Mizzou's Michael Sam comes out

[HedleyLamarr]

I've been pretty consistent on what I presumed Dungy was referring to when he said "distraction". (Assuming it hasn't been mod-edited) Look it up.

If Mark Richt (another coach that's known for being a big religious guy) had said the same thing, would he have been given the Dungy treatment? It's an awfully slippery slope to assume that a religious guy is making a comment because he's anti-gay rights. Especially when Dungy's on-the-record comments say he's not against Sam playing in the NFL.

[Cosmic]

I'm pretty sure Dungy wasn't thinking of "distraction" in the sense of Sam getting aroused by slapping a player with a towel or anything like that. Pretty sure he was thinking of "distraction" in terms of being the head coach and having to answer and re-answer the same questions about a singular player throughout camp, and also possibly putting himself in the position of having to explain why he was cut.

Anybody other than Dungy, I would agree with you. But when a man actively (and repeatedly) campaigns against the civil rights of his fellow human beings, he loses the benefit of the doubt on that particular issue.

Given his very vocal opposition to gay rights on more than one occasion, it's absurdly disingenuous to now suggest that his personal views have zero bearing on his comments regarding Sam.

Yeah, I'd probably even give him some benefit of the doubt after knowing his stance on gay marriage... but then when you add in the fact that he very publicly campaigned for teams to take on the biggest player distraction in NFL history...

[Raysfan12]

Bringing this conversation over from the NFL thread...

TheSoundOfBeingBanned

Ya no. Still here. And what on earth makes you think I should be banned?

A guy makes a remark about our football team which has indeed experienced tragedy at the result of gun violence far too often, and then a very true statement about a seventh round pick. What other seventh round pick needed a press conference to justify being cut?

And what on earth makes you think I should be banned? You're just kinda loud and obnoxious about your opinions. You bring nothing to the table as a poster other than volume and cringe-worthy statements that have your fellow St. Louis fans embarrassed via association.

A guy makes a remark about our football team which has indeed experienced tragedy at the result of gun violence far too often, and then a very true statement about a seventh round pick. What other seventh round pick needed a press conference to justify being cut? It's significant since he may not be in the public eye again, and it's a keystone moment for a league that is quietly rampant with homophobia and hypocrisy. It's not Jackie Robinson, but it means something that requires recognition at the expense of overexposure/analysis. It's a big deal making this thing not a big deal.

See, this was where Tony Dungy wasn't wrong in saying "distraction", especially from the coach's point of view.

I can't ever remember an instance where a team not only had their coach give a press conference about a player getting cut from the team at the end of the preseason, but a 7th-round draft pick got an introductory press conference the day after he was drafted. We're only a couple days removed from ESPN trying to make Michael Sam's showering habits a story (which was a bit of a distraction to the players that were interviewed, Fisher having to take time to issue his disgust with ESPN for the story, Long for his tweet supporting Sam, etc.). The Rams ballclub did an excellent job in making Sam's sexual preference a "who gives a crap?" thing at camp. Being drafted by the team near his school and with a coach that's about as stand-up a man as there is in the NFL, he was put in about as good a situation as he could dream of, and was given as much of a fair-shake as possible.

Early on in this thread, I outlined where Dungy could have been referring to as distraction situations. For the most part (not that I listened to much sports talk or watched much television....had a busy month), I didn't hear anything on Sam during training camp and preseason. (If any of you in the St. Louis area can add some insight on the local news stations and papers and how much Fisher and/or the players and/or other coaches were specifically asked about Sam's progress, let us know.) It kinda came off the rails this past week, both with the showering 'story' and the uncertainty of Sam surviving the final cuts.

I'm sure most of you will agree that the Rams, their fans and coaches didn't care about Sam being gay. He himself wasn't a distraction to them, but the media made it become a little bit of a distraction as camp was coming to a close. Fisher shouldn't have had to explain why a guy got cut when he could have using that time to be doing something more constructive.

I'm pretty sure Dungy wasn't thinking of "distraction" in the sense of Sam getting aroused by slapping a player with a towel or anything like that. Pretty sure he was thinking of "distraction" in terms of being the head coach and having to answer and re-answer the same questions about a singular player throughout camp, and also possibly putting himself in the position of having to explain why he was cut. With these coaches that spend so much time at the office devising game plans and such, doing something that takes time away from that (such as extended interviews) are distractions.

