long hair up for vote (1 Viewer)

[Bri]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../s124445D82.DTL

Troy Polamalu might not have to worry about getting tackled again by his hair. At their meetings in Palm Beach, Fla., next week, NFL owners will consider a proposal to ban players from having hair flow from their helmets below their names on the back of their jerseys.

That might affect Polamalu's image, but help him on the field. Two seasons ago, the Pittsburgh safety with the long ponytail had his hair grabbed by Kansas City's Larry Johnson and was thrown to the turf after an interception against the Chiefs.

The rule banning long hair on the field was proposed by Kansas City. It does not require players to get haircuts, but does "require them to tuck it up inside their helmets," said Atlanta president Rich McKay, chairman of the league's competition committee.

Polamalu is the best known of the players, most of them defensive backs, with hair flowing outside their helmets. Others include cornerbacks Al Harris of Green Bay and Mike McKenzie of New Orleans.

Because the rule was proposed by a team, the competition committee did not take a position on it. It will be discussed Monday with a package of other rules.

 

[Bri]

rest of rule changes proposed are here

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=389129

 

[awesomeness]

Seems like a pretty stupid rule to me. This only reiterates that the NFL is the no fun league. What possible benefit can become of this?

Players like McKenzie, Polamalu, and Ricky Williams (when it was long) know that by having long hair, they run of the risk of having it pulled and that the opponent faces no penalty for this. If those players still dont mind, why should anyone else?

 

[JPeso]

Players like McKenzie, Polamalu, and Ricky Williams (when it was long) know that by having long hair, they run of the risk of having it pulled and that the opponent faces no penalty for this. If those players still dont mind, why should anyone else?

And they will be the first to tell you that. This attempted rule change will not be taken lightly by the PA.

 

[Kirby]

What's the diff. between long hair covering your name and putting Ocho Cinco over it?

 

[Bri]

Seems like a pretty stupid rule to me. This only reiterates that the NFL is the no fun league. What possible benefit can become of this?Players like McKenzie, Polamalu, and Ricky Williams (when it was long) know that by having long hair, they run of the risk of having it pulled and that the opponent faces no penalty for this. If those players still dont mind, why should anyone else?

I think the concern is injury from it and lack of information related to that. The only comparison I can come up with is the cavemen of eons ago. Can a man "take" being whipped to the ground by his hair? Being dragged by his hair? (Pick your own wording for being tackled by your hair) Would his neck break? If you think his neck could be harmed, then the NFLPA would certainly be behind any rule protecting injury to it's players.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

What's the diff. between long hair covering your name and putting Ocho Cinco over it?

about ten grand.

 

[Dope]

I think that this is just a test case to see what the union is going to do.

In the past, they have been kinda playing rollover to the owners.

With the owners threatening a lockout, this might be a way to gauge how hard the negotiations are going to be.

If the union takes a hard stance...there will be war.

If the union plays ball like they have up til this point, the new CBA will go through.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Players like McKenzie, Polamalu, and Ricky Williams (when it was long) know that by having long hair, they run of the risk of having it pulled and that the opponent faces no penalty for this. If those players still dont mind, why should anyone else?

And they will be the first to tell you that. This attempted rule change will not be taken lightly by the PA.

I doubt there will be much of a fight from the PA over this rule if it goes into effect.

 

[bcr8f]

What's the diff. between long hair covering your name and putting Ocho Cinco over it?

That's banned too. Maybe it's more about fans not seeing your name. Let's dumb down the league so uninformed fans know who's playing.

 

[simey]

Troy Polamalu could put his hair in a hair net under his helmet, or use one of those stocking caps, but those seem like they would be hot. Guys with dreads and braids would probably have to cut theirs, cause dreadlocks are more bulky and wouldn't be hair net friendly.

 

[noneother]

I recognize the injury potential, this is football, it exists anyway.. it reduces the opportunity. It also would not degrade player performance. Forcing it is ridiculous. But I would make the guys who chose not to comply, waive ANYONE of responsibility should injury occur.

just like a manufacturing facility, no lose clothes or hair for safety.

