Researching Pro-Football's History

[oldecapecod11]

ARCHIVE

Researching Pro-Football's History
Started by oldestlivingprofootball, Apr 15 2014 09:57 PM

Page 1 of 2

39 replies to this topic

#1 oldestlivingprofootball
Forum Visitors
Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:57 PM
When I read the post a few days ago about Coy Bacon, that has been deleted, and all this back and forth over a players sack totals, I felt compelled to write my thoughts on this topic. I am in no way saying it is an unworthy discussion, any discussion about pro-football history is good in my book, but I can't wait for the day when some of you realize that there are hundreds of individuals listed on football encyclopedia web sites who are listed as players, when they in fact never played pro football, or were not listed when they did play pro ball. It seems researchers settled on listing someone with a similar name from some source, with no concern as to whether he was actually a player, just to fill a space. This results in incorrect birth dates, death dates, or both. Often, the birth place is wrong also because it has been matched to the wrong person.

Some glaring examples: Michael 'Earl' Nolan ('37-38 Chicago Cardinals). He died in Arizona in 1991. Some have the information of a guy that died in 1981. He was not the player. Vincent Shekleton, who played for the 1922 Racine Legion team is thought to have lived to be 103 years old by some. Not the case as he died in 1958. Then there is Whitmore Babcock, ('26 Canton) who everyone has listed as Sam Babcock and dying in 1970. Whitmore was the NFL player. He died in 1960.

You are all pro-football history buffs to one degree or another or you wouldn't be visiting this forum. I am here to tell you that the discrepancy of a sack total of a particular player is nothing compared to the genuine amount of mistakes, errors, out-right copying and mistruths that are sadly too prevalent on some of these sites with regards to player bios. Once you realize this, the amount of new research and discussion topics you could have with your fellow pro-football history enthusiasts would drastically increase.

For example, do you know that Ted Alflen (1969 Denver) is still alive (he did not die in 1978)? You wouldn't know that if you visited some sites. How about George Zorich? He died in 1967. But according to most sites, even this one, (and I have asked a couple of people over the years to change it but it never happened) he died in 1962. We all have heard stories about a player that has been listed as deceased but were in fact alive. The latest example is Harold Turner of the 1954 Detroit Lions. While I am not sure if he personally cared one way or another for any type of adulation that would come with being a former pro-football player from others besides his family and friends, I suspect he would, at the very least, have liked to be listed as alive on ALL of the football web sites, (some have him dying in 1981). He died in February of this year.

Another example is John Fekete. Did you know John Fekete '46 Bisons died in 2003, not 1988 like all web sites have listed? That is a 15 year discrepancy. An error that might have impacted his life in a variety of ways if more people realized he was still alive. The PFRA organization has been around for a long time, why these errors were not fixed many years ago is something that should be explained by its long time members. Does anyone care? Does anyone even know these errors exist? It is my opinion that this aspect of pro-football's history is extremely important. If you can't get the name/birth/death information correct, how can anyone take the other information you disseminate seriously.

On a side note and since it is fast approaching, each Memorial Day, someone puts out a list showing the pro-football players that have died serving our country. Most of the time, it is just copied from the last list they could find with no research to see if it is correct. It is always wrong, either missing a player, or adding one that should not be on the list. Here is the complete listing Pro-Football War Deaths.

The reason I am here is to let everyone know that these mistakes have been corrected by the OldestLivingProFootball.com web site researchers. The correct information is available, for free and for everyone who wants it. We are down to about 300 NFL and 50 old AFL players that need to be researched. At this point, the majority of the work has been done. We have well over 6,600 players listed in the necrology sections with hundreds of corrections to the established football encyclopedias that have been published in the past and now litter the Internet.

Listen, no person or web site is perfect, on that point I am sure we can all agree. Mistakes do happen, especially with this type of research. All I would ask is for an honest effort in putting the information out to the public. I do not think this has been done in the past.

James Zimmerman
Owner: OldestLivingProFootball.com

#2 Veeshik_ya
Forum Visitors
Posted 16 April 2014 - 08:32 AM
Zim, not really seeing the connection between sack data and accurate living player stats but...your overall point about accuracy is a good one.

