Have you been living under a rock?

 

If the Rams cut Sam at some point, it won't matter what reason is given.  There is a very vocal segment of our society who will try to make it about his sexual preference.  That small number of people you referenced will get an inordinate amount of media coverage because outlets are almost forced to pander to them. 

 

Have you joined the TMD School of Overreaction?

 

What are you (and Redsky and TMD) so afraid of? You apparently couldn't answer my question because there will be no reaction of sufficient force that will harm the Rams in any way. Weird - you're the one who sees LGBT "thugs' and conspiracy under every bed, but you've bought into the myth that there will be this overpowering uproar.

 

What happened to the great reaction to Michael Vick? Nothing.

 

What happened to the great reaction to Tim Tebow? Nothing.

 

This is America - a new thing every week. If Michael Sam gets cut it will be news for a week. Then something else will be in the headlines. You're working yourself up for no reason. You need to calm down.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

I think there will be as much "uproar" over Sam getting cut due to his sexuality as there was in regards to Tebow being cut due to his religious beliefs.

---

I think there will be as much "uproar" over Sam getting cut due to his sexuality as there was in regards to Tebow being cut due to his religious beliefs.

 

Agree.

 

And one final word - if the Mike Vick thing can blow over (I submit that there are many, many more animal/dog lovers in this country than there are homosexuals/supporters of gay rights) then anything can become yesterday's news.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

What are you (and Redsky and TMD) so afraid of? You apparently couldn't answer my question because there will be no reaction of sufficient force that will harm the Rams in any way. Weird - you're the one who sees LGBT "thugs' and conspiracy under every bed, but you've bought into the myth that there will be this overpowering uproar.

 

I don't know what led you to believe I was afraid of anything to do with the subject at hand, but you're mistaken on that mark. 

---

I don't know what led you to believe I was afraid of anything to do with the subject at hand, but you're mistaken on that mark. 

 

Dude....don't fall into it. Its how they argue. 

---

I don't know what led you to believe I was afraid of anything to do with the subject at hand, but you're mistaken on that mark. 

 

You seem to have an irrational fear of a media backlash against the Rams.

 

Why would you even care what the media says about the Rams?

---

Dude....don't fall into it. Its how they argue. 

 

It's incredibly obnoxious.

 

You seem to have an irrational fear of a media backlash against the Rams.

 

Why would you even care what the media says about the Rams?

 

Spare me your psychological diagnosis if you can't use any sort of reasoning to back it up. Nothing I've said implies any sort of fear. 

 

The second part of your post, about me caring about what the media says about the Rams, is completely off base. I haven't even mentioned the Rams. I'm trying to see things from Dungy's point of view here. 

---

I don't have an issue with a team not wanting to bring in added media distraction (stemming from a late rounder no less).

 

I'd bet that there were a few GM's that actually passed on the guy for that very reason. 

 

Dungy is hardly alone in his line of thinking - and he doesn't seem to have taken any moral stance here  - only a practical football consideration.

 

Whether or not  the kid makes the team  -  gay players in football will eventually  just be "normal" and not deserving of a media circus.

---

It's incredibly obnoxious.

 

 

Spare me your psychological diagnosis if you can't use any sort of reasoning to back it up. Nothing I've said implies any sort of fear. 

 

The second part of your post, about me caring about what the media says about the Rams, is completely off base. I haven't even mentioned the Rams. I'm trying to see things from Dungy's point of view here. 

 

That's fine, your motivation for posting here about this subject isn't fear.

 

What is that motivation, then?

---

I don't have an issue with a team not wanting to bring in added media distraction (stemming from a late rounder no less).


I'd bet that there were a few GM's that actually passed on the guy for that very reason.


Dungy is hardly alone in his line of thinking - and he doesn't seem to have taken any moral stance here - only a practical football consideration.


Whether or not the kid makes the team - gay players in football will eventually just be "normal" and not deserving of a media circus.

Well said NYC. This is what I tried to say but you put it better than I did. I'm guessing most if not all GMs factored in the media distraction to some extent. You would have to. Some locker rooms would handle that distraction better than others too. At the time he was planning on a reality show following him around. That type of distraction and attention would play a factor with most teams I would think.

---

That's fine, your motivation for posting here about this subject isn't fear.

 

What is that motivation, then?

 

I believe Dungy is entitled to believe Sam would bring unwanted media attention to his football team, therefore not wanting to draft him. Other front office decision makers may have thought this very thing, hey, maybe even ours did. Who could know? These kind of things are often meant to stay behind closed doors to avoid situations like this very one.

 

Counterarguments to this are well-reasoned, saying Dungy was an advocate of players who came from similarly controversial backgrounds. Tim Tebow, Michael Vick, Plaxico Burress, etc. I don't necessarily agree with it though, seeing as Burress and Vick had success in the NFL before their controversies arose. Even Tebow had moderate success in the NFL, and his following only went out of hand after he started winning games. 

 

Michael Sam on the other hand, was a late round player from the start, had questions about his ability and size, yet had a following rivaling Vick and Tebow, thanks to his orientation.

 

So the question arises, why would Dungy advocate for those men, but not Sam? Is it his belief in Chrisianity? Is it his belief or lack thereof in Sam's ability? I don't know. I don't know how much light he's shed on his comments either, but I sure as hell don't believe they warrant an apology.