I thought of the same thing as well. I felt the media would bring the distractions not Michael Sam himself. While I think Dungy should be more clear about the "distractions", he isn't wrong either.

[Gothamite]

Sure he is, when he suggests that distractions over a dog-killer are somehow no big deal (remember the outcry when Vick returned to the NFL?) and "look, a gay man!" distractions are.

But then again, given his own past, no surprise.

[HedleyLamarr]

I'm pretty sure Dungy wasn't thinking of "distraction" in the sense of Sam getting aroused by slapping a player with a towel or anything like that. Pretty sure he was thinking of "distraction" in terms of being the head coach and having to answer and re-answer the same questions about a singular player throughout camp, and also possibly putting himself in the position of having to explain why he was cut.

Anybody other than Dungy, I would agree with you. But when a man actively (and repeatedly) campaigns against the civil rights of his fellow human beings, he loses the benefit of the doubt on that particular issue.

Given his very vocal opposition to gay rights on more than one occasion, it's absurdly disingenuous to now suggest that his personal views have zero bearing on his comments regarding Sam.

Yeah, I'd probably even give him some benefit of the doubt after knowing his stance on gay marriage... but then when you add in the fact that he very publicly campaigned for teams to take on the biggest player distraction in NFL history...

....because the NFL asked him to.

[Gothamite]

So he's not a bigot, just an unprincipled corporate shill?

Okay, if you think that's somehow a defense of the man...

[Cosmic]

I'm pretty sure Dungy wasn't thinking of "distraction" in the sense of Sam getting aroused by slapping a player with a towel or anything like that. Pretty sure he was thinking of "distraction" in terms of being the head coach and having to answer and re-answer the same questions about a singular player throughout camp, and also possibly putting himself in the position of having to explain why he was cut.

Anybody other than Dungy, I would agree with you. But when a man actively (and repeatedly) campaigns against the civil rights of his fellow human beings, he loses the benefit of the doubt on that particular issue.

Given his very vocal opposition to gay rights on more than one occasion, it's absurdly disingenuous to now suggest that his personal views have zero bearing on his comments regarding Sam.

Yeah, I'd probably even give him some benefit of the doubt after knowing his stance on gay marriage... but then when you add in the fact that he very publicly campaigned for teams to take on the biggest player distraction in NFL history...

....because the NFL asked him to.

... and he said yes. He wasn't an NFL employee. It was still his choice to vouch for the biggest player distraction in NFL history. So yes, it is worth an eyebrow raise when he says certain people aren't worth a distraction.

Edit: and I feel like this is a relevant time to mention that one of the guys in question financed an interstate criminal organization and directly participated in the torture and killing of dogs. The other guy does "weird" stuff in the bedroom.

[Braden]

Michael Sam has cleared waivers, and is available to be on NFL practice rosters (the maximum has expanded this year from 8 to 10 players).

No Michael Sam yet, but St. Louis is amongst the 8 teams yet to announce their practice roster. Leading the team in sacks this pre-season and lasting until the final day has got to earn him that, right? Right? My fingers will continue to be crossed for the guy.

And can we give it a rest with this whole Tony Dungy stuff? Myself and all the gay sports fans I know (a LOT more than you realize) think he's a holier-than-thou douchenozzle and hasn't valued his opinions, football or non-football, in a loooong time. Don't expect me to read your defence of the content of his character, because I won't.

[ninersdd]

I read on twitter that while Sam had a positive PFF grade, his main competition, Westbrooks was rated the best 4-3 DE in the preseason. Case of wrong place wrong time for Sam to make the Rams.

[buzzcut]

Per Albert Breer on Twitter, he won't be on the Rams' practice squad. I don't see any team that takes him on now. Maybe the FXFL will take a flier?

[monkeypower]

He could come up here to Canada.

[kewp80]

I read on twitter that while Sam had a positive PFF grade, his main competition, Westbrooks was rated the best 4-3 DE in the preseason. Case of wrong place wrong time for Sam to make the Rams.

Exactly. The Rams already have a lot of talent at DE and the D-line as a whole. Like Jeff Fisher said, having 10 defensive linemen rather than 10 would of left us with a hole somewhere else on our roster.

Sam will, and should, be on an NFL roster by the end of the year. Would of loved to have him as a 3rd Down rusher, but I'm not the coach and not going to questioning him at all. It must of been a tough decision to make regardless.

