MUST READ: Death and distress haunt members of the 2001 title team

[Patsfanin Philly]

I clicked the close button on pop up, it took me to the subscribe page, I clicked back and it worked.

I hold the escape button down while opening the link, worked this time...

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Holy crap. Not just about losing so many of the 2001 Patriots, but this stat about the NFL blew my mind.

A 2019 study of NFL players from 1979 to 2013 found their average life expectancy was 59.6 years.

And that's even with the Brady outlier at 112.

But seriously, when you just turned 60, and your dad died at 59, this stat puts an extra edge on an edge that's already there.

Also, if you think this is another species posting this, you're next. And the next "decade" I'll see, if I'm lucky... dum dum DUM... the 70s.

Better than not seeing them I guess.

 

[BTTA]

Why do you use the term "privilege?' Might some of the parents just be working class folks who, while making more than the minimum wage, lead modest lives?

Not in this case. It was very well off parents who didn't want to acknowledge the challenges working class people faced. They didn't want their kids exposed to that reality, and they didn't want to give up on their self-serving narrative that "they system works well for everyone who will work hard."

 

[VectorPrime]

Again, most people who go through struggles with addiction don’t usually have untreatable brain damage along with it.

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

I played with and knew a couple of guys who played in the NFL. Alot of the money problems happen when they come home and "show off". I used to cringe when my buddy would come home after the season, everyone knew he was in the NFL (he was a role player and not a superstar) and they would expect him to pay for everything! I can't tell you how many drinks he paid for! Then of course the women, he would shower them with gifts.

It's hard when your young and come into some money, everyone has their hand out, and you of course want to be the big man on campus!

Five years later, he is out of the league, broke, 3 kids, 3 different mommas, and a bad back!

Another guy I played with, was a 1st rd pick, married his HS sweetheart, never splashed his money and is quite well off now.

As much as I hate to say it, the married guys (or at least the faithful ones) seem to do better with the money.

I remember reading that one of the Kardaisians whores was dating an NBA player and she discovered that he was paying the cell phone bills for like 30 of his buddies!

Hopefully now that these guys are getting paid in college, they won't be going from having zero money to millions overnight and will be a little better with money when the NFL windfall happens.

 

[captain stone]

Unable to read it, and I ain't paying' Ben Trollin's & Chris Gaspar's fish wrap a ****ing penny for the "privilege" either.

 

[Stu Pidassle]

The story gives context to why Ted Johnson apparently believes BB almost ruined his life by (allegedly) making him play through concussions. I wonder, though, if they just didn't know enough back then in contrast to today's protocols.

(Thanks @Ian for providing the second link.)

You have a good point, understanding of head trauma has come a long ways since 2001. In general the Pats are recognized for being very proactive when it comes to dealing with concussions. Rich Ohrnberger specifically called this out after the Tua injury. The old article in the link provides a very detailed description of what happened to Ted Johnson. While the team made a mistake making him practice after a concussion, Ted kept playing for years after he knew that he was damaged. It is great to see that he has recovered. It is too bad that his blatant anti BB agenda invalidates any of his opinions on talk radio.

Dark Days Follow Hard-Hitting Career in N.F.L. (Published 2007)

Ted Johnson, a three-time champion, blames brain impairment and addiction on injuries during his career.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Stu Pidassle]

And credit card companies cater to that mindset.

Credit cards are the cigarettes of the finance industry.

 

[Captain Cliche]

Too many parents expect the schools to teach their kids everything. There just aren’t enough hours in the school day for that. Financial literacy needs to be taught from a young age by the parents in order for kids to the best chance when they grow up. If you’re good with money, you should not need a credit card, for example. Credit card companies do a good job of convincing people they need their products for a “rainy day.” But because so many people do not know how to budget, the interest rates and payments on those cards make it impossible for most Americans to stockpile a rainy day fund.

In about a year or so, I’m going to begin incentivizing my oldest daughter to do “chores,” like pick up her toys and put them away when she is done with them. She will get coins (which will eventually turn into dollars as the chores get more challenging) to put into a piggy bank. Every once in a while, we will empty that piggy bank and take her to the store to buy something so she can learn the value of money.