 

[Godsbrother]

As a fan I couldn't care less if this rule passes or not.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

I recognize the injury potential, this is football, it exists anyway.. it reduces the opportunity. It also would not degrade player performance. Forcing it is ridiculous. But I would make the guys who chose not to comply, waive ANYONE of responsibility should injury occur.just like a manufacturing facility, no lose clothes or hair for safety.

I think the rule change makes more sense BEFORE somebodybreaks their neck from being ripped to the ground by the hair.

 

[Kirby]

What's the diff. between long hair covering your name and putting Ocho Cinco over it?

That's banned too. Maybe it's more about fans not seeing your name. Let's dumb down the league so uninformed fans know who's playing.

Not for fans... for Gumbel.

 

[renesauz]

I have wondered for years why this wasn't already in the rules. I mean..they have rules requiring the players to tuck their shirts in, why not their hair?

Long hair presents a legit safety issue as well.

The PA can do nothing about this type of rule. Personal appearence among employees can ALWAYS be regulated within reasonable limits by an employer WHEN WORKING (and in some cases, all the time.) That would certainly include extreme hairstyles.

 

[suchislife]

They were discussing this on Mike & Mike this morning (Greeny was out...Kasilias (sp?) and Golic with Stink in studio). Speculation was the rule change is for image purposes but trying to pass it off as a safety concern.

Different sport but don't the Yankees have a team rule about facial hair and long hair? If you want to play for them you have to abide by their rules.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

As a fan I couldn't care less if this rule passes or not.

I don't really care if it passes either. But don't the owners have more important things to think about? Seriously, this is pretty stupid.

 

[JohnnyU]

I think it's racially motivated to get rid of the dreadlocks. They would never say that, but that's the "real" reason.

 

[mbuehner]

I think it's racially motivated to get rid of the dreadlocks. They would never say that, but that's the "real" reason.

I don't buy the injury issue. Is it any worse than being pulled down by the back of your jersey? Snapping somebodies neck is a lot harder than the movies make it seem (ask my brothers). Impact causes broken necks. Whiplash is different, but they already say playing a game in the NFL is like being hit by a car. If they wanna take a chance, so be it. If you started taking a microscope to all the dangerous things that happen in an NFL game like this you would end up with flag football.

 

[treat88]

The injury issue relates to concussions, not being tackled by the hair.

The theory goes, hair like Troy P. has prevents the helmet from fitting as snugly as it is supposed to when worn correctly, thereby leading to an increased incidence of concussions.

I have no clue what the evidence says about this, but can see there may be some validity to the concept.

Lord knows Troy has had his share of concussion difficulties.

Not sure how the rule as proposed would do anything to alleviate this, but...

I could care less how the players wear their hair, but if there is the potential for a legitimate safety concern, the league should certainly make policy in the players best interest.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Fine by me. You don't have to play/work in the NFL if you don't want to. A dress code under normal circumstances is perfectly acceptable.

 

[fatness]

I think it's racially motivated to get rid of the dreadlocks. They would never say that, but that's the "real" reason.

I don't think it's racially-motivated, but I do think it relates to appearance, not injury risk or name identification on jerseys. We certainly can't have any "scruffy looking" athletes tarnishing the sport.

 

[fatness]

Kevin Mawee, head of the NFLPA

NFL players fearing they'll have to go to the barber or find hairnets won't have to worry if Titans center Kevin Mawae's voice is heard. The new president of the NFL Players Association said Thursday he's against a proposal that would prohibit flowing hair that obscures the player's name on the back of his jersey. NFL owners will consider the proposal at their meetings in Florida next week.

"I don't think there is any rule in the NFL rulebook saying your hair can't be a certain length. For management council or ownership to say we need all our players to cut their hair or bind it up or whatever, I think they need to understand it goes way beyond just haircuts," Mawae said. "It goes into a cultural issue with the African American population in our league and also with the Polynesian population. The hair is a part of their culture. It's part of the history and the background. To ask a player to cut it off just because a select few don't like it, I think there is an issue with that."

According to PFT:

The Collective Bargaining Agreement plainly states that no player will be disciplined for hair length. Period.

So while the league can pass a rule require hair to be tucked inside their helmets (which doesn’t seem to be the best way to ensure that the helmets will, you know, fit properly), any effort to force a player to do anything about the length of his hair would be a blatant violation of the CBA.

 

[Calm Cool and Collected]

I think it's racially motivated to get rid of the dreadlocks. They would never say that, but that's the "real" reason.