[HedleyLamarr]

I'm pretty sure Dungy wasn't thinking of "distraction" in the sense of Sam getting aroused by slapping a player with a towel or anything like that. Pretty sure he was thinking of "distraction" in terms of being the head coach and having to answer and re-answer the same questions about a singular player throughout camp, and also possibly putting himself in the position of having to explain why he was cut.

Anybody other than Dungy, I would agree with you. But when a man actively (and repeatedly) campaigns against the civil rights of his fellow human beings, he loses the benefit of the doubt on that particular issue.

Given his very vocal opposition to gay rights on more than one occasion, it's absurdly disingenuous to now suggest that his personal views have zero bearing on his comments regarding Sam.

Yeah, I'd probably even give him some benefit of the doubt after knowing his stance on gay marriage... but then when you add in the fact that he very publicly campaigned for teams to take on the biggest player distraction in NFL history...

....because the NFL asked him to.

... and he said yes. He wasn't an NFL employee. It was still his choice to vouch for the biggest player distraction in NFL history. So yes, it is worth an eyebrow raise when he says certain people aren't worth a distraction.

Edit: and I feel like this is a relevant time to mention that one of the guys in question financed an interstate criminal organization and directly participated in the torture and killing of dogs. The other guy does "weird" stuff in the bedroom.

I honestly don't know why you and so many are comparing Vick to Sam. It's two completely different scenarios. It's also Dungy wearing two different hats. Let me explain it to you all...again.

When this journalist asked Dungy about Michael Sam, it was a hypothetical situation. Having been a head coach, Dungy knows what all goes on in the locker room, in the front office, what all goes on during an interview, etc. He knew that there would be more off-the-field stuff he'd have to deal with a groundbreaking player than he would if he had an ordinary roster. He knows that the local media and the national media would focus on Sam the groundbreaking player than they would Sam the average-7th-rounder. He felt that there might be an on-the-field distraction, whether it be a teammate letting out some slurs during the heat of battle, or some fans that have had too much to drink and starts making gay chants towards Sam, or some opposing player trying to get under Sam's skin, whatever. Dungy was thinking about all the ancillary things that Average Guy doesn't think about.

When Dungy was approached by the NFL about Vick, he was the mentor and a sort-of agent for Vick.

A fair question to ask Dungy would have been "Would you have signed Vick while you were the coach?". (Technically, the GM signs the players, but the point is made.) I'm not so sure Dungy says yes to signing Vick, and for just about all the same reasons why he wouldn't have drafted Sam.

As I've said before, coaches would rather not be doing any of these interviews. They rather be spending their time in the office or in the film room, getting their plans together for practices, games, etc. And having sat through many an interview, coaches are asked just about the same question (re-worded differently a little bit) for about 75% of every interview session. There's the initial question, the follow-up question, etc. That's where having a player on the roster can become a distraction. When coaches and players are being asked about a guy's showering habits or having to issue statements about a player or having to explain their transactions, that's where it did become a bit of a distraction.

Now, to the Rams' credit, Sam was just another guy fighting for a job. From what I've seen and read, he was definitely given a full shake. No incidents were announced, he wasn't treated differently, etc.

But, to Dungy's credit (again, with his career in both being a head coach and now being in the media), he knew that Sam's presence on the team would eventually lead to some foolishness coming from outside the organization. Ultimately, he wasn't wrong, but Michael Sam was largely a non-story through camp.

Much like the steroids in baseball, the media tried to make Sam being gay a bigger issue than it really was for the team and the fans. Sure, we heard about Sam's play in the preseason a lot more than we'd normally hear about a 7th-rounder, but we weren't inundated with Sam's every move at practice on CNN and ESPN or Yahoo. The fans didn't care about a gay player, the team didn't care that a player was gay....it was pretty much business as usual. The media will back down the next time a gay athlete is trying out for a team because they know that people just don't care.

Sam himself wasn't the distraction. The media obsessing with Sam was the distraction, and that's what I believe Dungy was talking about from the onset. You can imply that his religious beliefs played a part, and I'll just take solace in that you're not willing to look at the entire picture.

[IceCap]

Sam himself wasn't the distraction. The media obsessing with Sam was the distraction, and that's what I believe Dungy was talking about from the onset. You can imply that his religious beliefs played a part, and I'll just take solace in that you're not willing to look at the entire picture.

That's quite a statement considering you said this...

