN: 36344
94

norantly laughed when we saw someone get hit so hard that they 

didn’t know where they were on the field during the game. I was 

one of those players who played hard and clean, but tried to make 

opposing running backs know that they were in for a long, hard 

day when they faced the New York Giants defense. 

While making big hits I was never knocked out, but I can remember seeing stars or losing my vision, with everything fading to 

black sometimes after hard hits given or received. 

In playing the game, I would at time times reflect on my high 

school physical science knowledge of Newton’s third law of physics, 

which simply states for every action there is an equal and opposite 

reaction. Those hard hits that I was giving as a player on the field 

were hits that equally affected me. 

When I think of Mike Webster, I think that the demise of Mike 

Webster was due largely in part to linebackers like me just playing 

the game. In the 1970’s and 1980’s, when I played, when much attention was focused on the more visible sustained injuries, like 

knees and ankles, few focused on dings or the concussions players 

sustain now. 

There are many studies taking place to determine whether concussions in football can lead to dementia or Alzheimer’s in older 

former players. When you look back on the equipment that was 

used, especially the helmets worn, some might wonder if the inferior products could have contributed to concussions that might lead 

to future balance or neurological disorders in players. 

It is my opinion that it is the pure nature of the game of football 

that causes traumatic brain injury. Concussions or dings have always been a part of the game and probably will always be a part 

of the game. When you have the speed of massive bodies colliding, 

and with the surface of the brain hitting the inner shell of the 

skull, causing a bruising on the brain, an athlete is going to be affected in some way that might not easily be detected. 

I played the game at a very high level and was proud that I was 

able to leave on my own accord. In making my transition to life 

outside of playing, I became more aware of various neurological 

events that created problems for me. Areas of concern were depression, occasional headaches, blurred vision, and short-term memory 

loss, difficulty concentrating and staying focused, sensitivity to 

bright lights and loud noises, among many other issues. These 

problems were highlighted because I chose sports broadcasting as 

a vocation after my days of playing football. 

I sought the help of my physician when I realized I was having 

some problems in my personal and professional life. I underwent 

2 days of extensive testing and was diagnosed with a mild 

postconcussion syndrome. The condition affected my ability to perform my job effectively, with the inability to perform or process information quickly, and was partly the cause of the dissolution of 

my first marriage. Since my diagnosis in 1990, I have learned 

much about the condition. I have spoken with various groups 

around the country on traumatic brain injury in sports and have 

begun to write my memoirs on the subject as it relates to my life. 

I just want to say as I was inducted into the Pro Football Hall 

of Fame, I chose to use the occasion to highlight the plight of retired players. Attention needed to be brought to bear on pension 

95

and disability issues that many retirees felt were being ignored by 

the NFL and the Players Association. I considered myself to be 

very fortunate to have had the opportunity to be part of a fraternity of men who are made of the best stuff and were able to exhibit 

their talents at the highest level to play on the professional level. 

I also consider it an honor to speak today for many who do not 

have a voice here. I look forward to answering any questions that 

you might have. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you for your testimony, Mr. Carson. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Carson follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HARRY CARSON

On August 5th, 2006 I joined the ranks of the greatest football players to ever 

play the game with my induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. While it was 

a very proud moment for my family and friends, I viewed it as the culmination of 

a journey that began many years ago as a youth growing up in Florence, South 

Carolina. 

Before my induction I reflected back on my days playing sandlot football with my 

friends and then trying out for the high school team as a 9th grader. On that first 

day of practice I realized early that I did not have what it took to do so much running, agility drills and especially take part in live contact drills. Before the conclusion of the practice session I turned in my helmet and pads to the equipment manager. The combination of the very hot and humid August day, wearing the many 

pounds of equipment and the screaming of coaches barking out orders was a complete shock to my system. Up to that point I thought football was easy and anybody 

could play. I was wrong and I discovered that I was not quite tough enough to play. 

For a year (9th grade) I lived with the humiliation of being a quitter in the eyes 

of some but more importantly I had to live with the bitter taste of quitting in my 

own gut. I came back the next year determined to rid myself of that taste of giving 

up. The next time I stepped on the football field I was better prepared for what I 

knew I was going to face and I knew I was going to have to push myself mentally 

and physically to stick and stay if I was going to make the team. As much as I did 

want to quit again I forced myself to do whatever it was going to take to survive 

practice. Making it through that first day of practice and then the next day and the 

next taught me that playing football was not a game for everyone. To play football 

you have a special toughness but you also have to be committed and dedicated to 

the team and the game. I made the team and went on to finish my high school years 

and then my college years at South Carolina State University. 

Before my induction on August 6th I reminisced about being drafted to play for 

the New York Giants. Being chosen to play professional football was probably the 

dream of every player who plays the game. It was no different for me but I knew 

the likelihood of making it was not great. These men that I was going to be competing against were seasoned veterans and I was a kid out of Carolina being asked 

to play a position I had never played before. I took on the challenge knowing that 

if I didn’t make it as a Giant I had a backup plan. I graduated with my college class 

and was qualified and prepared to teach in South Carolina and move on with my 

life. 

I relied on those early lessons of commitment, giving my all and the will to be 

the best to make the transition to professional football. From the beginning I knew 

it was very temporary, I had no idea how long I would play but I learned very 

quickly that a career could be over in the blink of an eye. The speed, quickness and 

power of the players were things that I rarely saw in high school or college. To compete on that level you really had to be good! 

As a young naive player with the Giants, it hit me early in training camp that 

the football that I was now playing was not just a sport but was very much a business. I had never been a part of teams that cut players; the training on teams I 

played on was so rough that players usually cut themselves by quitting. As a rookie 

I saw that if a player was injured or could not perform on the field he was waived 

or cut. To play on this level you had to be able to practice and you had to be able 

to play to your maximum on Sunday afternoons. Players would talk about it but 

I grew to understand that the team was a machine and all of the players were bit 

parts of that machine that made it function effectively. If a part was broken it was 

easily replaced with another to keep the machine running. 

With the enormous amount of physical contact most people saw on television coupled with the amount of contact in practice drills it would be hard for most players 

96

to remain unaffected by muscle strains and sprains, pulls, tears, etc. Many of the 

players I played with had some type of knee, ankle, hip, back, shoulder, elbow or 

neck injury they had to contend with to play football. Most were able to recuperate 

sufficiently enough to get back on the playing field to compete while others ended 

their football careers with an injury that prohibited them from playing. I watched 

many quality players clean out their lockers because an injury cut their playing careers short. 

As a linebacker I had more than my share of injuries. Elbows, fingers, ankles, 

back, nerve damage in my right shoulder resulting in the atrophy of my posterior 

deltoid muscle and four knee operations are a part of my football resume. I firmly 

believe that every player who plays professional football walks away from the game 

with some ache or some pain. Some are able to live relatively normal pain free lives 

while others have to live their lives with an understanding that they may never 

know what feeling ‘‘normal’’ is all about. 