Good luck with that, though. And don't hold your breath for corrections or even an acknowledgement that something might be amiss--they'll put it out "when (they're) damn good and ready."

Personally, I don't think there's any dishonesty going on here. Rather, it's either a defensive reaction to insecurity about the data, or simple hubris. You decide.

The bigger question is your qualifications to make these observations. Do you consider yourself part of the general public? Because if you do, this site isn't for you. And if you haven't watched game film, your factual observations are unworthy.

#3 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 16 April 2014 - 09:07 AM
oldestlivingprofootball, on 15 Apr 2014 - 9:57 PM, said:
The reason I am here is to let everyone know that these mistakes have been corrected by the OldestLivingProFootball.com web site researchers. The correct information is available, for free and for everyone who wants it. We are down to about 300 NFL and 50 old AFL players that need to be researched. At this point, the majority of the work has been done. We have well over 6,600 players listed in the necrology sections with hundreds of corrections to the established football encyclopedias that have been published in the past and now litter the Internet.

Listen, no person or web site is perfect, on that point I am sure we can all agree. Mistakes do happen, especially with this type of research. All I would ask is for an honest effort in putting the information out to the public. I do not think this has been done in the past.
James Zimmerman
Owner: OldestLivingProFootball.com

And I think those are statements that we would all agree with. I noticed that you pointed out some of the glaring errors that you've noticed and corrected over the years, without having to refer to any particular person, book, or site, and that's a good approach.

Most researchers would agree that there are a lot more resources are readily available now, as compared to the 20th Century. Bob Carroll and the team that put together Total Football did the best with what they had, and they relied heavily on the Social Security Death Index, which was groundbreaking technology in the dial up days. I remember that he commented about all the errors that later researchers corrected from Roger Treat's 1952 Football Encyclopedia. He said that there had been so many, that they were referred to in the community as "Treatisms", but he praised Treat for having started the work at preserving the history of the sport at a time when the NFL was still in its early 30s, and nearly all of its alumni were still alive.

Kudos to you for the way you went about this, and for the copious research of you and your team.
#4 Jeremy Crowhurst
PFRA Member
Posted 16 April 2014 - 11:02 AM
Veeshik_ya, on 16 Apr 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:
The bigger question is your qualifications to make these observations. Do you consider yourself part of the general public? Because if you do, this site isn't for you. And if you haven't watched game film, your factual observations are unworthy.

Wow. Don't you think you should at least cough up your $35 and join PFRA before dropping something like this on the forum?

#5 Moran
PFRA Member
Posted 16 April 2014 - 11:12 AM
Jim I think your point is well taken - mistakes get perpetuated in print and now the replication rate is multiplied by the internet - there is a lot of basic research and fact checking still needed. And it must be frustrating when you do the research and it seems there is resistance to correcting what is already out there.

I first purchased a computer when working on a membership list for our church. We'd type in all the names and then do a count and realize we missed someone. Then we'd type it up again and realize we missed a different person. I wanted a machine that would let me correct just the single omission in the list without retyping the whole thing and the computer did that. So I find it ironic when an error is discovered and people tell you they can't correct it because it's in the computer that way -

Back in 1987 when the newspapers announced the first pension plan for the NFL players who had five seasons prior to 1959 my father called the Giants to get more information - he was put through to Wellington Mara who began the conversation by saying "Hap, we thought you were dead." I can't imagine what would have happened if he called the Cardinals - they probably wouldn't have a record that he ever even played for them. And of course, he couldn't call Pottsville or Frankford. But to the credit of the PFRA, all that information was researched and available. Perseverance furthers.....

#6 Veeshik_ya
Forum Visitors
Posted 16 April 2014 - 11:38 AM
Jeremy Crowhurst, on 16 Apr 2014 - 11:02 AM, said:
Wow. Don't you think you should at least cough up your $35 and join PFRA before dropping something like this on the forum?

Two comments:

A - You're certain I'm not a PFRA member?
B - I didn't drop these comments on the forum. I repeated them. They were made by other posters.

#7 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 16 April 2014 - 12:00 PM
Two comments:
A - You're certain I'm not a PFRA member?
B - I didn't drop these comments on the forum. I repeated them. They were made by other posters.