My daughter is terrible with her money.

I'm frugal, my wife is frugal, her nanny and husband (single dad) were frugal.
We all taught her about being frugal and managing money.

She's in the Navy and gets free financial counselling. None of it helps. She spends every penny and has nothing to show for it.
Her bills go unpaid and she has to pay late fees.
If I go through a period of spending, at least I have guns and knives to show for it.
I helped her buy a house in San Diego and set her up with $75,000 in mutual funds. She's in the process of selling the house and will make $90,000 in profit. She gets over $2000/month housing allowance (tax free) and had 2 roommates paying $800/mo each. I told her the money from the roomies should be surplus and go straight into the bank. She talks **** to her coworkers about they should buy a house and get ahead, but without my help, she'd be 30, renting, and broke.

I recently told her to get some counselling. "Your mother had a drug and alcohol problem. You have a spending problem."
I'll keep nagging her until she gets help.

 

[DaBruinz]

There is a huge difference in life expectancy between the general population and NFL players.

From the article:


By contrast the life expectancy of a 20-year-old male is to live to around 77 - nearly 20 years longer. Black males overall have a shorter life expectancy though, but that likely accounts for maybe 4 years of the 20 year difference.

The Boston.com misquotes the study. The study states: "All of the men tracked for the study played at least five seasons in NFL or MLB between 1959 and 1988. Their causes of death in the period of 1979 to 2013 were gleaned from preexisting databases and, in some cases, state agency death certificates."

The Study was of players who played from 1959-1988. It was NOT a study of players who played from 1979 through 2013. And yes, it makes a HUGE difference when you're attempting to compare the life expectancies.

An NFL player who is 21 in 1959, was born in 1938. The Life expectancy of black males born in 1938 was 54 years old. A white male was 62.1 years old.

An NFL player who was 21 in 1988 was born in 1967. The life expectancy of black males born in 1967 was 60. For white males it was 68.

It's a matter of putting things into the proper context. Not comparing the average age of someone who died at 59.6 who was born in 1938 to someone born in 2022 who is expected to live to 72 or 77 respectively.

I am not downplaying CTE or any of the other very REAL things that these men suffer while playing the game we watch each week. I just attempting to correct the erroneous context of the Globe article in regards to the study they referenced.

A line from that study that I find interesting is this:
"Yet, studies dating as far back as 1994 have shown that, compared with the U.S. male population at large, former NFL players have lower death rates when all causes are considered, and from cardiovascular disease in particular."

It completely SUCKS that Glenn and Patten died in car accidents at 43 and 47 respectively. It completely sucks that Turner and Myers died of cancer at 35 and 38 respectively. It completely sucks that Jones, Parker and Johnson died before 50.
That 2001 team was special.

 

[DaBruinz]

Holy crap. Not just about losing so many of the 2001 Patriots, but this stat about the NFL blew my mind.



And that's even with the Brady outlier at 112.

But seriously, when you just turned 60, and your dad died at 59, this stat puts an extra edge on an edge that's already there.

Also, if you think this is another species posting this, you're next. And the next "decade" I'll see, if I'm lucky... dum dum DUM... the 70s.

Better than not seeing them I guess.

Go read the actual study and not the butchered opinion posted by the Globe. It gives you better context.
The players in the study were born from 1938 to 1967. Look at the life expectancies from those years.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Go read the actual study and not the butchered opinion posted by the Globe. It gives you better context.
The players in the study were born from 1938 to 1967. Look at the life expectancies from those years.

Not quite as bad as it looks, at first glance.

Period Life Expectancies, Historical Period

1940 M average was 61.4
1967 M average, 67.0

However, by the time you are toward the later years, being in the NFL even for a little while probably might additionally skew the notoriously correlated variable of income. Seven years ain't nothin', and when you consider that if anything, they should be doing better than the average, if their time in the league was decently compensated, it's definitely still a "wow."