Since the end of my professional football career almost 19 years ago I’ve tried to 

live the best life I could accepting the aches and pains that come along with what 

I did as an athlete. Occasionally I have to deal with back pain brought on by degenerative disks in my neck and lower back that press against my spinal column that 

causes me pain in my lower back and legs. But the one area that causes me the 

greatest concerns is living with Post Concussion Syndrome, a condition I was diagnosed with two years after leaving professional football. Aside from the physical 

wear and tear on my body, I sustained many concussions during my career that I 

was able to play through. I was very good at what I did as a player. Others might 

say I was the best inside linebacker and goal line linebacker to play the game, but 

there is a price that you pay for being the best. Part of the toughness of being able 

to play the game is to be physical with opposing lineman and running backs at the 

point of attack on the football field. A player risks his body and limbs to make the 

big tackle or to make the big play to win the game not always understanding the 

cumulative effects on the body afterwards. I knew something was wrong with me 

while I played but because I was so in tune with my physical body I just couldn’t 

put my finger on what the problem was. 

I, like many other players at that time ignorantly laughed when we saw someone 

get hit so hard that they didn’t know where they were on the field during the game. 

I was one of those players who played hard and clean but tried to make opposing 

running backs know that they were in for a long hard day when they faced the NY 

Giants defense. While in making big hits I was never knocked out but I can remember seeing stars or losing my vision with everything fading to black sometimes after 

hard hits given or received. In playing the game I would at times reflect on my high 

school physical science knowledge of Newton’s Third Law of Physic which simply 

states ‘‘For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction’’. Those hard hits 

that I was giving as a player on the field were hits that equally affected me. 

In the 1970s and 80s when I played much attention was focused on the more visible injuries sustained by athletes but very few focused on the ‘‘dings’ or the concussions players sustained until now. There are many studies taking place to determine 

whether concussions in football can lead to dementia or Alzheimer’s in older former 

players. When you look back on the equipment that was used especially the helmets 

worn some might wonder if the inferior products could have contributed to concussions that might lead to future bouts of neurological disorders in players. It is my 

opinion that it is the pure nature of the game of football that causes traumatic brain 

injuries. Concussion or ‘‘dings’’ have always been a part of football and will probably 

always be a part of the game. When you have the speed of massive bodies colliding 

and with the surface of the brain hitting the inner shell of the skull causing a bruising on the brain an athlete is going to be affected in some ways that might not be 

easy to detect. 

I played the game at a very high level and was proud that I was able to leave 

on my own accord. In making my transition to life outside of playing I became more 

aware of various neurological events that created problem for me. Areas of concern 

were depression, occasional headaches, blurred vision, and short term memory loss, 

difficulty concentrating and staying focused, sensitivity to bright light and loud 

noises, among many other issues. These problems were highlighted because I chose 

sports broadcasting as a vocation after my days of playing football. I sought help 

from my physician when I realized I was having some problems in my personal and 

professional life. I underwent 2 days of extensive testing and was diagnosed with 

a mild post concussion syndrome. The condition affected my ability to perform my 

job effectively (inability to process information quickly) and was a partial cause of 

the dissolution of my first marriage. Since my diagnosis in 1990 I have learned 

much about the condition, have spoken with various groups around the country on 

97

traumatic brain injuries in sports and have begun to write my memoirs on the subject as it relates to my life. 

Over the years since I played I have come to understand that there are many 

former players who have had similar problems adjusting to life after ending their 

careers from the NFL with many of the same symptoms I’ve experienced and have 

concluded that many of my fellow retirees are effected with Post Concussion Syndrome. I consider myself fortunate to at least know what my condition is because 

I was examined by an expert in that field. I feel for those who might be affected 

by the lingering long term effects of concussions they sustained as players but have 

no clue because they were never examined. As I see the many older retirees of the 

NFL who are now battling dementia and other mental and neurological disorders 

I unfortunately see what may eventually become my future. I feel that I must speak 

very openly and candidly about this condition from a player’s perspective. In all 

probability the NFL and the NFL Players Association will dispute my testimony and 

will attempt to present evidence to the contrary to shoot down any correlation between those neurological conditions and a player’s career in the National Football 

League. 

As I was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame I chose to use the occasion 

to highlight the plight of the retired NFL players. Attention needed to be brought 

to bear on pension and disability issues that many retirees felt were being ignored 

by the NFL and the Players Association. I considered myself to be fortunate to have 

had a very unique opportunity to be a part of a fraternity of men who are made 

of the best stuff and were able to exhibit their talents at the highest level to play 

on the professional level. I also consider it an honor to speak today for many who 

do not have a voice here. 

I look forward to answering any questions your might have.

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Mr. Marsh, you are recognized for your testimony. 

TESTIMONY OF CURT MARSH, RETIRED NFL PLAYER, 

SNOHOMISH, WA 

Mr. MARSH. Thank you, Chairwoman Sa ́nchez and Members of 

the Committee. My name is Curt Marsh. I am 47 years old. I live 

in Snohomish, Washington. I was selected in the first round of the 

1981 NFL draft by the Oakland Raiders and played offensive guard 

for 7 years. 

I have had a total of 31 surgeries due to injuries suffered in my 

career. They include four low back, one neck, two open reductions, 

two hip replacements, seven arthroscopies, and 14 ankle surgeries, 

including an amputation, to list a few. 

In the NFL, most injuries were just played through in the old 

days, and on the Raiders, because our doctor, who was in his 

eighties, was old school, when you got hurt, you simply got a shot 

of cortisone and Novocaine in the injured area and played. However, there was no warning of the damage cortisone injections did 

to your joints later in life, and in 1994 I found out that the injections had caused me to need both hips replaced due to joint disease. 

The injury that ended my career, however, occurred at the beginning of my seventh season. It was an ankle injury misdiagnosed by 

our team doctor as a sprain. And I finally saw a second doctor outside the team who found I had been playing on the ankle broken, 

and this injury ended my playing days for good. I had 11 more surgeries over the next 6 years before I finally had no choice but to 

amputate. 

NFL physicians are not like regular doctors, who are committed 

to making a person well. An NFL doctor’s only job is to make a 

player well enough to play, and the further you go back in NFL 

history, the worse it was. In 1996, I found out about the new disabled player benefit for degenerative disabilities. I applied, was 

98

told I needed to see a doctor of their choice at my own expense, to 

be reimbursed if I qualified. The physician would make a recommendation to a board who meets once every 6 months. 

First doctor was in Everett, close to my hometown. He said that 

I was the worst case he had seen and recommended approval to the 

board. The board voted, a result 3-3 tie. I was seen by Dr. Smith 

in Seattle, the next one they referred me to, who said I was the 

worst he had seen. Again the vote was 3 to 3. Then I was referred 

and told I would have to see a third doctor in Los Angeles, who 

would be the final word. No more votes. At my own expense I went 

to see Dr. James DeBone, the MAP, medical advisory physician you 

heard about, in August 19 97. He, too, said I was the worst he had 

seen, and he was going to recommend I receive the disability. 

The board had no choice but to approve the benefits. The whole 

process took about a year and a half. I believe that the procedure 

is much too cumbersome. I went through it and experienced it firsthand. And I find it very interesting when I hear those in the process itself say that I must be confused about my own experience. 

They tell me it didn’t take that long; it only took a few months. 

And they send me pieces of paper showing I applied in 1997 and 

got it in 1997, which is ridiculous. I was a football player, but I am 

not stupid. Most people would be surprised at my IQ, and I have 

no problems with my memory. 