That's a very good question, and one that merits an explanation for everyone on the Forum.


I'm as certain as the limitations of our registering system will allow. Anyone who is a PFRA Member, but who has been identified as only a Forum Friend, may contact me at pfra@profootballresearchers.org for the mistake to be promptly corrected. We don't ask for anyone to provide their name when registering for the Forum, though we do ask for an e-mail.

If a person's e-mail address corresponds with the list of e-mail addresses that we have for the current PFRA members, then the person is correctly identified as a member. However, a few of the members haven't provided an e-mail contact when joining or renewing, and others have changed their contact information. I'll correct any oversight brought to my attention.

#8 Jeremy Crowhurst
PFRA Member
Posted 16 April 2014 - 09:44 PM
Veeshik_ya, on 16 Apr 2014 - 11:38 AM, said:
Two comments:
A - You're certain I'm not a PFRA member?
B - I didn't drop these comments on the forum. I repeated them. They were made by other posters.

That's a cop-out. You told the guy his factual observations are unworthy unless he's watching game film. Exactly what game film should he be watching to help clarify his knowledge on when a bunch of players from the 20's and 30's died?

As for your membership, you're posting as a non-member who's made 44 prior posts. I don't know whose role it is to tell anyone that they shouldn't be on this site, but it certainly isn't for you to be saying that.

#9 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 17 April 2014 - 09:23 AM
This has now become a moot point. In response to the above, it's my role to tell someone that they shouldn't be on this site. Let me make it clear-- people who are not members of the PFRA are welcome at the Forum. But if you overstay that welcome, don't expect to stay.

The PFRA members are the hosts. Their dues are the lion's share of the PFRA budget, out of which we pay for the internet service that makes the PFRA Forum possible. Those of you who are Forum Friends are our guests, and your participation here is a privilege, not a right. For those of you who aren't members, we hope that you'll join. You'll find that it's your chance to share your knowledge with a much larger audience, and to be part of a network that includes authors of a lot of the books you've read, and even the publishers.

Our only expectation of non-members is that they work at getting along with people. So, enjoy the Forum, and if you have a problem with it, please feel free to tell me.

#10 Jeffrey Miller
PFRA Member
Posted 17 April 2014 - 11:08 AM
Sometimes this place just ain't no fun no more ...

#11 Ken Crippen
Administrator
Posted 17 April 2014 - 03:25 PM
I add to Mark's point and to get in before people start screaming about their first amendment rights, you agree to the Terms of Service (TOS) when you register. You are essentially agreeing to act in a civilized manner. If you fail to act in a civilized manner, the owners of the site have the right to warn/temporarily suspend/permanently expel any user for violations of the TOS as they see fit. We also have the ability to identity and notify your ISP of any flagrant behavior. Only once have we had to take things to the extreme, when a user threatened violence because we refused to allow him to post YouTube videos. His emails were promptly sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

#12 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 17 April 2014 - 05:09 PM
And the Terms of Service are more interesting to read than most TOS write-ups, which usually look like a finance agreement.
http://www.pfraforum...tion=boardrules

Most of us skipped straight to the "I accept" button when we registered, of course, but presenting a serious subject doesn't have to be boring. One sentence I liked, which bears repeating, is
"If you can't keep your comments within the framework of these rules - GO ELSEWHERE!"
Good advice back in 2008 and now.

#13 Moran
PFRA Member
Posted 17 April 2014 - 10:49 PM
Thank you, Administrators, for administering the site and keeping it civil.

By the way, I notice under my name it says Forum Friend - how does that get changed to PFRA member? I didn't see a way to manage that in my profile - Mike Moran

#14 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 18 April 2014 - 09:07 AM
My apologies, Mike-- consider it done, literally.

#15 Tod Maher
PFRA Member
Posted 19 April 2014 - 07:43 PM
oldestlivingprofootball, on 15 Apr 2014 - 9:57 PM, said:
Another example is John Fekete. Did you know John Fekete '46 Bisons died in 2003, not 1988 like all web sites have listed? That is a 15 year discrepancy. An error that might have impacted his life in a variety of ways if more people realized he was still alive. The PFRA organization has been around for a long time, why these errors were not fixed many years ago is something that should be explained by its long time members. Does anyone care? Does anyone even know these errors exist? It is my opinion that this aspect of pro-football's history is extremely important. If you can't get the name/birth/death information correct, how can anyone take the other information you disseminate seriously.

