The New York Times
The New York Times is reporting a sports hero is giving up the remainder of his contract after an injury forced him out of play. He didn't feel right about accepting the eleven million.
It is rare for a sports hero to say his family life is more important than the money. He is forfeiting far more in one year than many, many hard-working employees added together make in their entire lifetimes.
The big news is what's behind the news: this is reported as being very rare. His boss manager even admits he wouldn't ever say "you're not able to play, so you should retire." That doesn't happen, and why doesn't it?
Now I am not going to pretend to have knowledge I don't have about why sportsmen are paid so much. I've heard theories. I do know what is right and fair, and I think the amounts of money top sportsmen make is out of proportion to their contributions to society.
I haven't ever had a sports hero before, but he's one to me. It's a baby step for the sports community, and I wish more were as honest a person as him. I haven't ever bought the idea sportsmen are worth huge contracts, and I've thought about it a lot. It's a societal inefficiency that's gotten way out of whack. They aren't automatically more disciplined than everyone else and I applaud his action. I don't want to say his name, and the full story is here.
What do you think, why are top sportsmen supported and paid so much, apart from being crowd-drawing, crowd-pleasing team players?