Leave the fishing to another thread please. TIA

 

[Bri]

Fine by me. You don't have to play/work in the NFL if you don't want to. A dress code under normal circumstances is perfectly acceptable.

you have a decent point. Alot of us have often reacted to some of the dress code violations (esp the in memory of ones) as extremely pettty, so they are fairly well known for being real strict on dress code already.Alot of young americans enterring the job market with long hair, cut it. They hide tattoos with clothing so maybe tucking it into the helmet or shoulder pads would be thought of similar to that.I'd like to hear what exactly it is that bothers the NFL about it

 

[Bri]

The injury issue relates to concussions, not being tackled by the hair.The theory goes, hair like Troy P. has prevents the helmet from fitting as snugly as it is supposed to when worn correctly, thereby leading to an increased incidence of concussions.I have no clue what the evidence says about this, but can see there may be some validity to the concept.Lord knows Troy has had his share of concussion difficulties.Not sure how the rule as proposed would do anything to alleviate this, but...I could care less how the players wear their hair, but if there is the potential for a legitimate safety concern, the league should certainly make policy in the players best interest.

Concussions is an interesting point. I know the tackling is a concern discussed by writers/reporters that cover the NFL. As a collective pool, maybe you feel that's just a need for a possible story but I've read about that point a bunch.

 

[HULLOBUDMAN]

The injury issue relates to concussions, not being tackled by the hair.The theory goes, hair like Troy P. has prevents the helmet from fitting as snugly as it is supposed to when worn correctly, thereby leading to an increased incidence of concussions.I have no clue what the evidence says about this, but can see there may be some validity to the concept.Lord knows Troy has had his share of concussion difficulties.Not sure how the rule as proposed would do anything to alleviate this, but...I could care less how the players wear their hair, but if there is the potential for a legitimate safety concern, the league should certainly make policy in the players best interest.

Concussions is an interesting point. I know the tackling is a concern discussed by writers/reporters that cover the NFL. As a collective pool, maybe you feel that's just a need for a possible story but I've read about that point a bunch.

Wouldn't tucking more hair into the player's helmet make the helmet fit worse, not better?

 

[428143]

I think it's racially motivated to get rid of the dreadlocks. They would never say that, but that's the "real" reason.

Leave the fishing to another thread please. TIA

The league wants to project a certain corporate image, and while they have the power to do so, it would be naive to suggest that this post was a fishing attempt. I don't understand the logic behind the policy, and I certainly don't buy the injury excuse, so what is it then? I do hope the NFLPA fights this, as I feel this policy is quite ridiculous....

 

[treat88]

Wouldn't tucking more hair into the player's helmet make the helmet fit worse, not better?

Yes.That's why the proposed rule change is pointless.

 

[Calm Cool and Collected]

I think it's racially motivated to get rid of the dreadlocks. They would never say that, but that's the "real" reason.

Leave the fishing to another thread please. TIA

The league wants to project a certain corporate image, and while they have the power to do so, it would be naive to suggest that this post was a fishing attempt. I don't understand the logic behind the policy, and I certainly don't buy the injury excuse, so what is it then? I do hope the NFLPA fights this, as I feel this policy is quite ridiculous....

So what if they want to project a corporate image, it doesn't mean they are racist. It's absolutely disgusting how everything has to be about race. Long hair is something that anyone can have. You don't have to be a certain color to have long hair.JohnnyU's comment is fishing, he doesn't even disagree that he's fishing. When I think of NFL players with long hair I think, Troy Polamalu. He doesn't even wear dreadlocks. There are obviously other players that do have dreadlocks but certainly not all. Exactly what race are they going after here?Don't get me wrong, I think the rule idea is stupid and I also hopes the NFLPA fights this ridiculous proposal but I'm not so cynical to think that everything comes down to race. The Kansas City Chiefs are the ones proposing the rule change. They also have an African-American Head Coach. Are they a racist organization? I don't think so.

 

[GRIDIRON ASSASSIN]

What's the diff. between long hair covering your name and putting Ocho Cinco over it?

about ten grand.

Ocho Cinco wasn't on Chad Johnson's jersey during the game. It was a pre-game attention drawing gimmick.To me this is a load of crap - and the union can step in. And they will imho. The relationship between the NFL and union is very strained right now, and the union will give no quarter.