Fekete died in Sun City, California not Arizona. Also, his full name is John A. Fekete, Jr. (Michael is the middle name of the misidentified 1988 deceased person).

#16 oldestlivingprofootball
Forum Visitors
Posted 19 April 2014 - 09:12 PM
Mark, thank you for your initial comments. While I had hoped my posting would have generated some more thought provoking responses by some of your other long time members, I guess I was mistaken. There are more responses about "how to act on this web site" rather than on the original post. However, I am glad that at least one other web site has taken the information I have presented and made a few changes and has done some further research.

I know that I have opened myself up to criticism and for the "gotcha moment" that some might take joy in doing by making a post like I did, but I would like you to know that I have no problem when someone points out an error on my site. Usually, I will fix it within 24 hours, if not sooner... after I do my own research to verify the information of course. I do not know everything and I do not pretend to know everything, my ultimate goal is to get the information correct, in all places.

Mr. Maher, thank you for the update on the state where Mr. Fekete died. I have his obit and it does say California, I guess Arizona just came out as I typed. I did not know about his middle name though. Thank you for that information. Thanks for changing his death date to 2003 on your site as well, hopefully others will follow your lead. As I have stated to you privately, working together, along with everyone else who cares, we can make pro-football history as complete as humanly possible.
James Zimmerman
Owner: OldestLivingProFootball.com

#17 John Turney
PFRA Member
Posted 19 April 2014 - 10:11 PM
Why would people criticize you or have a gotcha moment? Most of the people here do not do that. They respect and admire the work of others. The PFRA is composed of members that have very diverse interests, kind of a niche, thing. While I like and enjoy your sight, it's not in my skill set to do what you do but maybe it is for others.
I wish you well but I know I am not capable of helping, if that's what you were asking . . .but maybe some will.

#18 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 22 April 2014 - 11:19 AM
oldestlivingprofootball, on 15 Apr 2014 - 9:57 PM, said:
The PFRA organization has been around for a long time, why these errors were not fixed many years ago is something that should be explained by its long time members. Does anyone care? Does anyone even know these errors exist? It is my opinion that this aspect of pro-football's history is extremely important. If you can't get the name/birth/death information correct, how can anyone take the other information you disseminate seriously.
James Zimmerman
Owner: OldestLivingProFootball.com

I guess I'll criticize him, since I don't think that his criticisms of PFRA are entirely fair. I missed the is part of the initial posting quoted above (fifth sentence onward in paragraph five of eight), which includes the "If you can't get this right, how can anyone take you seriously" thing.

I'm not aware that PFRA has ever maintained a player registry.

Starting in 1998, our magazine began an annual listing of players who had passed away in each previous year before. Unfortunately, the compilers were not aware of the death of Mr. Fekete in 2003, and his name was not on the 2004 list, but the images of prior issues cannot be rewritten. These lists are compiled from reports from our members (and even from non-members who can post at the topic at the very top of the PFRA Forum list (this year, it's ("2014 Player Deaths"). So, in answer to the "Does anyone care?" question, yes, we care. Granted, Zimmerman is way better than we are at keeping track of such things, and we're glad that he takes the time to do it, but I take issue with an unfounded accusation.

#19 Mark
PFRA Member
Posted 22 April 2014 - 12:17 PM
Mark L. Ford, on 22 Apr 2014 - 11:19 AM, said:
I guess I'll criticize him, since I don't think that his criticisms of PFRA are entirely fair. I missed the is part of the initial posting quoted above (fifth sentence onward in paragraph five of eight), which includes the "If you can't get this right, how can anyone take you seriously" thing.

I'm not aware that PFRA has ever maintained a player registry.

Starting in 1998, our magazine began an annual listing of players who had passed away in each previous year before. Unfortunately, the compilers were not aware of the death of Mr. Fekete in 2003, and his name was not on the 2004 list, but the images of prior issues cannot be rewritten. These lists are compiled from reports from our members (and even from non-members who can post at the topic at the very top of the PFRA Forum list (this year, it's ("2014 Player Deaths")
So, in answer to the "Does anyone care?" question, yes, we care. Granted, Zimmerman is way better than we are at keeping track of such things, and we're glad that he takes the time to do it, but I take issue with an unfounded accusation.

