The NFLPA wants somebody to take another look at how the Philadelphia Eagles handled Jalen Hurts’ blood-clot diagnosis. The NFL, having already defended the team’s doctors, apparently doesn’t see the need. It’s a strange disagreement to have in public, especially with Hurts now sidelined by blood clots in both lungs.
Here’s what makes the league’s position difficult to understand. Nobody has established that Philadelphia did anything medically wrong. Specialists cleared Hurts to play against the Jacksonville Jaguars, and there’s no evidence that taking the field caused his condition to worsen. But the NFLPA isn’t demanding punishment. It’s asking the league to examine what happened before deciding whether everything was handled properly.
Instead, the league seems to have skipped ahead to the conclusion.
Eagles Face Growing Scrutiny as NFLPA Demands Jalen Hurts Investigation
Hurts took a cleat to his left calf during Philadelphia’s October 4th game against the Los Angeles Rams. Four days later, he reported discomfort to the medical staff.
An ultrasound performed in London on October 10th revealed a superficial blood clot. After consulting specialists, the Eagles cleared Hurts to face Jacksonville the following afternoon.
He played the entire game. Philadelphia lost 19-17.
There wasn’t much public discussion about his calf afterward, at least not until the medical situation changed.
The Eagles arranged additional testing following their return from London. That examination revealed movement in the clot, and subsequent testing confirmed deep vein thrombosis and bilateral pulmonary emboli.
On October 19th, the team announced Hurts would begin treatment with blood thinners. Contact football is prohibited during that treatment, leaving Philadelphia without its starting quarterback for the foreseeable future.
Then the NFLPA entered the picture.
The union said Tuesday that the league had previously informed it no investigation was planned. Its response was straightforward: an examination of Hurts’ care should happen before anybody declares the medical decisions appropriate.
NFLPA Finds Itself at Odds With League Officials
NFL chief medical officer Dr. Allen Sills has defended Philadelphia’s handling of the situation. He believes the doctors made appropriate decisions with the information available at the time.
That explanation isn’t without merit.
A superficial clot and deep vein thrombosis are different diagnoses. Doctors also can’t know with certainty whether a patient will develop complications several days later. The fact that Hurts eventually suffered pulmonary emboli doesn’t automatically make his earlier clearance a mistake.
But that’s not quite the point the NFLPA is making.
The union wants an examination of the treatment itself. Which specialists were consulted? What precautions were recommended? How was the quarterback monitored before and after the flight home?
It’s entirely possible those questions have satisfactory answers.
The NFLPA would simply prefer those answers come from a formal review rather than another statement expressing confidence in the medical staff.
Sills also indicated that the league doesn’t have one universal protocol covering every blood-clot diagnosis. Physicians make decisions based on individual circumstances, which is understandable given how widely these conditions can vary.
That discretion places considerable responsibility on the medical personnel involved.
The NFL Has Investigated Less Serious Situations
Consider how the league approaches possible violations of its concussion procedures.
When a player returns to a game under questionable circumstances, the NFL and NFLPA have a process for reviewing whether the proper steps were followed. Those investigations don’t automatically establish that a physician made a mistake. Sometimes they confirm the medical staff acted appropriately.
Hurts’ diagnosis falls outside that concussion framework, so the same review procedures don’t necessarily apply.
Still, the comparison is difficult to overlook.
The NFLPA is asking for a closer examination of a quarterback who played with a diagnosed clot and later developed pulmonary emboli. The league has responded by defending its doctors and reportedly deciding Philadelphia won’t face discipline.
Those two developments aren’t proof of a cover-up, negligence or anything else. They do raise a reasonable question about why an independent investigation would be inappropriate.
And that question isn’t going away just because the Eagles have another game to prepare for.
NFLPA Dispute Adds to Philadelphia’s Problems
Hurts’ absence is already a significant setback for the Eagles. Philadelphia must adjust its offense while its quarterback undergoes treatment for a condition that has nothing to do with whether he can tolerate pain or play through an ordinary football injury.
The medical controversy is a separate headache.
Head coach Nick Sirianni has defended the organization’s handling of Hurts’ condition, although decisions involving blood clots are obviously beyond a coach’s medical expertise.
That’s why teams employ physicians and consult specialists.
The NFLPA isn’t suggesting that coaches should make those decisions. Quite the opposite. The union wants the medical process examined on its own terms.
Philadelphia could emerge from an investigation with its doctors completely vindicated. In fact, an independent review supporting their decisions would probably do more to settle the controversy than the league’s current public defense.
Instead, the argument continues.
The Last Word
Hurts is expected to make a full recovery, according to the Eagles and his agent, Nicole Lynn. That’s the most encouraging development in a situation that could have been considerably worse.
The NFLPA, meanwhile, has put the league in an uncomfortable position. NFL officials have defended Philadelphia’s doctors, but the union wants the decisions surrounding Hurts’ treatment independently examined. Those aren’t unreasonable positions to hold simultaneously.
What seems harder to justify is refusing a review simply because league officials already believe the appropriate decisions were made.
Maybe they were. There is medical evidence supporting that possibility, and nothing publicly established proves negligence.
But the NFLPA isn’t asking the league to assume the Eagles got it wrong. It’s asking the league to demonstrate how it reached the conclusion that they got it right.
More NFL News:
- Jalen Hurts’ Contract Could Become a $255 Million Problem for Philadelphia
- Browns Insider Reveals Potential Trade Deadline Plans After Surprising 4-2 Start
- Patrick Mahomes’ Legacy Is Entering a Chapter Tom Brady Never Faced
Main Photo Courtesy of Kirby Lee – Imagn Images