 

[fatness]

Anything that decreases your chances to win, no matter how small or unlikely, is simply unacceptable.

Nice argument supporting steroid use.

 

[GRIDIRON ASSASSIN]

Anything that decreases your chances to win, no matter how small or unlikely, is simply unacceptable.

Nice argument supporting steroid use.

How many people over the years have been tackled by their dreads, or been prone to concussions because of them.I don't recall Steve Young, Trent Green, Al Toon or Troy oh my Aik-enhead-man with dreadlocks.And the only guy I recall being tackled by them was a defender - which rarely happens.

 

[treat88]

How many people over the years have been tackled by their dreads, or been prone to concussions because of them.I don't recall Steve Young, Trent Green, Al Toon or Troy oh my Aik-enhead-man with dreadlocks.And the only guy I recall being tackled by them was a defender - which rarely happens.

Agreed.The concussion argument sounds good in theory, but I doubt there is any objective evidence to support it.

 

[nxmehta]

So what if they want to project a corporate image, it doesn't mean they are racist. It's absolutely disgusting how everything has to be about race. Long hair is something that anyone can have. You don't have to be a certain color to have long hair.

JohnnyU's comment is fishing, he doesn't even disagree that he's fishing. When I think of NFL players with long hair I think, Troy Polamalu. He doesn't even wear dreadlocks. There are obviously other players that do have dreadlocks but certainly not all. Exactly what race are they going after here?

Don't get me wrong, I think the rule idea is stupid and I also hopes the NFLPA fights this ridiculous proposal but I'm not so cynical to think that everything comes down to race. The Kansas City Chiefs are the ones proposing the rule change. They also have an African-American Head Coach. Are they a racist organization? I don't think so.

Actually, I find it absolutely disgusting when people downright refuse that anything could ever be about race.FYI Troy Polamalu is of Samoan descent. The vast majority of players in the NFL with long hair are either Black or Polynesian. If you're so certain that this isn't about race, what do you think this issue is about then? The arguments for injury don't make a lot of sense to me. Is it that hard for people to talk about race and consider it as a possibility?

I don't know if this issue really is about race, but I can see the argument for it. At least I'm willing to entertain it.

 

[DropKick]

So what if they want to project a corporate image, it doesn't mean they are racist. It's absolutely disgusting how everything has to be about race. Long hair is something that anyone can have. You don't have to be a certain color to have long hair.

JohnnyU's comment is fishing, he doesn't even disagree that he's fishing. When I think of NFL players with long hair I think, Troy Polamalu. He doesn't even wear dreadlocks. There are obviously other players that do have dreadlocks but certainly not all. Exactly what race are they going after here?

Don't get me wrong, I think the rule idea is stupid and I also hopes the NFLPA fights this ridiculous proposal but I'm not so cynical to think that everything comes down to race. The Kansas City Chiefs are the ones proposing the rule change. They also have an African-American Head Coach. Are they a racist organization? I don't think so.

Actually, I find it absolutely disgusting when people downright refuse that anything could ever be about race.FYI Troy Polamalu is of Samoan descent. The vast majority of players in the NFL with long hair are either Black or Polynesian. If you're so certain that this isn't about race, what do you think this issue is about then? The arguments for injury don't make a lot of sense to me. Is it that hard for people to talk about race and consider it as a possibility?

I don't know if this issue really is about race, but I can see the argument for it. At least I'm willing to entertain it.

Its more disgusting when people introduce race into a non-racial issue.

 

[JohnnyU]

So what if they want to project a corporate image, it doesn't mean they are racist. It's absolutely disgusting how everything has to be about race. Long hair is something that anyone can have. You don't have to be a certain color to have long hair.

JohnnyU's comment is fishing, he doesn't even disagree that he's fishing. When I think of NFL players with long hair I think, Troy Polamalu. He doesn't even wear dreadlocks. There are obviously other players that do have dreadlocks but certainly not all. Exactly what race are they going after here?

Don't get me wrong, I think the rule idea is stupid and I also hopes the NFLPA fights this ridiculous proposal but I'm not so cynical to think that everything comes down to race. The Kansas City Chiefs are the ones proposing the rule change. They also have an African-American Head Coach. Are they a racist organization? I don't think so.