---

I believe Dungy is entitled to believe Sam would bring unwanted media attention to his football team, therefore not wanting to draft him. Other front office decision makers may have thought this very thing, hey, maybe even ours did. Who could know? These kind of things are often meant to stay behind closed doors to avoid situations like this very one.

 

Counterarguments to this are well-reasoned, saying Dungy was an advocate of players who came from similarly controversial backgrounds. Tim Tebow, Michael Vick, Plaxico Burress, etc. I don't necessarily agree with it though, seeing as Burress and Vick had success in the NFL before their controversies arose. Even Tebow had moderate success in the NFL, and his following only went out of hand after he started winning games. 

 

Michael Sam on the other hand, was a late round player from the start, had questions about his ability and size, yet had a following rivaling Vick and Tebow, thanks to his orientation.

 

So the question arises, why would Dungy advocate for those men, but not Sam? Is it his belief in Chrisianity? Is it his belief or lack thereof in Sam's ability? I don't know. I don't know how much light he's shed on his comments either, but I sure as hell don't believe they warrant an apology.

 

So to boil this down, your motivation is a fear of curtailment of freedom of expression or repercussions extending therefrom?

---

Have fun, just remember to be respectful of others. The lack thereof is what got political discussion banned. I know this, as I was one of the worst offenders.

 

Yes, yes you were. lol

---

I believe Dungy is entitled to believe Sam would bring unwanted media attention to his football team, therefore not wanting to draft him. Other front office decision makers may have thought this very thing, hey, maybe even ours did. Who could know? These kind of things are often meant to stay behind closed doors to avoid situations like this very one.

 

Counterarguments to this are well-reasoned, saying Dungy was an advocate of players who came from similarly controversial backgrounds. Tim Tebow, Michael Vick, Plaxico Burress, etc. I don't necessarily agree with it though, seeing as Burress and Vick had success in the NFL before their controversies arose. Even Tebow had moderate success in the NFL, and his following only went out of hand after he started winning games. 

 

To be clear, I believe teams are entitled to make their own judgments on these matters, consistent with the law, and govern themselves accordingly.

 

I just did not buy Dungy's stated rationale, given his past embrace of distracting players.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

To be clear, I believe teams are entitled to make their own judgments on these matters, consistent with the law, and govern themselves accordingly.

 

I just did not buy Dungy's stated rationale, given his past embrace of distracting players.

 

And I think that is the biggest issue. He pushed for teams to take on distractions like Vick, like Burress, like Tebow, like Manziel. But all of sudden Sam's he could not handle.

---

It's amazing how some folks are pretending to ignore Bullseye's posts. You made some great points, Bullseye. Very astute.

 

 

Thank you.

 

I believe Dungy's faith based beliefs, not the distraction Sam would cause, sparked this controversy.  My thing is Dungy has been outspoken about his principles before.  Why not be forthcoming now?

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Again, what rock are you living under?

 

The Jason Collins situation is irrelevant.  When the NBA has the same level of fan interest as the NFL, let me know.  The story flashed, then quickly subsided as the media attention went elsewhere.

 

Sam coming out sparked a reality show on the Oprah Network.  That's why the cameras were there when he celebrated his selection as a 7th round player.  You are certainly entitled to believe the party line that he only came out in the most grand way possible by announcing it on national television because he wanted to head off the rumor mongering.  He could have very easily done the same thing quietly by confirming it if asked by teams at the combine.  By doing it in such a visual way, I tend to think he was just trying to get enough of the spotlight to raise his potential draft stock.  In the end, he was drafted, and there was a distinct possibility coming into the draft that he was going to be a rookie free agent. 

 

To say the potential doesn't exist where he could be considered a distraction is bogus.  The Rams saw this as well, and pretty much shut down his reality show once he was on the team.  Clearly they saw that as a potential distraction.  As players are asked on a daily basis about playing with a gay guy because the media is so overly infatuated with such things, they're going to be put in a position where it could also become a distraction, especially; when you're talking about a guy who's a 7th round pick. 

 

To think the potential doesn't exist in the current climate is just bogus.

 

To say that Jason Collins is irrelevant in discussing Michael Sam is as ridiculous a comment I have ever read in this boards.

 

There is no other comparison that you can make in Sam's case BUT Collins.

 

You're also contradicting yourself. You claim that Sam was only drafted because he came out, then also state that the Rams see some of the things attached to him as distractions (as Dungy referred to them). If that's the case, then isn't it more likely that coming out ACTUALLY hurt Sam's stock? If him coming out was going to be viewed by teams as a distraction, then isn't it more reason for an athlete NOT to come out?

 

And that's where this comes back to....that's why no prominent athlete has ever come out of the closet...until now.

 

For whatever reason, there's this connotation in doing so. I mean, seriously, pray tell....

 

Why do you automatically assume a negative agenda to Sam coming out? Why can't it be that he just wanted to come out? To tell his story? To inspire kids and teens that it's OK to be open about how you really are?

 

Why does it have to be that "oh he came out. He must be trying to get some special benefit from it"?

---

Dude....don't fall into it. Its how they argue. 

 

Thanks for making my point.

 

Sometimes this is too easy.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

Thanks for making my point.

 

Sometimes this is too easy.

 

What's wrong with calling left-wing extremists and though-police "they"?

---

What's wrong with calling left-wing extremists and though-police "they"?

 

 

....he's one of 'em.

---