Before I offer up my opinions on the NFL Painkiller lawsuit, I would like to put things into perspective. I'm not a journalist, an ESPN talking head, or a former NFL player--that being said I can only relate the issues at hand to what I've experienced personally albeit on a MUCH smaller scale. I'm just your typical middle class male who has a family of his own, and happened to play four years of small college football.
Football has, and always will carry with it the Machismo stigma--young and middle aged males grinding it out between the painted lines, doing whatever it takes to see the field, and ultimately stay on the field.
Having Dealt with a handful of injuries from nearly slicing off my big toe the Friday night before a game to a pulled groin, to recovering from illness that dropped me to my knees a Wednesday prior to a game, I never once considered being out, even if that meant putting substances into my body that I knew later would be harmful to my health. I had the good fortune of never needing such substances, but if it was a choice-I'd had made the decision to partake regardless of consequences down the road. The "culture" of the game is to stay on the field. Now lets digest the perspective, if a small ball player is willing to risk his health without the repercussions of losing the vehicle that feeds and clothes his family, and the ultimate loss of his livelihood, why would an NFL player even have to think twice about it. The answer is out there, and the resounding response is; among the "culture" of NFL players, there was, and is, no second choice.
Among the group of 500 plus players named in the suit, and even those who have chosen not to pursue the proceedings, you hear the same thing over and over--YOU DO WHAT IT TAKES TO STAY ON THE FIELD! That same thought has been shared numerous times over national radio sports talk shows by those who lived it, (ie. Mike Golic and Mark Schlereth, not a part of the lawsuit, and others such as Richard Dent, Jim McMahon and Kyle Turley, who are currently named in the lawsuit). While there is no denying the issue of wanting to stay on the field, after all the livelihood of these men was on the line, the area that has become the talking point of this issue is informed consent, and the responsibility of each individual team doctor.
I believe collectively that these players will submit to the fact that they took these substances to stay at the top of their game, there's no denying that, but many are saying that the league (or the individual team doctors) were negligent in informing players of the health risks down the road. That being said, I've got to believe these same players would be lying to our faces if they proclaimed they would have refused had they received informed consent.
Lets imagine for a second Richard Dent sitting on a plane after a big game, a doctor walks the aisle and asks if he needs painkillers, after an emphatic "Yes", do we really believe these medications will be then turned down after informed consent. In the moment, during that magical '85 season, history on the line, do we really believe that Dent would even blink an eye at risk factors he may face 20-30 years down the line--I'm guessing not.
I have no idea where this goes from here, and I'm guessing that this will not go away anytime soon. Will the players ultimately "win" this battle? That answer will be sorted out in due time, but not without a mess of proceedings to come in the days or even years ahead. I'm not sure what will happen with the players, but my guess is one way or the other, there will be changes in the NFL policy to cover their behinds.
The NFL policies and procedures manual may be adding a few pages to legally protect themselves, but will this really change the thoughts of its current players when it comes to painkilling substances--it remains to be seen, but my thought is the "culture" of the game will continue to win out amongst the men who grind it out between the lines.