When I read his criticism I was also baffled but then it occurred to me maybe he was under the impression that the PFRA was associated with Pro Football Reference.

#20 nicefellow31
PFRA Member
Posted 22 April 2014 - 01:36 PM
Moran, on 17 Apr 2014 - 10:49 PM, said:
Thank you, Administrators, for administering the site and keeping it civil.

By the way, I notice under my name it says Forum Friend - how does that get changed to PFRA member? I didn't see a way to manage that in my profile - Mike Moran

Same for me. How did you fix it?

Page 1 of 2
oldecapecod 11

[oldecapecod11]

Researching Pro-Football's History
Started by oldestlivingprofootball, Apr 15 2014 09:57 PM

Page 2 of 2

39 replies to this topic

#21 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 22 April 2014 - 01:50 PM
I hadn't thought of that, but it makes sense-- PFR, PFRA. Their R is for "reference" and ours is for "researchers". Ironically, some of our worst criticism comes from other researchers. And most individual researchers are happy when someone proves them wrong with new information, as in the case of our recent discussion about who the first player to be signed by the 49ers had been. To his credit, Zim didn't say anything untoward about any one person, although I hate to see a suggestion that the entire organization a either careless, or that the people here couldn't care less, two different concepts.

#22 Mark L. Ford
Posted 22 April 2014 - 04:10 PM
nicefellow31, on 22 Apr 2014 - 1:36 PM, said:
Same for me. How did you fix it?

OK, fixed-- nicefellow31, I didn't have your e-mail in our database-- I see who are member from Newport News VA is, but his e-mail is very different -- if you can send a message through the back channel, or e-mail me at pfra@profootballresearchers.org with your name, that will be fine, or, for that matter, just give your initials. We'll need to update our records. Thanks.

#23 rhickok1109
PFRA Member
Posted 22 April 2014 - 05:38 PM
Mark, on 22 Apr 2014 - 12:17 PM, said:
When I read his criticism I was also baffled but then it occurred to me maybe he was under the impression that the PFRA was associated with Pro Football Reference.

That didn't occur to me, but I think you might well be right. I read his post with interest and some sympathy, but it left me a bit baffled about exactly what he would like us to do about it

#24 John Turney
PFRA Member
Posted 22 April 2014 - 07:53 PM
That does make some sense, maybe he thinks this is the PFR site. PFRA does not keep a list of all players, at least that I am aware of, so he cannot be looking at any PFRA publication or compilation and he'd have to be a member to get this list of player deaths . . . maybe my Zimmerman is trying to alert PFR and not the PFRA.

His initial post said, " but I can't wait for the day when some of you realize that there are hundreds of individuals listed on football encyclopedia web sites who are listed as players, when they in fact never played pro football, or were not listed when they did play pro ball".

Since PFRA does not have an "encyclopedia website, " he has to be talking about some other organization.

#25 fgoodwin
Forum Visitors
Posted 27 April 2014 - 06:59 PM
Getting back to the topic of accuracy of player info, I have completely given up on weeding out non-player info from Wikipedia.

My own specialty is the Dallas Cowboys, so fortunately I don't have to go further back than 1960 to determine if someone actually played for them. My main source is the Cowboys official list of all-time players as published in their media guide, supplemented with game day newspaper stories and game books, when I can find them. I can't tell you how many times I've deleted names of guys who are listed on Wikipedia as having played for the Cowboys, when they are not listed on the official all-time roster.

There was one time back in the early 2000s when someone asked me about a certain alleged former Dallas Cowboy (I was a Cowboy "expert" on Ask.com at the time). I forget the guy's name but I told the questioner my standard response: he was not listed on the all-time roster, and he should ask the guy directly if he could support his claim with some evidence. I was confident that was the end of it, as it had been 100% of the time when this question had been asked before about other former "players".

