With Ben Rothlisberger’s accident, and J.J. Reddick’s DWI, a lot of debate on sports radio is going on about the responsibility players have to their teams, schools, and fans… and how this responsibility should be enough to prevent players from partaking in risky business, or if teams should add clauses to contracts and scholarships that forbid risky (and stupid) behavior.

The argument for pro sports is that a player owes it to those who have investments in them and their success. In the case of Big Ben, that would be his teammates, coaches who rely on his performace to help them succeed. The Steeler’s franchise has invested millions of dollars in Ben, and the fans give their tax dollars for stadiums and their devotion to the team.

As for Reddick, he has a little less, but other than himself might he owe Duke University and Coach K a little more in terms of not destroying their images? Sure lacrosse is doing more than their part, but Duke’s reputation gets hurt a lot more when something like this happens over say… Ohio State where, the days when scandals come out, they call those Tuesdays.

I don’t really know if there’s an answer, but rather think it is useless debate. If a player has the moral character where they do feel that sense of responsibility, well… those players are not so likely to get tanked up and drive, or take risks like riding motorcycles helmetless. If teams begin to write contracts where they forbid risky activities, are they really prepared to take action when a star player violates the rules? I say no, they won’t.

Just like Jason Grimsley would not be cut by the Arizona Diamondbacks if he was, let’s say Albert Pujols, I don’t think the Steelers would have cut Rothlisberger even if he had language in his contract about riding motorcycles or risky behavior.  Let’s face it: In America success in professional athletics means that rules and laws do not apply to you.