Interesting to look back and remember all those years we couldn't imagine this metric dropping year to year!

 

[PatsFanInVa]

The Boston.com misquotes the study. The study states: "All of the men tracked for the study played at least five seasons in NFL or MLB between 1959 and 1988. Their causes of death in the period of 1979 to 2013 were gleaned from preexisting databases and, in some cases, state agency death certificates."

The Study was of players who played from 1959-1988. It was NOT a study of players who played from 1979 through 2013. And yes, it makes a HUGE difference when you're attempting to compare the life expectancies.

An NFL player who is 21 in 1959, was born in 1938. The Life expectancy of black males born in 1938 was 54 years old. A white male was 62.1 years old.

An NFL player who was 21 in 1988 was born in 1967. The life expectancy of black males born in 1967 was 60. For white males it was 68.

It's a matter of putting things into the proper context. Not comparing the average age of someone who died at 59.6 who was born in 1938 to someone born in 2022 who is expected to live to 72 or 77 respectively.

I am not downplaying CTE or any of the other very REAL things that these men suffer while playing the game we watch each week. I just attempting to correct the erroneous context of the Globe article in regards to the study they referenced.

A line from that study that I find interesting is this:
"Yet, studies dating as far back as 1994 have shown that, compared with the U.S. male population at large, former NFL players have lower death rates when all causes are considered, and from cardiovascular disease in particular."

It completely SUCKS that Glenn and Patten died in car accidents at 43 and 47 respectively. It completely sucks that Turner and Myers died of cancer at 35 and 38 respectively. It completely sucks that Jones, Parker and Johnson died before 50.
That 2001 team was special.

Sorry to pick the academic scab here, when the first thing that's worth considering is that hey, football does take years off your life (though your plea for a balanced approach is appreciated.) In the same spirit, here's a little more of the financial landscape.

It's support for the theory of "they had the money to live longer" (very broad strokes description), that they all played 5 years or more. IOW, they weren't 1-year washouts technically in the league on someone's practice squad, they had legit NFL careers. Just picking a random year in there, 1981, the average salary in the NFL was about $91,000 (really quaint low number by today's standards.)

The NFL's average salary in 1981 increased by 14.5... - UPI Archives

The NFL's average salary in 1981 increased by 14.5 percent over 1980 to $90,102, according to the annual salary survey conducted by the league's Management...

www.upi.com

In a "That can't be right" moment, the average salary in 1981 for all occupations was 47,700. Wow, it only doubled your income to be a pro football player in 1981! Of course, you got double the average income at a very young age, by definition. 40 was an ancient warrior then, and in the main, still is now.

Trends in Men's Wages, 1981–2014

Social Security Administration Research, Statistics, and Policy Analysis

www.ssa.gov

But still - double the income is a huge apples-to-oranges comparison. (It would be less so in the earlier cohorts, with 1981 pay representing, say, guys born 1959 and earlier. Guys born in 1938 would not vary as much from the mean income. Guys born in 1967 getting paid in 1988, well, couldn't make the 5-year requirement. So really the skew might be more in 1984 than 1981, continuing to the 1988 skew. But I have to sit up a half hour for the statin to settle, so let's look.

1984 league average, $162k
1984 average overall, $48,211

NFL Salaries Up 25%, Average $162,000

National Football League players made more money in 1984 than ever, according to a listing of salaries compiled by the NFL PLayers Assn. and published Sunday by the Dallas Morning News.

www.latimes.com

By 1988, the fifth year of the last cohort included in the study, it was

1988 average salaries by team - lowest (TB), $178,300; highest (SF), 280,400
1988 average overall, $50,538

So, on the 49ers, in 1988, you were making an average of between 5 and 6 times the national average.

My point in trotting out this factor is that apples-to-apples would really be closer if you compared to the average man making twice to nearly six times the mean income, for the 80s up to 1988. And I am sure that earlier there were still benefits to being a pro athlete - it was just a percentage multiplier over the average income, not a multiplier of several times the income (quickly ballooning to orders of magnitude difference.)