Actually, I find it absolutely disgusting when people downright refuse that anything could ever be about race.FYI Troy Polamalu is of Samoan descent. The vast majority of players in the NFL with long hair are either Black or Polynesian. If you're so certain that this isn't about race, what do you think this issue is about then? The arguments for injury don't make a lot of sense to me. Is it that hard for people to talk about race and consider it as a possibility?

I don't know if this issue really is about race, but I can see the argument for it. At least I'm willing to entertain it.

Its more disgusting when people introduce race into a non-racial issue.

While I agree with you about introducing race into a non-racial issue, I disagree that it's clear this is a non-reacial issue. Race could be on the minds of a select few that want to force this issue. Like one poster said, it's clear which races have the majority of the long hair

 

[Novice2]

Hippies shouldn't be playing football to start with.

 

[Da Guru]

I think it's racially motivated to get rid of the dreadlocks. They would never say that, but that's the "real" reason.

They don`t have to get rid of them, just tuck the hair inside the helmet. No big deal, plus it may prevent an injury. Line cooks have to do the same thing for much less money.

 

[JohnnyU]

I think it's racially motivated to get rid of the dreadlocks. They would never say that, but that's the "real" reason.

They don`t have to get rid of them, just tuck the hair inside the helmet. No big deal, plus it may prevent an injury. Line cooks have to do the same thing for much less money.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but some players have so much hair that I'm not sure they can tuck it inside their helmet. At least not where the helmet would fit.

 

[Da Guru]

I think it's racially motivated to get rid of the dreadlocks. They would never say that, but that's the "real" reason.

They don`t have to get rid of them, just tuck the hair inside the helmet. No big deal, plus it may prevent an injury. Line cooks have to do the same thing for much less money.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but some players have so much hair that I'm not sure they can tuck it inside their helmet. At least not where the helmet would fit.

Who knows? If it prevents one neck injury it is worth it.

 

[Novice2]

I think it's racially motivated to get rid of the dreadlocks. They would never say that, but that's the "real" reason.

They don`t have to get rid of them, just tuck the hair inside the helmet. No big deal, plus it may prevent an injury. Line cooks have to do the same thing for much less money.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but some players have so much hair that I'm not sure they can tuck it inside their helmet. At least not where the helmet would fit.

Who knows? If it prevents one neck injury it is worth it.

Eliminating tackles from the game will prevent neck injuries along with alot of other injuries. If it prevents one injury it is worth it.Safety shouldn't be a buzzword to get one owners personal pet peve superficial BS pushed through.This is the ''Don't spike the ball'' rule of 08. The African/Samoan cultural thing may be enough to keep this one from being passed but like seatbelt laws not being passed at first because of DWB concerns this too may not be enough a year or two down the road.

 

[Da Guru]

I think it's racially motivated to get rid of the dreadlocks. They would never say that, but that's the "real" reason.

They don`t have to get rid of them, just tuck the hair inside the helmet. No big deal, plus it may prevent an injury. Line cooks have to do the same thing for much less money.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but some players have so much hair that I'm not sure they can tuck it inside their helmet. At least not where the helmet would fit.

Who knows? If it prevents one neck injury it is worth it.

Eliminating tackles from the game will prevent neck injuries along with alot of other injuries. If it prevents one injury it is worth it.Safety shouldn't be a buzzword to get one owners personal pet peve superficial BS pushed through.This is the ''Don't spike the ball'' rule of 08. The African/Samoan cultural thing may be enough to keep this one from being passed but like seatbelt laws not being passed at first because of DWB concerns this too may not be enough a year or two down the road.

My first job out of college was with Rockwell INT. The first day on the job my boss called me in and said my hair was too long. Next day..my hair was shorter. I had a choice, make good money and abide by the rules, or leave the job and keep my long hair. Plus my hair was not even that long, but it was company policy.

 

[cstu]

And the sign said,"Long-haired freaky peopleNeed not apply."So I tucked my hair up under my hatAnd I went in to ask him why.He said, "You look like a fine upstandin' young man.I think you'll do."So I took off my hat and said, "Imagine that.huh , me workin' for you."

 

[Chase Stuart]

What's the punishment for a player that doesn't conform?