Well in this particular case, the alleged former "player" DID produce some evidence. The guy had a signed contract that allowed him to try-out for the team during training camp (seems like it was during the mid-80s but I never saw the actual document, my questioner confirmed he saw it). So now it became a matter of definition: does a guy who tried out for a team but never makes the active roster a former "player"? I say no, but I can see how a guy who takes multiple hits during the pre-season and draws a paycheck from the team feels otherwise.

Anyway, that episode convinced me to stop editing out non-player names from the list of Cowboy players on Wikipedia. I feel sorry for the people who use that resource.

#26 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 27 April 2014 - 07:37 PM
fgoodwin, on 27 Apr 2014 - 6:59 PM, said:
So now it became a matter of definition: does a guy who tried out for a team but never makes the active roster a former "player"? I say no, but I can see how a guy who takes multiple hits during the pre-season and draws a paycheck from the team feels otherwise.
You see this a lot in obituaries of people that "briefly played" with a team, which usually means they were in someone's training camp and didn't come close to making the team.

Of course, baseball is even worse when it comes to people bragging about how they were either "signed" by a team or played for "a year or so," when in reality, they might have been released soon after. Prior to the internet, the problem was even worse, with most people accepting a statement like that without argument. One prime example is Fox News' Eric Bolling, who is constantly talking about how he "played pro ball," which is technically true. What he never mentions, though, is that his entire career consisted of three games in Rookie ball:

http://www.baseball-...id=bollin001eri

#27 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 27 April 2014 - 09:32 PM
fgoodwin, on 27 Apr 2014 - 6:59 PM, said:
Getting back to the topic of accuracy of player info, I have completely given up on weeding out non-player info from Wikipedia.

Yeah, there's just way too much on there for anyone to correct, in large part because of worshipful articles that fans of a particular college football team make for their favorite players. Got signed by the Cowboys? Yay, he's a Dallas Cowboys player now, gonna get a bye under the rule that all pro athletes gets their own page, never mind the part that they have to have actually appeared in a game for that automatic eligibility. The rationale usually is that, if he didn't make the team this year, surely he'll play in an NFL game someday. The average Wikipedian doesn't remember anything that happened in a year that didn't begin with a "2", but does like to create pages for the heroes who have come along since 2000. Sometimes, there's an asterisk to show that the fellow was on the practice squad or played in preseason only, but Wikipedia is top heavy on sports and entertainment pages. Thanks for trying, anyway.

#28 John Grasso
Board of Directors
Posted 28 April 2014 - 09:01 AM
On the Association for Professional Basketball Research forum APBR president Ray LeBov started a thread
called "Phantom NBA careers" in which various articles about basketball players
erroneously claiming to have played in the NBA are listed. The thread is now up to page 5 with over 100 posts.
http://apbr.org/foru...t=167&start=100

#29 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 28 April 2014 - 10:58 AM
I don't know why any athlete would feel insecure about not having made it into a regular NFL, NBA, MLB, etc. game-- putting on the uniform in an exhibition game is more than most college athletes get a shot at, and going through the rigors of training camp is testimony to one's fortitude. There was a case several years back of a candidate for office in Maryland or D.C., who claimed to have "played for the Dallas Cowboys" for three years, something easy enough to check. He had been in the camp at Thousand Oaks once in the mid-80s, but had been cut early on. All he really would have needed to say is, "I tried to make it in an NFL camp, Tom Landry only had so many spots on his team, but it was a character-building experience" (or some equally insincere statement that politicians make). Foolish to lie about that in the Internet era. It would be easier (though even more reprehensible) to to get away with falsely claiming that one was a veteran of the armed services.

#30 fgoodwin
Forum Visitors
Posted 28 April 2014 - 11:10 AM
Mark L. Ford, on 28 Apr 2014 - 10:58 AM, said:
There was a case several years back of a candidate for office in Maryland or D.C., who claimed to have "played for the Dallas Cowboys" for three years, something easy enough to check. He had been in the camp at Thousand Oaks once in the mid-80s, but had been cut early on. All he really would have needed to say is, "I tried to make it in an NFL camp, Tom Landry only had so many spots on his team, but it was a character-building experience" (or some equally insincere statement that politicians make). Foolish to lie about that in the Internet era. It would be easier (though even more reprehensible) to to get away with falsely claiming that one was a veteran of the armed services.