To prepare for today, I read the transcript of the Mike Webster 

case and was extremely disappointed. It reminded me of the feelings I experienced when going through my application process. I 

felt as though some members of the board reviewing my case were 

looking for the smallest loophole to not grant disability, rather than 

trying to find people who truly qualified. I had no leg, no hips, no 

back, and the rest of my body was falling apart, and the doctors 

recommended that I receive the disability. And I thought to myself 

if I don’t qualify, who does? 

I appreciate that the NFL CBA introduced the degenerative disability plan at all, but more needs to be done. The suggestion I 

read to rely on the Social Security standard for qualification is as 

good a place to start as any, but the process must be open to scrutiny and streamlined. In addition, the benefit is currently a monetary benefit only, and never being able to work again means you 

will never qualify for health insurance either. I believe the disability plan should have a health insurance component as well. 

In closing, I would like to add that the players who came before 

us are the foundation of all that came after us. They deserve our 

respect and compassion. Their medical treatment they received 

during their playing days was far inferior to that of today’s milliondollar athletes, and they are suffering from consequences in the 

here and now. It is easy for those who are dealing in the world of 

the high-finance NFL on a day-to-day basis to get caught up in how 

important, who they are and what they do seem to be, so much so 

that it is easy to forget the suffering of those trailblazers who have 

no voice today. 

I may be in the minority, but I believe that the union should 

fight for the players of the past and make the improvements that 

are required to serve their needs. Regardless of who is in leadership, the NFL must do more. 

99

Thank you very much for the time. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you, Mr. Marsh. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Marsh follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CURT MARSH


CM-1.eps
100


CM-2.eps
101


CM-3.eps
102


CM-4.eps
103


CM-5.eps
104


CM-6.eps
105


CM-7.eps
106


CM-8.eps
107

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. We are now going to take a brief recess so that we 

can assemble both panels for our round of questioning. Members 

are advised we will be in recess for a brief 5 minutes. Don’t wander 

too far. 

[Recess.] 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Okay. At this point we would like to begin our 

round of questioning for the witnesses. The same rules apply to 

your testimony. You will see the light. It will turn green when the 

time has begun. At 4 minutes it will turn orange, and at 5 minutes 

it will turn red. If you are in the middle of answering a question, 

please feel free to wrap up your final thought before we move on 

to the next Member for questioning. 

At this time I would like to recognize myself for 5 minutes of 

questioning, and I would like to begin with Mr. Curran. At a certain point in your testimony you said that the league was not really required to provide pensions to players who played prior to 1959, 

although it did. What about morally? Whose obligation or responsibility do you think it is to help former NFL players? 

Mr. CURRAN. They are part of the NFL family. We all try to help 

as best as we can. Twenty million dollars in benefits for disability 

went out just last year alone from these plans. 

So we all have an obligation to help, and as with the pre-1959ers, 

we are constantly looking to improve the manner in which we do 

it, either by speeding up the process, as we tried to do with the Social Security benefits, or through this new alliance with all these 

other funds in order to take care of players who do not qualify for 

total and permanent disability, but may qualify for other medical 

needs. 

So I believe that we all have an obligation, and I think the NFL 

is fulfilling it. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Mr. Ell, I am interested, you talked about the fiduciaries of the plan. And I want to talk about the six members on 

the board who review these applications for disability benefits. My 

understanding is that three of the members who serve as fiduciaries of that plan are picked by the owners, and three are picked 

by the current players. Are there any retired players, or do the retired players have a say in who sits on that six-person board? 

Mr. ELL. Thank you. On disability decisions, under the rules of 

the Department of Labor, there is a different committee that makes 

the initial decision. Under the plan, it is called the Disability Initial Claims Committee, and each of the sides appoints one person 

to that. Appeals——

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Do retired members have a say in who sits on 

that? 

Mr. ELL. The union appoints one person. That person is not a retired player. But there are three retired——

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Does the union represent retired players? 

Mr. ELL. I think I would have to defer to the labor lawyers, but 

I believe under the labor law the union is required to represent active players. The union has fought very hard for the retired players. The motto of the NFL——

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. The answer to my question would be no, there is 

no retired players who sit on that board then. 

108

Mr. ELL. There are three retired players who sit on the Retirement Board. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. The Retirement Board, but not the Disability 

Board. 

Mr. ELL. That is correct. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. You also mentioned that the fiduciaries of this 

plan, they don’t get to make the rules, they just get to interpret 

the rules. 

Mr. ELL. Yes. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. As an attorney it makes a great deal of difference 

oftentimes to cases depending upon who is interpreting the rules 

or how the rules are being interpreted. And I wanted to ask Mr. 

Smith about that. You maintain that basically the languages of the 

plans are okay, or the proposed changes to the language where the 

Social Security disability standard would apply may not make any 

deal of difference because it is all in what? It is all in the interpretation of those rules. 

I want to ask you, particularly because I know you probably have 

a lot of experience with this, about the review that courts have over 

these decisions of arbitrators. It is my understanding that 24 of 25 

cases that were brought before the Federal court the retired players lost because of the difficulty in overcoming the arbitrary and 

capricious standards. Could you clarify that or elaborate on that for 

us? 

Mr. SMITH. The Supreme Court has said, in a 1989 decision, that 

if the plan document gives that sort of discretion to the Retirement 

Board or the plan administrator, then a review of a decision will 

be for abuse of discretion. That doesn’t mean that the plan administrator or the Retirement Board was right; it just means they 

weren’t shockingly wrong. And the courts have said very often that 

there might be decisions they don’t agree with, they would have 

made different decisions, they could even be against the weight of 

the evidence, but as long as they are not an abuse of discretion, 

then the fiduciary will be sustained. 

So to say that the plan has won a number of these cases just 

tells you that the barrier for review is very high. The fact that 

there have been that many cases suggests that there is something 

broken in the system. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you. 

I want to ask the retired players about health insurance and how 

expensive it would be to purchase health insurance, considering the 

preexisting conditions that most of you suffer. Anybody want to 

take a stab at that? 

Mr. MARSH. I quit looking. Ten or eleven years ago, when I was 

looking, when I left the city of Everett and I could not work anymore, it was going to cost me around $700 a month at that point 

to get health insurance for me and my wife and three children, and 

it would have been just hugely expensive for me. And I am sure 

it is a lot more than that. Over $1,000 a month it would probably 

cost me to have health insurance. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Anybody else? 

Mr. CARSON. Well, you know, I had the opportunity to shop for 

insurance as well. I found it to be a bit more than I could pay, because after my football career ended, and also dealing with the 

109

postconcussion syndrome, my life sort of took a hit. It didn’t hit 

rock bottom, but it took a hit, and I had to make a decision as to 

what essentials I was going to spend my money on, whether it be 

my mortgage or whether it be my utilities or whatever. At that 

point, buying insurance was not something that I could do. If I had 

to go to a doctor, I basically would pay out of pocket. And God forbid if I had come down with some catastrophic illness, I would have 

had to mortgage my house and whatever investments I had had. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Mr. Marsh? 

Mr. MARSH. I would just like to make one more comment, if I 

may. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Briefly. 

Mr. MARSH. I just want to clean up one misconception that many 

people may have. When you hear that someone like me was a firstround draft pick, I was drafted in 1981. And just to make it clear, 

I played for 7 years. I was the 23rd player picked in 1981. In my 

entire career over that 7 years, I did not make $1 million if you 

add all the money I made together in my NFL career. So I retired 

with enough money to buy a house and invest in a business, and 

now—and then I had to find a job. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Okay. Thank you. My time has expired. 

