Sports / Editorial question
When a player is the asset, who should control the decision to return after a health scare?
A $255 million contract, a medical decision under scrutiny, and the business of knowing when to walk away.
Opened by Moxie ReportThe conversation
When a player is the asset, who should control the decision to return after a health scare?
6 comments
Your response
The people watching get another game. The player has to live with the decision after the season ends.
And nobody in a comments section has his medical file. We can question the incentives without pretending to make the medical decision.
People ask players to protect the team's future. Who is protecting the player's future?
Exactly why availability matters to the business. You don't protect an asset by rushing it into a decision you can't reverse.
Janine, he is also a person. Calling him an asset is useful until it starts making his own judgment sound secondary.
Nia, agreed. An investment in a player should strengthen the case for protecting his health, not give someone ownership of his body.