Funny you should mention that. I can't recall the guy's name, but I investigated that case several years ago. And I agree, the false Medal of Honor claimants are the worst, but according the Supreme Court, they have a First Amendment right to claim whatever they want, as long as they don't defraud anyone. So I suppose the same holds true for the "phantom" football players I detest so much.

#31 oldecapecod 11
PFRA Member
Posted 28 April 2014 - 11:56 AM
It is my understanding that it is now a felony to claim to be the recipient of a military decoration if it is not so?

Maybe it is just local? Check with your nearby VA office or American Legion, VFW, etc.

I know in Florida you must produce DD214 (Military Service Record) for Veteran's plates and other documentation for POW, Purple Heart, Paratrooper, and some other plates as well.

#32 fgoodwin
Forum Visitors
Posted 28 April 2014 - 12:01 PM
Court Holds Stolen Valor Act unconstitutional, dismisses First American Financial v. Edwards

#33 oldecapecod 11
PFRA Member
Posted 28 April 2014 - 12:03 PM
http://www.law.corne...ode/text/18/704

Pretty steep penalties... not to mention the danger of a false claim overheard by some Green Beret, or SEAL, or Ranger, or Marine, or any parent who had lost a friend or child or relative...

WHOOPS! I see the "correction." What a shame! All the more reason for a little "sidewalk justice."

#34 rhickok1109
PFRA Member
Posted 28 April 2014 - 01:03 PM
Quite a few years ago (by that, I mean 30 or more), I got a call from a friend at the local newspaper, where I had worked for 10 years. She wanted to know if a certain person had played in the NFL. I consulted Neft-Cohen, couldn't find the name in any of the indexes, and reported that to my friend. I asked her why she wanted to know and she said that the person in question had died and the obit (written by the funeral home, based on information given by the family) said that he had played for a certain NFL team.

I thought about it afterward. The guy in question had probably told his kids about playing in the NFL. Maybe he had been to a training camp with someone, maybe he had actually been on a roster without ever getting into a game. And there was also the possibility that he actually had played in a game or two but had somehow slipped through the Neft-Cohen net. Whatever the background, his NFL "career" had become a family tradition of sorts, passed on to his grandchildren. Now he was dead and, while they were beginning the process of grieving, they were going to discover that he had been "lying" all those years.

I didn't think that was quite fair or right. Some years later, I got a similar call from the same person at the newspaper, asking a similar question because of another obit. This time, I told her that I wouldn't check it for her.

It just didn't seem all that important to me.

#35 fgoodwin
Forum Visitors
Posted 28 April 2014 - 01:59 PM
rhickok1109, on 28 Apr 2014 - 1:03 PM, said:
Quite a few years ago (by that, I mean 30 or more), I got a call from a friend at the local newspaper, where I had worked for 10 years. She wanted to know if a certain person had played in the NFL. I consulted Neft-Cohen, couldn't find the name in any of the indexes, and reported that to my friend. I asked her why she wanted to know and she said that the person in question had died and the obit (written by the funeral home, based on information given by the family) said that he had played for a certain NFL team.

I thought about it afterward. The guy in question had probably told his kids about playing in the NFL. Maybe he had been to a training camp with someone, maybe he had actually been on a roster without ever getting into a game. And there was also the possibility that he actually had played in a game or two but had somehow slipped through the Neft-Cohen net. Whatever the background, his NFL "career" had become a family tradition of sorts, passed on to his grandchildren. Now he was dead and, while they were beginning the process of grieving, they were going to discover that he had been "lying" all those years.

I didn't think that was quite fair or right. Some years later, I got a similar call from the same person at the newspaper, asking a similar question because of another obit. This time, I told her that I wouldn't check it for her.

It just didn't seem all that important to me.

I understand, and I also have mixed feelings about "outing" a deceased phantom player.

I have no hard evidence of this, but I think most instances where I get a call (or an email) asking about a former player comes from women checking the background of some guy they met in a bar who was bragging about their sports prowess (probably trying to get into her pants). In those cases I have no problem at all sharing what I find (or don't find, as the case may be). Where it's an obit, I'll let sleeping dogs lie.

