As the Raiders and former Raiders defensive tackle Christian Wilkins embark on a legal fight over whether the team properly voided his remaining guarantees before cutting him, one key question will be whether his foot injury required another surgery — and whether he should have submitted to it.
Hovering over that issue will be his absolute right to a second opinion.
From Article 39, Section 6 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement: “A player will have the opportunity to obtain a second medical opinion. As a condition of the Club’s responsibility for the costs of medical services rendered by the physician furnishing the second opinion, such physician must be board-certified in his field of medical expertise; in addition, (a) the player must consult with the Club physician in advance concerning the other physician; and (b) the Club physician must be furnished promptly with a report concerning the diagnosis, examination and course of treatment recommended by the other physician. A player shall have the right to follow the reasonable medical advice given to him by his second opinion physician with respect to diagnosis of injury, surgical and treatment decisions, and rehabilitation and treatment protocol, but only after consulting with the Club physician and giving due consideration to his recommendations.”
In this context, if the Raiders’ doctor concluded that Wilkins needed another procedure to repair the Jones fracture in his foot and Wilkins obtained a second opinion to the contrary, Wilkins had the right to follow that advice.
The fact that the CBA is so clear on this point suggests that the Raiders will have something else to use.
Or maybe they simply decided to roll the dice. If they owe him the money anyway, what’s the harm in throwing something/anything against the wall and hoping it sticks? That applies to anything relating to his foot injury, or anything else they may be able to use against him in an effort to avoid paying him more than $35 million — on top of the $49.7 million he already has earned.