I will now recognize my distinguished Ranking Member Mr. Cannon for 5 minutes of questioning. 

Mr. CANNON. Thank you, Madam Chair. Was my opening statement included in the record? 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. It was. 

Mr. CANNON. Thank you. I appreciate that. And I apologize not 

having been here. I needed to be on the floor, making an amendment to the Interior appropriations bill. 

I want to thank our panel for being here. This is actually a pretty interesting group of people, and surprisingly articulate. Maybe 

I shouldn’t be surprised, but you guys have made a case that I 

think is very thoughtful. 

This Committee is about the rules, and we were actually having 

a discussion about the rules on our side of the aisle here. And so 

without jeopardizing any future ability to object to the rules, we actually have a Member of the Committee who has a special interest 

in these issues, and so I would—if she is interested, I would be 

pleased to yield to the gentlelady from California for the period of 

my time. 

Ms. Waters. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Ms. Waters. 

Ms. WATERS. Well, thank you very much. I think that is very 

generous. I am a Member of the Judiciary Committee, but not this 

Subcommittee, and I thank you for yielding time to me. 

I do have a very special interest. My husband was a former football player, and I have learned an awful lot about what happens 

to retired football players. I want to thank Mr. Bernie Parrish for 

having dedicated his life to trying to get some justice for former 

and retired football players. And I want to talk about a case that 

I worked on. 

My husband had a friend who was a football player. His name 

was Jim Shorter, and he died an awful death. When he died, he 

110

had received several amputations. He was blind. He was on dialysis. He was broke. He had nothing. And I had to work on the case. 

I called the Players Association on many occasions, and I think 

some people down here can remember those calls. And I will never 

forget that I was not treated kindly. And I had been warned that 

that would be the case by the wife of Mr. Jim Shorter. But I was 

persistent, and I followed it all the way to showing up at one of 

the meetings of the representatives who had the fiduciary responsibility to make a decision about Mr. Jim Shorter and whether or not 

he would receive some kind of disability benefits. 

I have learned through all of this that he had taken early retirement at that time, and he was not eligible for any disability benefits. That is something that I am told may have been worked on 

since that time. But I have to tell you for these players who played 

years ago who didn’t make a lot of money and who ended up retiring and not having much in the way of money to live on, they did 

take early retirement in order to have some income, but they didn’t 

know, they truly did not know, that this would eliminate their ability to get disability benefits no matter what was discovered about 

their medical condition and whether or not it was connected to the 

time that they played. 

Having said that, I think it was Mr. Ell or Mr. Curran who mentioned that there are 317 players now on disability. Is that correct? 

Mr. ELL. Yes, that is correct. 

Ms. WATERS. What is the number of players that have played for 

the NFL, and what percentage is represented by this 317, out of 

how many players? 

Mr. ELL. I think if you count terminated vested players, that is 

players who played at least 3 years and entitled to a pension and 

potential disability, and then we have about 3,000 people currently 

collecting a benefit, and about 2,100 active players, you can add it 

up in different ways, that adds up to about 10,000 people roughly. 

Ms. WATERS. You are saying there are 10,000 people who have 

played in the NFL? 

Mr. ELL. Including current players. I think——

Ms. WATERS. Total? 

Mr. ELL. Without the current players it is about 8,000. 

Ms. WATERS. I beg your pardon? 

Mr. ELL. Without the current players it is about 8,000 terminated vested players. 

Ms. WATERS. So in one of the most dangerous sports in the history of mankind, only 317 players are receiving disability from this 

sport. Is that correct? 

Mr. ELL. Only 317 players have been found to meet the plan’s 

eligibility benefit requirements, that is correct. 

Ms. WATERS. And you mentioned that $20 million figure. Would 

you tell the Committee exactly what that represents? 

Mr. ELL. I think that was Mr. Curran’s——

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Curran, what does that 20 million represent? 

Mr. CURRAN. It is the amount of money that was going out last 

year for people on the various disability categories that I mentioned earlier: active football, active nonfootball, football degenerative, inactive, and line of duty. There are also some death beneficiaries or surviving spouse beneficiaries. 

111

Ms. WATERS. About how many people would that represent? 

Mr. CURRAN. I think that is the same number we are talking 

about. 

Ms. WATERS. The 317? 

Mr. CURRAN. That is correct. 

Ms. WATERS. Twenty million dollars. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

Mr. CURRAN. That is correct. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. I am going to ask unanimous consent to give Ms. 

Waters an extra minute to finish up that line of questioning if she 

so chooses. 

Ms. WATERS. Yes, thank you very much. 

Mr. FEENEY. Madam Chairman, if I could. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Yes. 

Mr. FEENEY. What I would like to do is give unanimous consent 

to give Mr. Cannon an additional minute, which he can yield as he 

pleases, so I can be faithful to the commitment that I gave to my 

Ranking Member. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. A very well-thought-out plan, Mr. Feeney. 

Mr. FEENEY. There is more than one way to skin a cat, Madam 

Chairman. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. That is correct. And we are doing it very nicely 

here. I will ask unanimous consent that Mr. Cannon be given an 

additional minute of questioning. 

Mr. CANNON. I thank the gentleman for that clarification, and 

appreciate the extension of the extra minute, and would be pleased 

to yield it to the gentlelady. 

Ms. WATERS. Thank you very much, and I appreciate that. 

So the $20 million comes from the fund for the NFL Players Association. How much is in that fund? 

Mr. CURRAN. 1.1 billion. 

Ms. WATERS. $1.1 billion, and you spent $20 million last year on 

317 players total. 

Mr. CURRAN. The rest of the funds are committed for future retirements. It is funded for those people that are going to retire in 

the future and have disabilities in the future. So that money is not 

discretionary. It is already committed. 

Ms. WATERS. So you don’t differentiate between disability and retirement. You have to have the money there for retirement. So all 

that money that is spent on disability takes away from the retirement money; is that correct? 

Mr. CURRAN. No, that is not correct. 

Ms. WATERS. How does it work? 

Mr. CURRAN. Both the retirement and the disability future needs 

are in one fund, except for a supplemental disability fund, which 

even gives more. But as far as the Bert Bell fund is concerned, both 

disabilities and pensions are funded for what is anticipated——

Ms. WATERS. How much is in the disability fund? 

Mr. CURRAN. It is one fund. It is the 1.1 billion. 

Ms. WATERS. That is what I thought, and that is what I said. It 

is all in one fund. So to the degree that you give out money or you 

pay out money for disability, it reduces the amount of money for 

retirement; is that correct? 

112

Mr. CURRAN. No, that is not correct. We will always have to pay 

the full amount of retirement to which we have committed. And if 

the money is insufficient to do that, we would have to put in more 

money. It would never revert. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. The time of the gentleman has once again expired. 

At this time I would like to recognize the gentleman from Massachusetts Mr. Delahunt. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Mr. Curran, you indicated in your opening remarks that you 

were funding this willingly. I almost drew the inference that this 

was out of altruism and a sense of compassion. I presume this is 

achieved as a result of negotiations, it is a collective bargaining 

agreement. 

Mr. CURRAN. That is correct. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. The NFL didn’t do this because they wanted to 

be kind and good. They sat down and in negotiations and they 

reached an agreement; is that a fair statement? 

