A lengthy article in the WaPo about “medicine” versus “NFL medicine”*. What is – or should be – completely obvious to the reader of the article: doctors and players behave differently in the NFL than they do in “real” life; and everybody in the NFL knows this.
Look, there is no mystery: if you want to earn tens of millions of dollars, be a national celebrity, be on television every week, be in commercials for products and charities, you will be incentivized in a certain way and you will have to perform in a certain way. If you can’t take it then you don’t do it.
That anybody would even think it could be otherwise – and that many people do – is an indication of a severe lack of understanding of what markets are and what it takes to be an elite anything (athlete in this case).
* – note that the article starts with a shot at the hippocratic oath. Two things: 1) doctors are people and to believe that the hippocratic oath is actually some kind of law of nature (like gravity) that all doctors follow all the time and in the same way is absurd; 2) “do no harm” means – if it is to have any meaning at all – to actually DO something. In the case of RGIII, doctors allowing him to play – not stopping him – is NOT doing something. They have broken no oath. They would be breaking some oath if they were, for example, doing surgery on him and did something unadvisable. If you’re going to say that the team doctors broke their oath by allowing him to play then you also have to say that EVERY doctor in the world that watched that game broke their oath by allowing him to play. Yes, absurd.