The
National Football League has settled the lawsuits against it by the retired players
who claim it misled them about the risks of the head injuries they suffered
in its employ. The preponderance of journalistic opinion is that the deal is a
big win for the league.
The
plaintiffs in the suit—some 4,500 of them—are to split $765 million. That seems
like a very large sum until you divide it by the number of teams in the
league—32—and the 20-year period over which it will be paid. Although payment will be front-loaded, with
half the money to be distributed during the first three years, each team’s average
annual payout will come to about $1.2 million, which is about what it spends for
Ben Gay and Ace bandages.
When you note that the NFL’s revenue last season
was about $10 billion, and the figure is expected to rise steeply in the years
immediately ahead, the conclusion that it made out like a bandit seems
inescapable.
And as the TV pitchmen say—Wait!
There’s more! The settlement covers all ex-players, not only those who signed
up as plaintiffs, so if one of them develops neurological symptoms years down
the road—a not-uncommon occurrence with head injuries—he’ll have to share from
the existing pot. Current and future players aren’t included, but they are
parties to labor-contract provisions that will subject their claims to
arbitration, which typically is less generous to plaintiffs than litigation.
The NFL got off without having to
apologize or admit fault, things that are dear to the stony hearts of corporate
lawyers. Additionally, the settlement
saved it the considerable legal costs trials would have entailed and spared it
from having to produce for cross-examination its dubious experts who until
recently were telling the players and the rest of the world that there was no
proven link between playing football and ailments like Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s
and dementia, even though studies to the contrary have existed for more than 30
years. Again, rack up a “W” for the Big
Team in Suits.
So why did the players agree to
such a deal? Because many of the afflicted retirees are broke and hurting,
unable to wait out the years that litigation would have taken and justifiably
leery about their prospects of proving in court that their illnesses stemmed
from injuries they sustained as professionals, not as high-schoolers or
collegians.
The
“broke” part pertains mostly to ex-NFL bit-parters who never made much money in
the game, but it’s notable that the plaintiffs’ list also included such recent-year
stars as Bruce Smith, Tony Dorsett, Art Monk, Harry Carson, Leroy Butler, Fred
Taylor, Andre Reed and Jim McMahon, whose medical and care requirements eventually
could strain even their once-ample bank accounts. Perhaps they and others
looked at the head-injury-related suicides of Junior Seau, Dave Duerson and
Andre Waters and decided that if help didn’t come soon it might be too late.
Still, the belief that the NFL got
off cheap may be premature. Yeah, the league admitted no guilt, but the Latin
phrase “res ipsa loquitur,” meaning “the thing speaks for itself,” seems to
apply, with 765 million reasons to back it up. In paying the settlement, the
league ratified the idea that playing football has serious potential health
consequences. The action takes the sport
out of the category of a healthful exercise that might be appropriate at the
school as well as the adult level and ranks it with auto racing and downhill
skiing as a daredevil pursuit that should be undertaken only with full
appreciation of its risks.
A similar recognition is inherent
in the recent changes the league has made to prevent head injuries and better
treat ones that occur. While laudable, they also underline the fact that
something dangerous is going on between the sidelines, which the evidence of our
senses confirms every Sunday.
What’s the chance of incurring a debilitating neurological injury at age
50 after, say, 10 or 12 years of playing organized football—1%, 5%, 20%? How about after four or eight years in the
sport? We don’t know now but the data is out there and one day it will be tabulated
definitively. If the results don’t deter the players themselves—young athletes
are strong and cocky, and think that injuries are things that happen to other
people—it might make an impression on the parents who have to approve their
participation in schools and colleges.
These parents might note that young,
developing brains are more susceptible to trauma than the more-mature ones of
the NFL behemoths. They also might heed some recent research that concludes
that an individual needn’t have sustained a “big bang” head blow resulting in a
verifiable concussion to suffer lasting neurological damage—that the numerous, smaller
“dings” he shrugs off in practice or games can have a cumulative affect that
can amount to about the same thing.
You love football, I love football, and the
players and their moms and pops love football, but maybe something similar will
happen to perceptions about the game. It may take a while but if it does the
NFL won’t be celebrating its “victory.”
No comments:
Post a Comment