Mr. CURRAN. We reached an agreement with the union on disability, that is correct. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. Thank you. 

You know, 20 million out of 1.1—I mean, you say it in a way that 

makes it seem like it is a significant amount of money. That 1.1—

presumably is professionally managed. 

Mr. CURRAN. That is correct. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. Right. And I presume that there is a return on 

investment that is somewhat equal to what we see in an index 

fund, for example? 

Mr. CURRAN. Yes. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. So if the index fund should achieve a growth of 

15 percent a year, it is earning $150 million a year. Is my math 

pretty well? 

Mr. CURRAN. Our target is 7.25 percent actually. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. Yeah. I hope you do better than 7.25. 

Mr. CURRAN. It depends on the markets. Three years ago we 

didn’t. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. Right. You know, if I could do better than that, 

I would think the NFL pension system could do better than that. 

But, you know, it seems to me—and I can understand the frustration of the retired players here—there is a quote that I came across 

by the president of the players union, and let me read it into the 

record. It’s from a New York Times article. And this is Mr. Gene 

Upshaw. He told a North Carolina newspaper, the bottom line is 

I don’t work for the retired players. They don’t hire me, and they 

can’t fire me. They can complain about me all day long, but the active players have the vote. That is who pays my salary. 

I guess that clarifies your confusion, Mr. Ell, as to whether the 

retired players are part of the union or they are not, if we can accept that statement as being accurate. 

Mr. ELL. If I may, I think that statement was clearly taken out 

of context. Over the——

Mr. DELAHUNT. I am not asking about that statement. 

Mr. ELL. All I am saying is I don’t think it is an accurate statement at all of how Gene Upshaw and the union leaders have operated over——

113

Mr. DELAHUNT. I am not asking how they operated. I am asking 

whether the retired players are part of the union. 

Mr. ELL. Legally, no. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. Legally, no. 

Mr. ELL. Correct. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. Maybe it was taken out of context. But I am sure 

that retired players who read that particular quote are not encouraged to believe that they are being adequately represented on the 

issues that directly impact them. It doesn’t go to build confidence. 

Mr. ELL. I understand that, but legally under the law——

Mr. DELAHUNT. I understand, but we can change the law here. 

That is what we are doing. And we see, at least I see, okay, a sense 

of disenfranchisement on the part of the retired players. Now, that 

might be perception, that might be accurate, I don’t know, but I 

think it would behoove the NFL and the NFL Players Association 

to consider, you know, either absorbing the retired players into the 

Players Association so that they have a sense that they are being 

adequately represented. Do you have a problem with that, Mr. Ell? 

Mr. ELL. Absolutely not. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. Okay. 

Mr. ELL. The retired players have an association, and Mr. Fugett 

here is the head of the Retired Players Association associated with 

the NFLPA. Mr. Fugett attended the——

Mr. DELAHUNT. I am sure that he does a terrific job. I am not 

even commenting on that. What I am saying is when it comes down 

to decisions and issues that impact how they live and the quality 

of their life, they want to be at the table represented by an association that they have confidence in. 

I think it was Mr. Ditka that said let us fix the problem. How 

do we go about fixing the problem? There is enough money, you 

know, sloshing around. What does the industry generate now in 

terms of income, 7-, 8-, $9 billion a year? 

Mr. ELL. I heard 7-. I don’t know. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. I don’t know either, but what I am saying is I 

think in terms of respect and dignity, you know, there is enough 

there in terms of the size of the pie to address what I believe to 

be legitimate concerns when you have retired players who come before this Congress and say that they can’t get health insurance. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

At this time I would like to recognize the gentleman from Florida 

Mr. Feeney for 5 minutes of questioning. 

Mr. FEENEY. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Mr. Smith, given your experience and your relationships with 

others that have represented players with disabilities, is there a 

bias in the selection of the physicians that do the review in terms 

of the eligibility for disability? 

Mr. SMITH. Some of the physicians appear to be neutral; some of 

them do not. It depends. A much bigger problem is the phenomenon of doctor shopping, where the plan will send an applicant 

to multiple doctors, until they have at least one report that they 

can use to create a division in the medical evidence, and then rely 

on that same abuse of discretion that I was being asked about earlier to find that the applicant is not disabled. 

114

Mr. FEENEY. Well, given that, Ms. Wagner, this Committee has 

no jurisdiction over ERISA, and you are an expert in ERISA. We 

do, the full Committee does, have jurisdiction, not this Subcommittee, over antitrust issues. And there are antitrust exemptions for the NFL Players Association. Mr. Smith has said he 

thinks that this is an attitudinal problem, that new legislation 

can’t fix it. Do you agree with that? And is there anything that you 

can think of that we can do? 

I mean, we just heard the president of the union Mr. Upshaw 

suggest that he doesn’t represent, at least in his opinion, the 

former players. Obviously, the owners have some differing interests 

than former players that are asking for disability that they are 

going to have to in part fund. So if nobody is there representing, 

as they appoint these three people on the review boards, you got 

three appointed by Mr. Upshaw, who says he doesn’t represent the 

former players, three appointed by the owners, is there something 

that we need to do legislatively, or do you agree with Mr. Smith 

that this is a mere attitudinal problem of the people making the 

decisions? 

Ms. WAGNER. Well, I think a couple things. First of all, I think 

one of the questions you are asking is outside of my jurisdiction, 

which is ERISA. The joint boards are, in fact, required, as I understand it, and I am not a labor lawyer, by the Labor Management 

Relations Act of 1947, the Taft-Hartley Act, so I think you need to 

talk to somebody else about the makeup of that Board. 

But I think that, although obviously I don’t know about the implementation here, it strikes me that looking at the plan documents, they seem to follow exactly what they should do. They seem 

to say the right things. They seem to be approaching the problem 

the right way from an ERISA perspective. But some of the delays, 

and apparent by long delays, concern me without knowing, frankly, 

from my perspective, whether people have filed serial claims and 

that is the reason for the long delays; whether people have agreed 

to the delays, which the plan allows them to do; or whether or not 

there is something else happening here. It is really an implementation question, I think, rather than a structural or design question. 

Mr. FEENEY. If there is nobody aggressively protecting the interests of former players who may have disabilities, either at the front 

end, when we are deciding how much money to put aside, or on the 

back end, when we are deciding who is eligible, and we have a 

group that should be protected that is not protected, and isn’t there 

something legislatively you can think of we need to do to fix that? 

Ms. WAGNER. No, I don’t really think so. And let me tell you my 

experience is mostly with single-employer plans, not multiemployer 

plans like we are talking about here. In a single-employer plan the 

employer decides, period, how the plan is designed. You don’t have 

collective bargaining, you don’t even have the input of the active 

players. So this already takes the process a step further from the 

perspective of where I sit most of the time. You don’t have input 

of retired people in single-employer plans either. 

Mr. FEENEY. But this is a little different than your typical employer. It is a dangerous work environment, even for those of us 

that are among the most avid football fans. We don’t send OSHA 

onto the practice field every day to make sure everybody is getting 

115

the right amount of hydration and being treated—we don’t do that. 

We actually give an antitrust exemption from a lot of Federal laws. 