All this discussion reminded me of a case over a decade ago about a guy claiming to be former Cowboys WR Golden Richards. Now most "phantom players" don't claim to be someone famous or semi-famous, that's too easy to check out. But in this case, that's what the guy did (because he had a similar name, although he didn't look anything like the actual Golden Richards) and was eventually busted for it (although he suffered no legal consequences for the impersonation):

Richards says Texan impostor

#36 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 28 April 2014 - 02:22 PM
I don't worry obituaries that say that someone was in the NFL when he actually wasn't. I agree with Ralph that it's awful to shatter a family's belief during a period of mourning. Death is the great equalizer. In addition, I think that we researchers are more sensitive about the distinction between having "played in the NFL" (or an "NFL player") as opposed to having been a football player who was "with" an NFL team. It's akin to having starred in a film, or having been in that film as an uncredited extra in the background. If you were on the payroll of a pro team at one time, whether it was on the practice squad (which is now pretty good money) or getting a stipend during training camp, it's an interesting part of your life experience.

I do have a problem with living people who make exaggerated or false claims about having "played" in the pros. Mr. Goodwin's story reminded me of a situation around 1986, where a very gullible woman in Lexington was convinced that she had been dating Joe Montana. Somehow, she never thought it odd that a sports superstar would need to borrow money from her....

#37 fgoodwin
Forum Visitors
Posted 28 April 2014 - 02:39 PM
Mark L. Ford, on 28 Apr 2014 - 2:22 PM, said:
I do have a problem with living people who make exaggerated or false claims about having "played" in the pros. Mr. Goodwin's story reminded me of a situation around 1986, where a very gullible woman in Lexington was convinced that she had been dating Joe Montana. Somehow, she never thought it odd that a sports superstar would need to borrow money from her....

Exactly. That's why I take seriously any question about a player's background, especially if it's a name I don't recognize. I can just see some unsuspecting (and probably adoring) fan giving money or whatever to some loser who doesn't deserve it. Obviously someone who has passed won't be doing this, but a living faker just makes me mad. Real players put in too much time and sacrifice. Fakers live off that fame, whether they take a player's name or just claim to have been on the team.

#38 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 28 April 2014 - 02:40 PM
Mark L. Ford, on 28 Apr 2014 - 2:22 PM, said:
I do have a problem with living people who make exaggerated or false claims about having "played" in the pros. Mr. Goodwin's story reminded me of a situation around 1986, where a very gullible woman in Lexington was convinced that she had been dating Joe Montana. Somehow, she never thought it odd that a sports superstar would need to borrow money from her....
There was also the bizarre case of former Lions RB Nick Eddy: http://www.recordnet..._NEWS/310079985

Just a few weeks ago, REAL former baseball player Bill Henry died, nearly seven years after his would-be doppelganger passed away, allowing the real Henry to have a Mark Twain moment: http://www.theledger.../NEWS/709050475

#39 fgoodwin
Forum Visitors
Posted 28 April 2014 - 02:57 PM
oldecapecod 11, on 28 Apr 2014 - 12:03 PM, said:
WHOOPS! I see the "correction." What a shame! All the more reason for a little "sidewalk justice."

I never served, but I was angered by that decision.
The men and women of our military paid dearly (some with their lives) for the honor of wearing those medals. For some sleazebag to wear them so he can march in a parade or get a round of drinks for free just makes my blood boil.
I salute all our veterans and think they should be treated with more dignity and respect.

#40 fgoodwin
Forum Visitors
Posted 28 April 2014 - 03:07 PM
BD Sullivan, on 28 Apr 2014 - 2:40 PM, said:
There was also the bizarre case of former Lions RB Nick Eddy: http://www.recordnet..._NEWS/310079985

Just a few weeks ago, REAL former baseball player Bill Henry died, nearly seven years after his would-be doppelganger passed away, allowing the real Henry to have a Mark Twain moment: http://www.theledger.../NEWS/709050475

The Nick Eddy case is sad, but I'm glad it was discovered while he was still alive. The Bill Henry case shows what sadness befalls a grieving family when the truth behind a hoaxster is revealed. Did David Lambert do the right thing in revealing the ruse? I like to think so.

Page 2 of 2