 

[Chase Stuart]

I think it's racially motivated to get rid of the dreadlocks. They would never say that, but that's the "real" reason.

They don`t have to get rid of them, just tuck the hair inside the helmet. No big deal, plus it may prevent an injury. Line cooks have to do the same thing for much less money.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but some players have so much hair that I'm not sure they can tuck it inside their helmet. At least not where the helmet would fit.

Who knows? If it prevents one neck injury it is worth it.

Eliminating tackles from the game will prevent neck injuries along with alot of other injuries. If it prevents one injury it is worth it.Safety shouldn't be a buzzword to get one owners personal pet peve superficial BS pushed through.This is the ''Don't spike the ball'' rule of 08. The African/Samoan cultural thing may be enough to keep this one from being passed but like seatbelt laws not being passed at first because of DWB concerns this too may not be enough a year or two down the road.

My first job out of college was with Rockwell INT. The first day on the job my boss called me in and said my hair was too long. Next day..my hair was shorter. I had a choice, make good money and abide by the rules, or leave the job and keep my long hair. Plus my hair was not even that long, but it was company policy.

Rockwell INTL wasn't a monopoly.

 

[nxmehta]

So what if they want to project a corporate image, it doesn't mean they are racist. It's absolutely disgusting how everything has to be about race. Long hair is something that anyone can have. You don't have to be a certain color to have long hair.

JohnnyU's comment is fishing, he doesn't even disagree that he's fishing. When I think of NFL players with long hair I think, Troy Polamalu. He doesn't even wear dreadlocks. There are obviously other players that do have dreadlocks but certainly not all. Exactly what race are they going after here?

Don't get me wrong, I think the rule idea is stupid and I also hopes the NFLPA fights this ridiculous proposal but I'm not so cynical to think that everything comes down to race. The Kansas City Chiefs are the ones proposing the rule change. They also have an African-American Head Coach. Are they a racist organization? I don't think so.

Actually, I find it absolutely disgusting when people downright refuse that anything could ever be about race.FYI Troy Polamalu is of Samoan descent. The vast majority of players in the NFL with long hair are either Black or Polynesian. If you're so certain that this isn't about race, what do you think this issue is about then? The arguments for injury don't make a lot of sense to me. Is it that hard for people to talk about race and consider it as a possibility?

I don't know if this issue really is about race, but I can see the argument for it. At least I'm willing to entertain it.

Its more disgusting when people introduce race into a non-racial issue.

And why's that? Afraid to talk about it? What's wrong with discussion?In any case, like JohnnyU said, it's not obvious that it's a non-racial issue.

 

[Bri]

Here's one hair tackle

His head jerks down pretty hard for a quick second or half second there.

Does that change anybody's thoughts?

 

[Tanner9919]

Seems like a pretty stupid rule to me. This only reiterates that the NFL is the no fun league. What possible benefit can become of this?

Players like McKenzie, Polamalu, and Ricky Williams (when it was long) know that by having long hair, they run of the risk of having it pulled and that the opponent faces no penalty for this. If those players still dont mind, why should anyone else?

the reason why the NFL is the best pro sports entity in the world, is because of the no fun rules. they're simply the best sporting league in the world..The NFL is a finely tuned specimen. They are very conscience about their image. I like the rule, actually..I mean, if I'm a Wall Street guy , I'd be in a suit and tie everyday, same with Insurance salesmen, corporate salesmen,etc..if WE have a dress code, why can't the NFL?! Heck, even Catholic schools have dress codes.

the Yankees have a 'must be clean-shaved and no hair over the collar' rule, so its OK for them to have it, but NOT for the NFL to propose such a rule? thats ridiculous.

If I pay people millions of dollars a year to work for me, I expect a certain behavior out of them, a certain dress code, etc.

Players need to realize this isn't their league, that what they do is a job..be professional, act professional, look professional. You are making a ton of money at what you do, show respect to the owner of the franchise who is putting bread on your table and feeding your family.

Al Harris doesn't NEED to play football, he can go work at Wendy's or sell stocks, if thats what he's good at..same with Polamalu or Kyle Turley ( when he had the long hair). If they don't like the rules, they can get new jobs then, no one is holding a gun to their heads forcing them to play in the NFL..