Coach Ditka, you indicate in your testimony that there are 300 

players that have been documented and identified as in need of disability assistance. I assume that is in addition to the 317 that the 

NFL and the NFLPA collective bargaining agreement is paying? 

Mr. DITKA. Yeah. Mr. Feeney, I am not sure that is 100 percent 

right. It is somewhere in that area. And, you know, I just think to 

go back and pick up these people and take care of them, it is not 

that big a problem. I go back to, you know, we hear the NFL talk 

about what they do, we hear the owners, but what do they really 

do? Don’t they have a responsibility and an obligation as owners 

who have made a heck of a lot of money? Believe me, nobody is 

going broke. Players Association, sure they fought for what they 

had to get, for benefits, and I understand all that. They got a lot 

of money in the coffers also. 

The responsibility has to go back to the league and the owners 

as well as anybody else to take care of these people. That is what 

it is all about, just right versus wrong, period. You know, do the 

ethical thing or do the wrong thing. So far they have chosen a path 

of the wrong thing. 

Now they come up with this idea we are going to form another 

committee, but this time we are going to put Mr. Upshaw, the 

Commissioner of the National Football League, NFL Charities, 

NFL this, NFL that, and they had the audacity to say would you 

take the money in your trust, which is minute, and put it into our 

fund so we can administrate it? Come on. You got to be kidding. 

That is exactly what they don’t do. They don’t administrate anything. It is a bunch of red tape and a bureaucracy. That is all it 

is. 

Now, listen, when people have needs, they come to us, and we 

say, what are your needs? You need money? You got to pay the 

bill? Bang, you get a check. What the hell is the matter with that? 

Why is that wrong? I don’t understand it. Take care of them. Then 

go out and make them fill out the forms. And then go talk to all 

your other lawmakers, the ERISA, or everybody else. And I don’t 

know all these terms. I am not that intelligent to know all this 

stuff. I am just saying I know what is right, and I know what is 

wrong. What is happening now is wrong, period. 

Mr. FEENEY. Madam Chair, I don’t want to quarrel with Coach 

Ditka. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. I wouldn’t recommend it. 

Mr. FEENEY. I yield back the balance of my time. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you, Mr. Feeney. 

At this time I would like to recognize the gentleman from Georgia Mr. Johnson for 5 minutes. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

On Sunday evenings, Sunday afternoons and evenings, you 

know, the American public puts on that TV, big screen TV, sometimes two or three games on at one time, and sits there and watches the games, and we see the warriors out there who are playing 

through injuries that any mortal man would take a few weeks out 

and let the recuperation process set in. But they get out there anyway because they got the finest of medical care, they have the 

116

gentle urging of their coaches, Coach Ditka, to play through the 

pain. There is always somebody in the background ready to take 

their spot if they don’t, and it is a very competitive situation. 

We watch all of the ads, we go to the games, we drink the beer. 

It is all so many people making money. And the athletes on Monday morning go into rehab and try to get ready for the next week’s 

game. And then after the season is over, you know, it all begins 

once again to get ready. And so superhuman dedication by these 

players. 

And then once they finish their careers, after having been 

smacked around in the head with closed head injuries that don’t 

start manifesting until some point later, they start knocking on 

doors, wanting to consider disability payments, and so they make 

application. Who do they make application to but a Disability Initial Claims Committee, a two-person committee, one person appointed by the NFL, the other person appointed by the NFL Players Association. And I guess these individuals who make up that 

Disability Initial Claims Committee are paid for their work. Is that 

not correct? 

Mr. ELL. One of them is an employee of the NFL, one is an employee of the NFLPA. They are not paid by the plan. 

Mr. JOHNSON. They do get compensation for rendering their service and adjudicating the claims, correct? 

Mr. ELL. Correct. 

Mr. JOHNSON. And they like to get called back so that they can 

adjudicate more claims, and I guess so that they can make money, 

too. 

Mr. ELL. Actually——

Mr. JOHNSON. Hold on now. I guess the numbers that have been 

cited that were revealed by Congresswoman Waters show a great 

gaping disparity between the former players and those who are receiving disability benefits. And just looking around this room I see 

there is so many interested people here today that appear visibly 

they are injured. I can see that they are injured. 

But at any rate, the claim gets denied at that process, at the Disability Initial Claims Committee, and then the poor old slob has to 

appeal to a six-member Retirement Board; again, three of those 

persons appointed by the NFL and three appointed by the NFL 

Players. And those people get paid, too, to decide the claims; do 

they not? 

Mr. ELL. That is not true. They never received a penny in compensation for being fiduciaries or deciding claims. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Maybe we should pay some professional folks, and 

those folks might even go to work, because this review board 

doesn’t work but four times a year to handle the claims. And then 

there is no ability of the poor player to appeal the decision, isn’t 

that correct, once they get denied? 

Mr. ELL. Once they get a final denial from the Retirement 

Board——

Mr. JOHNSON. There is no appeal to an independent body. 

Mr. ELL. The Retirement Board is a second body. After that——

Mr. JOHNSON. And there is no further appeal after that body. 

Mr. ELL. Generally, unless sometimes the Retirement Board allows another appeal if——

117

Mr. JOHNSON. The door is closed. 

Mr. ELL [continuing]. If there is a concern that the player hasn’t 

had a chance to put enough evidence in. 

Mr. JOHNSON. The door is then slammed shut on the player. And 

then as a result we have got the players who are here today who 

complain that as a result of all of this money that has been made 

on their backs, their blood, sweat and tears, that in their time of 

need the door is shut. And there is no one there, and they have 

to resort to the baseball players to help them out, to give them a 

hand-out. And that to me, for a proud warrior who has given their 

service, is quite a tragedy. My heart cries for those who are afflicted, and I know that there is something that we must do in 

order to correct this injustice. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. The time of the gentleman has expired. 

At this time there is enough interest in a second round of 5-

minute questioning, if you would indulge us. I will recognize myself. 

Mr. Ell or Mr. Curran, can either of you tell me why there is a 

12-year statute of limitations on disability claims? I am interested 

in knowing why and who set the timeline. And particularly given 

the serious nature of the injuries that can be sustained over the 

course of a football career, why would there be a process that was 

structured so that there is a limited time frame when benefits can 

be claimed, when the immediate effects or aftereffects of some very 

serious injuries can last a lifetime? 

Mr. ELL. Thank you. There is no 12-year statute of limitations. 

If you are unable to work 25 years after leaving the NFL, for whatever reason, you can get disability benefits. I think you may be referring to a provision in the plan that says you can’t get the higher 

football degenerative disability benefits. Right now the period for 

that is 15 years. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Why is that? 

Mr. ELL. I believe the problem that I believe was considered is 

that the longer after a player leaves the game, the harder it is to 

figure out whether it was football-related or not. And the collective 

bargaining parties decided to put their—spend the higher dollars 

on the people who became unable to work sooner, because they had 

a greater confidence that that was caused by football. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. I am curious to ask some of the retired players 

whether they think that that is a good idea or not to have a 15-

year statute of limitations for which a player can—is then barred 

from going back and getting the higher football-related injury benefits. 