And even being solidly in the desireable high-income group, these guys were losing years off their life expectancy against the national average.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

Sorry to pick the academic scab here, when the first thing that's worth considering is that hey, football does take years off your life (though your plea for a balanced approach is appreciated.) In the same spirit, here's a little more of the financial landscape.

It's support for the theory of "they had the money to live longer" (very broad strokes description), that they all played 5 years or more. IOW, they weren't 1-year washouts technically in the league on someone's practice squad, they had legit NFL careers. Just picking a random year in there, 1981, the average salary in the NFL was about $91,000 (really quaint low number by today's standards.)

The NFL's average salary in 1981 increased by 14.5... - UPI Archives

The NFL's average salary in 1981 increased by 14.5 percent over 1980 to $90,102, according to the annual salary survey conducted by the league's Management...

www.upi.com

In a "That can't be right" moment, the average salary in 1981 for all occupations was 47,700. Wow, it only doubled your income to be a pro football player in 1981! Of course, you got double the average income at a very young age, by definition. 40 was an ancient warrior then, and in the main, still is now.

Trends in Men's Wages, 1981–2014

Social Security Administration Research, Statistics, and Policy Analysis

www.ssa.gov

But still - double the income is a huge apples-to-oranges comparison. (It would be less so in the earlier cohorts, with 1981 pay representing, say, guys born 1959 and earlier. Guys born in 1938 would not vary as much from the mean income. Guys born in 1967 getting paid in 1988, well, couldn't make the 5-year requirement. So really the skew might be more in 1984 than 1981, continuing to the 1988 skew. But I have to sit up a half hour for the statin to settle, so let's look.

1984 league average, $162k
1984 average overall, $48,211

NFL Salaries Up 25%, Average $162,000

National Football League players made more money in 1984 than ever, according to a listing of salaries compiled by the NFL PLayers Assn. and published Sunday by the Dallas Morning News.

www.latimes.com

By 1988, the fifth year of the last cohort included in the study, it was

1988 average salaries by team - lowest (TB), $178,300; highest (SF), 280,400
1988 average overall, $50,538

So, on the 49ers, in 1988, you were making an average of between 5 and 6 times the national average.

My point in trotting out this factor is that apples-to-apples would really be closer if you compared to the average man making twice to nearly six times the mean income, for the 80s up to 1988. And I am sure that earlier there were still benefits to being a pro athlete - it was just a percentage multiplier over the average income, not a multiplier of several times the income (quickly ballooning to orders of magnitude difference.)

And even being solidly in the desireable high-income group, these guys were losing years off their life expectancy against the national average.

To add to your point - the NFL players’ pension plan has to file annual reports with the government which are available for public view. The plan actuary needs to make a best estimate of future mortality, which will be based on actual plan experience. The NFL’s actuary used the blue collar version of the latest mortality table. The blue collar version has a much shorter life expectancy than using a table without collar adjustment, let alone using a white collar mortality table which has the highest life expectancy. It’s practically unheard of to use blue collar mortality for highly paid people. For comparison, MLB’s pension plan actuary uses the white collar version of the mortality table.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

To add to your point - the NFL players’ pension plan has to file annual reports with the government which are available for public view. The plan actuary needs to make a best estimate of future mortality, which will be based on actual plan experience. The NFL’s actuary used the blue collar version of the latest mortality table. The blue collar version has a much shorter life expectancy than using a table without collar adjustment, let alone using a white collar mortality table which has the highest life expectancy. It’s practically unheard of to use blue collar mortality for highly paid people. For comparison, MLB’s pension plan actuary uses the white collar version of the mortality table.

I was working a lot on ("nearby" perhaps) pension issues around 2008-2014... i.e., I was learning to translate from expert to layman.