I'm not so sure Dungy says yes to signing Vick, and for just about all the same reasons why he wouldn't have drafted Sam.

It's counter-factual. You're assuming something based on little more then your opinion of the man. Just as people are assuming he's a homophobe based on theirs. The difference? The people calling him a homophobe are basing their opinions on something he actually said. You're basing your opinion that he would have treated Vick the same on pure assumption.

I'm going to echo Braden here. What Dungy said rightfully pissed a lot of LGBT sports fans off. We're not interested in seeing you or anyone else jump through hoops to defend him just because you enjoy the "character" he plays on tv.

[OnWis97]

Looks like his NFL chances are done. It's too bad. I viewed the St. Louis cut as legit, but given the preseason he had I'm not totally comfortable with him not even making anyone's practice squad.

I'd say the NFL is not ready. It's gonna have to wait several more years (barring a superstar coming out).

This all works out well for the NFL. I don't think a marginal talent would be wise to come out now.

[Sport]

So nobody's even going to practice squad him?

[SuperLeafsFan]

He could come up here to Canada.

Sam on the Argos??????

Him and our Pride Parade would be a epic thing.....

[illwauk]

Bringing this conversation over from the NFL thread...

TheSoundOfBeingBanned

Ya no. Still here. And what on earth makes you think I should be banned?

A guy makes a remark about our football team which has indeed experienced tragedy at the result of gun violence far too often, and then a very true statement about a seventh round pick. What other seventh round pick needed a press conference to justify being cut?

And what on earth makes you think I should be banned? You're just kinda loud and obnoxious about your opinions. You bring nothing to the table as a poster other than volume and cringe-worthy statements that have your fellow St. Louis fans embarrassed via association.

A guy makes a remark about our football team which has indeed experienced tragedy at the result of gun violence far too often, and then a very true statement about a seventh round pick. What other seventh round pick needed a press conference to justify being cut? It's significant since he may not be in the public eye again, and it's a keystone moment for a league that is quietly rampant with homophobia and hypocrisy. It's not Jackie Robinson, but it means something that requires recognition at the expense of overexposure/analysis. It's a big deal making this thing not a big deal.

See, this was where Tony Dungy wasn't wrong in saying "distraction", especially from the coach's point of view.

I can't ever remember an instance where a team not only had their coach give a press conference about a player getting cut from the team at the end of the preseason, but a 7th-round draft pick got an introductory press conference the day after he was drafted.

So you're saying that Dungy... someone with a well-documented history of making homophobic and bigoted remarks... is vindicated because an NFL coach will have had to give 102 pressers this year instead of his usual 100?

Yeah... no.

He could come up here to Canada.

Why not? That's what Warren Moon had to do until Murica could finally accept seeing someone darker than a paper bag behind center.

F~~k this country.

[Gothamite]

But, to Dungy's credit (again, with his career in both being a head coach and now being in the media), he knew that Sam's presence on the team would eventually lead to some foolishness coming from outside the organization. Ultimately, he wasn't wrong, but Michael Sam was largely a non-story through camp.

But that's nonsense. Dungy "wasn't wrong" about there being distractions because he personally led them.

Had Dungy not said that, and given ESPN the cover to agonize over the story for weeks, the coverage of Sam might have been very different.

[Cosmic]

When Dungy was approached by the NFL about Vick, he was the mentor and a sort-of agent for Vick.

A fair question to ask Dungy would have been "Would you have signed Vick while you were the coach?". (Technically, the GM signs the players, but the point is made.) I'm not so sure Dungy says yes to signing Vick, and for just about all the same reasons why he wouldn't have drafted Sam.

He was asked by the NFL, an entity to which he was not beholden in any way. If he were an employee, it would be different. He willingly took on the job of "selling" Vick to teams; doing something like that, it's a de facto statement that Dungy himself would have taken Vick if he were in position to. If you write somebody a recommendation letter for a job application, it normally doesn't mean, "I would never hire this guy in a million years, but he's perfect for you!" If you, of your own free will, recommend somebody for a position, I don't see how you can say that doesn't mean you would take the person if you were in the same situation.

Maybe he was lying when he told teams to take Vick; maybe he wouldn't have touched him if he were still a coach. He still actually took action to say to NFL teams that a racketeer and dog murderer fresh out of two years in prison is worth a giant distraction, but couldn't put on that same face to just say on TV that a gay man is worth a fraction of the media circus.