Mr. CARSON. Personally I think it is unfair, because I played 13 

years in the National Football League, and having been out of the 

league almost 19 years now, I am starting to feel things that I experienced when I played, the injuries, the knees, the ankles, the 

hips, my back. The whole postconcussion thing has manifested 

itself over the years, and it hasn’t really gone away. When I was 

diagnosed 2 years after leaving football, it was deemed to be permanent in nature. And I just can’t help but think that I went—I 

got tested because I knew something was wrong with me. There 

are a whole bunch of other players who are walking around, and 

they don’t know what is wrong with them because there is no reaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:09 Jul 15, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00123 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\WORK\COMM\062607\36344.000 HJUD1 PsN: 36344
118

son for them to be tested, because perhaps physically they feel fine. 

Neurologically they may be off somewhat. And I think this is the 

same problem that many of the soldiers who are coming back from 

Iraq are dealing with, postconcussion syndrome. 

And so in my opinion, I think players should have lifetime health 

coverage, because the things that you put your body through on the 

football field, they never go away. You are going to take those 

things to the grave with you, whether it be knees—and there are 

so many of my friends now who are having knee replacement surgery. I am 53, and these guys, some of them are in their forties 

having knee and hip replacement surgeries right now. And so 15 

years is really a joke. It should be lifetime. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Let me ask Mr. Ell or Mr. Curran, because of medical advances specifically, and an increased understanding of the 

symptoms of concussions, do you guys think that there should be 

a statute of limitations that precludes claims by older players who 

suffered concussions in the past? 

Mr. CURRAN. Well, again, as Mr. Ell indicated, there is no statute 

of limitations. It is a question of what the level of benefits would 

be. And in the plan itself there is a——

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Is there not a significant difference between the 

benefits received by a, quote/unquote, football-related injury versus 

just a regular disability? 

Mr. CURRAN. Yes, there is. There is a significant difference. And 

as Mr. Ell indicated——

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. So why should players who maybe don’t see the 

aftereffects for many years after their careers end be precluded 

from claiming the higher benefit? 

Mr. CURRAN. Well, the reason it was put in, as Mr. Ell indicated 

earlier, was to make sure that we could connect up more closely to 

football people who would be 45 years old, if they retired at 30, and 

therefore be sure the benefit was football-related. Now, is that an 

arbitrary time? It is a little bit. Perhaps we could revisit that. However——

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Perhaps you should revisit that. 

Mr. Smith, do you believe that arbitration should have a more 

prominent role in the disability benefits process? Because some current critics of the system have suggested that allowing an arbitrator to hear all appeals and benefit denials, rather than the current system under the Retirement Board, might be a better approach. Do you agree with that? 

Mr. SMITH. I think there is some merit to that, Madam Chairwoman. Right now your appeal is from this two-person Disability 

Initial Claims Committee to the Retirement Board. It is all inside 

the same box. And I don’t believe that anyone on the Retirement 

Board has medical expertise, unless it is by coincidence. There 

would be room, I think, for truly neutral arbitrators, that is to say 

people who are not beholden to the Retirement Board or the NFL 

plan, that the parties have a role in selecting or maybe selecting 

a neutral arbitrator. That, I think, would be a big improvement on 

the present system. And it is certainly something that is within, as 

I understand it, the Subcommittee’s jurisdiction. Right now there 

is no neutrality and not a lot of knowledge at the appeal level. The 

appeal is an appeal in name only. 

119

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you. 

Did you want to add something to that, Mr. Boyd? 

Mr. BOYD. Yeah, I did about that, because there is no medical 

people involved in this disability process at all. There is three team 

owners, who are businessmen. There is three ex-football players, 

who are friends and appointees of Gene Upshaw. There is no doctors in the room when they have these board meetings. Doug Ell 

and Groom Law, they take all the medical information, and it is 

all filtered through Doug Ell, and it is presented to the six voting 

members of the Disability Board, and they vote on Doug’s recommendation. There is not a doctor in the room, there is not a 

medical person in the whole process from start to finish. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you. My time has expired. 

I would now like to recognize our generous and sportsmanlike 

Ranking Member Mr. Cannon for 5 minutes of questioning. 

Mr. CANNON. The sports goes back a long, long time, almost as 

much as some of you guys, and not nearly so distinguished. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Now, the jurisdiction of this Committee relates to the arbitration 

provisions of these disability issues. The full Committee has antitrust jurisdiction, which is often delegated to this Committee, but 

which this year or this Congress has been put in a task force. But 

many of the Members of this Committee serve on this task force 

and are involved, as I am, in these issues of antitrust. 

And it seems to me that—I mention that to put some teeth into 

what I am about to say, which is that there is some serious concern. I think it is fairly clear that there is some dissatisfaction and 

a lack of a clear response, except the legalistic response to the fact 

that the interests of retired players are not considered in the process maybe as much as they should be, and that I suspect is because 

of a failure or because the National Labor Relations Act precludes 

the representation of retirees. But the sports situation, because it 

is unique, has antitrust provisions. But also because it is unique, 

you may want to consider some other kind of adjustment perhaps 

beyond the scope of this Committee. But that would be that most 

employers have people that are young who have just started the 

workforce at 20 or 30 and others at 40 or 50 and others at 60 or 

even beyond 60 who are getting ready to retire, and their judgment 

matures as they stay in the profession and therefore as they look 

at the retirees, they have a slightly different perspective than I 

think may be the case in sports. 

So Mr. Ell, Mr. Curran, should we be looking at an adjustment 

to the NLRB that would allow for a difference for players who tend 

to be very young and therefore not all the perspective that they 

might have as they get older so that we can create some justice out 

of what appears a fairly unjust system or at least a system which 

is hard to make just because of the lack of representation by the 

retired players through the union? Should we get a special exemption that allows a change in the way the union is able to represent 

retirees? 

Mr. ELL. That is quite a question. The money for all these benefits comes out of the active players, and I think that is what the 

law currently recognizes. I am not an NLRB expert. I do think it 

is unfair to say that the Players Association and Gene Upshaw is 

120

not concerned about the retirees. Hundreds of millions of dollars——

Mr. CANNON. That is not what I said. The point is that the retirees are not represented in the process in large part because the 

union can’t represent the retirees, not that any person is bad or 

wrong or evil but rather the process produces results that I think 

are pretty clearly incongruous. 

Mr. CURRAN. Well, I don’t personally believe that a law change 

is necessary. I think that the former players that have been appointed by the union are well able to exercise their fiduciary responsibilities on behalf of all former players. The trustees have 

changed over time since 1982, many times, and they have all 

stepped up to the plate and done their fiduciary duties. So I don’t 

accept that the process is broken. 

I believe that what Gene Upshaw has done for former players is 

well beyond what he had to do legally, as I said earlier, and the 

League is happy to make those retired players raise their benefits 

and retirement and raise the disability benefits. I don’t believe a 

law change is necessary. 

Mr. CANNON. I actually thought I was working from a fairly common presumption here. But I think I heard you say that the players are adequately representing the interests of the retirees. 

Mr. CURRAN. I believe that the trustees appointed by the Players 

Association, former players themselves, are adequate to represent 

them in the retirement process. If you are talking about collective 

bargaining, then that is the union which is made up of the current 

members. 

Mr. CANNON. But the trustees are elected by the members of the 

union. 

Mr. CURRAN. They are appointed by the union. That is correct. 

Mr. CANNON. The union is made up of people—unlike any other 

industry—it is made up of people who are very young and who lack 

a certain perspective on the future. In fact, I don’t think you can 

get anybody but young people to do the kind of self-destructive 

things that happen in football. 