In the last three years I have often thought to myself that the idiots who are coming up with our half-witted conspiracy theories all missed the boat. The half-witted crackpot conspiracy theory that makes sense is all about the change in the cost to fund benefits (in a DB plan) if you introduce a significant decrement to life expectancy. Fortunately, those most concerned with half-witted conspiracy theories are also those who are least concerned with actuarial tables, which, after all, are full of facts (which are like kryptonite to those guys.) Still, I'm shocked nobody's gone down the "COVID: qui bene?" road. Of course, the federal end of that is probably more than offset by the number of people driven from the workforce by long covid.

Hey how do you know when an actuary is extraverted? He's looking at your shoes

 

[State]

These players are idolized as youngsters then courted as they grow up. Their athletic prowess is exceptional. They get the girls. The attention. Don’t have to follow the rules like others.

Life is blue sky.

Then it’s all taken away.

It turns out all to be a curse.

Better to be a hard-working Joe who never has to miss the roar of an adoring crowd.

We are sometimes cursed by our blessings and blessed by our curses.

 

[scout]

I'd like to read this. Is there a way around the paywall other than paying?

Read the article on Boston.com
Darkness on the edge of the Patriots dynasty

 

[1960Pats]

The story is what it is. I do wonder how many players on other teams from 20+ years ago are also dead. Is this an abnormal number? Might be something a journalist would look into and add for context.

I also wonder if there is any coincidence that the Boston Globe dropped this article the same day the departure of Xander Bogaerts was announced. Deflect from the Red Sox bad press in free agency to say, look Patriots bad.

Probably not related, but those jizz stains at the Red Sox and Globe also get no benefit of doubt.

I stopped reading the Globe in 2003 after they portrayed a doctored photo from a porn site and said it was American soldiers raping an Iraqi woman. The crooked pol who provided the pic ended up in jail on another matter but the editor who approved it got a new job and a promotion at the Washington Post.

If the Globe would go to those drastic lengths to make our soldiers look like rapists then trying to make the Pats look bad is a piece of cake.

 

[1960Pats]

You have a good point, understanding of head trauma has come a long ways since 2001. In general the Pats are recognized for being very proactive when it comes to dealing with concussions. Rich Ohrnberger specifically called this out after the Tua injury. The old article in the link provides a very detailed description of what happened to Ted Johnson. While the team made a mistake making him practice after a concussion, Ted kept playing for years after he knew that he was damaged. It is great to see that he has recovered. It is too bad that his blatant anti BB agenda invalidates any of his opinions on talk radio.

Dark Days Follow Hard-Hitting Career in N.F.L. (Published 2007)

Ted Johnson, a three-time champion, blames brain impairment and addiction on injuries during his career.

www.nytimes.com

Why is Ohrnberger's opinion any more valid than Ted Johnson's? They both played here and by the sound of it they had different experiences.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

I was working a lot on ("nearby" perhaps) pension issues around 2008-2014... i.e., I was learning to translate from expert to layman.

In the last three years I have often thought to myself that the idiots who are coming up with our half-witted conspiracy theories all missed the boat. The half-witted crackpot conspiracy theory that makes sense is all about the change in the cost to fund benefits (in a DB plan) if you introduce a significant decrement to life expectancy. Fortunately, those most concerned with half-witted conspiracy theories are also those who are least concerned with actuarial tables, which, after all, are full of facts (which are like kryptonite to those guys.) Still, I'm shocked nobody's gone down the "COVID: qui bene?" road. Of course, the federal end of that is probably more than offset by the number of people driven from the workforce by long covid.

Hey how do you know when an actuary is extraverted? He's looking at your shoes

I’m a pension actuary myself - I’ve heard that joke numerous times (pension people tend to fall in that “extroverted” category as they need to be consultants). The translating from actuarial nerd speak to real human being language is the toughest part of my job! I felt comfortable bringing up the NFL and MLB pension since neither I nor my company work for either of them, but I do feel very comfortable with the thought process that was used to set those assumptions.

Not to get too far off topic, but to your point on the conspiracy theories, there would need to be a significant number of entities involved to pull that off - from the companies themselves to the actuaries and their firms, to the actuarial profession itself, to the audit firms, and then finally the government itself. Way too many areas for a potential breakdown, which should hopefully put a kibosh on those theories!