Mr. CURRAN. It is a young workforce. That is correct. The trustees are not appointed by the workforce but by the union itself, 

which has a very historical view. 

Mr. CANNON. But the union itself represents the people who are 

active. 

Mr. CURRAN. That is correct. 

Mr. CANNON. And that union is elected by the people who are active who are very young. 

Mr. CURRAN. That is correct. 

Mr. CANNON. I see my time has expired but think the point is 

fairly clear, that there is an inequity here, Madam Chairman, and 

perhaps there ought to be a legal solution. I yield back. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. That is what we are here today to determine. 

Thank you, Mr. Cannon. 

I am going to ask unanimous consent to be entered into the 

record a number of articles that we have received and the staff has 

received with respect to the subject matter of today’s hearing, as 

well as letters and e-mails that we have received regarding the 

121

NFLPA. And without objection, so ordered. Those will be entered 

into the record. 

[The information referred to follows:]

122

SUBMISSION LIST ON FILE WITH THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, SUBCOMMITTEE

ON COMMERCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, FROM FORMER NATIONAL FOOTBALL

LEAGUE PLAYERS


B-1.eps
123


B-2.eps
124


B-3.eps
125


B-4.eps
126


B-5.eps
127


B-6.eps
128


B-7.eps
129

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. I also want to recognize again Congresswoman 

Waters for participating with us today and we were also joined by 

Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee from Texas as well. I do want 

to thank again all the witnesses for their testimony today. It has 

been very helpful. 

Without objection, Members will have 5 legislative days to submit any additional written questions, which we will forward to the 

witnesses and ask that you answer as promptly as you can to also 

be made a part of the record. Without objection, the record will remain open for 5 legislative days for the submission of any other additional materials. 

Again, I thank everybody for their time and their patience, and 

this hearing of the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:15 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(131)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

132

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS FROM DENNIS CURRAN,

NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE


C-1.eps
133


C-2.eps
134

f


C-3.eps
135

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS FROM DOUGLAS W. ELL, PLAN COUNSEL TO

THE BERT BELL/PETE ROZELLE NFL PLAYERS RETIREMENT PLAN


D-1.eps
136

f


D-2.eps
137

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS FROM MARTHA JO WAGNER, ESQUIRE, 

VENABLE LLP


E-1.eps
138


E-2.eps
139

f


E-3.eps
140

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS FROM CYRIL V. (CY) SMITH,

ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP

f


F.eps
141

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS FROM MIKE DITKA, FORMER NFL COACH


G-1.eps
142


G-2.eps
143


G-3.eps
144


G-4.eps
145


G-5.eps
146


G-6.eps
147


G-7.eps
148


G-8.eps
149


G-9.eps
150


G-10.eps
151


G-11.eps
152


G-12.eps
153


G-13.eps
154


G-14.eps
155


G-15.eps
156


G-16.eps
157


G-17.eps
158

— Tab 1 —


G-19.eps
159


G-20.eps
160


G-21.eps
161


G-22.eps
162


G-23.eps
163


G-24.eps
164

— Tab 2 —


G-26.eps
165


G-27.eps
166


G-28.eps
167


G-29.eps
168


G-30.eps
169


G-31.eps
170


G-32.eps
171

— Tab 3 —


G-34.eps
172


G-35.eps
173


G-36.eps
174


G-37.eps
175


G-38.eps
176


G-39.eps
177


G-40.eps
178


G-41.eps
179


G-42.eps
180


G-43.eps
181


G-44.eps
182


G-45.eps
183


G-46.eps
184


G-47.eps
185

— Tab 4 —


G-49.eps
186


G-50.eps
187


G-51.eps
188


G-52.eps
189


G-53.eps
190


G-54.eps
191


G-55.eps
192


G-56.eps
193


G-57.eps
194


G-58.eps
195


G-59.eps
196


G-60.eps
197


G-61.eps
198


G-62.eps
199

— Tab 5 —


G-64.eps
200


G-65.eps
201


G-66.eps
202


G-67.eps
203


G-68.eps
204

— Tab 6 —


G-70.eps
205


G-71.eps
206


G-72.eps
207

— Tab 7 —


G-74.eps
208

— Tab 8 —


G-76.eps
209


G-77.eps
210


G-78.eps
211


G-79.eps
212


G-80.eps
213

— Tab 9 —


G-82.eps
214


G-83.eps
215


G-84.eps
216


G-85.eps
217


G-86.eps
218


G-87.eps
219


G-88.eps
220


G-89.eps
221


G-90.eps
222


G-91.eps
223


G-92.eps
224


G-93.eps
225


G-94.eps
226


G-95.eps
227


G-96.eps
228


G-97.eps
229


G-98.eps
230


G-99.eps
231


G-100.eps
232


G-101.eps
233


G-102.eps
234


G-103.eps
235


G-104.eps
236


G-105.eps
237


G-106.eps
238


G-107.eps
239


G-108.eps
240


G-109.eps
241

— Tab 10 —


G-111.eps
242


G-112.eps
243


G-113.eps
244


G-114.eps
245


G-115.eps
246


G-116.eps
247


G-117.eps
248


G-118.eps
249


G-119.eps
250


G-120.eps
251

— Tab 11 —


G-122.eps
252


G-123.eps
253


G-124.eps
254

— Tab 12 —


G-126.eps
255


G-127.eps
256


G-128.eps
257


G-129.eps
258


G-130.eps
259


G-131.eps
260

— Tab 13 —


G-133.eps
261


G-134.eps
262


G-135.eps
263


G-136.eps
264


G-137.eps
265


G-138.eps
266


G-139.eps
267


G-140.eps
268


G-141.eps
269


G-142.eps
270

— Tab 14 —


G-144.eps
271


G-145.eps
272


G-146.eps
273


G-147.eps
274


G-148.eps
275


G-149.eps
276


G-150.eps
277


G-151.eps
278


G-152.eps
279


G-153.eps
280


G-154.eps
281


G-155.eps
282


G-156.eps
283


G-157.eps
284


G-158.eps
285

— Tab 15 —


G-160.eps
286


G-161.eps
287

— Tab 16 —


G-163.eps
288

f


G-164.eps
289

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS FROM HARRY CARSON, RETIRED NFL PLAYER

f


H.eps
290

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS FROM CURT MARSH, RETIRED NFL PLAYER

f


I.eps
291

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS FROM BRENT BOYD, RETIRED NFL PLAYER


J-1.eps
292


J-2.eps
293


J-3.eps
294


J-4.eps
295


J-5.eps
296


J-6.eps
297


J-7.eps
298


J-8.eps
299


J-9.eps
300


J-10.eps
301


J-11.eps
302


J-12.eps
303


J-13.eps
304


J-14.eps
305


J-15.eps
306


J-16.eps
307


J-17.eps
308

f


J-18.eps
309

LETTER FROM DOUGLAS W. ELL, PLAN COUNSEL TO THE BERT BELL/PETE ROZELLE

NFL PLAYERS RETIREMENT PLAN, TO LINDA T. SA ́ NCHEZ, CHAIR, SUBCOMMITTEE

ON COMMERCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW


K-1.eps
310


K-2.eps
311


K-3.eps
312


K-4.eps
313


K-5.eps
314


K-6.eps
315


K-7.eps
316

Æ


K-8.eps