Michael Sam Says He Is Gay; May Become First Publicly Gay Player in N.F.L.

[outofplace]

Exactly. This is YF looking for a way to circumvent the rules about political discussion on the board. Congrats on helping him push his flawed narrative, LTL.

Leave political politics out of it.

Read the anonymous quotes from NFL executives, who call NFL football a man's man kind of game, and cite it as a reason why Michael Sam would not fit in.

If that's a prevailing mindset, can you both support gay rights, and acceptance, and be an NFL fan?

You put the politics in your initial post. It's bad enough that you are making things up and presenting them as fact all over this thread. Don't start lying about how and why you started it, too.

 

[Songbird]

Oy vey. Go have sex or something. Release the anger. You are more concerned about the nothingness of something than anyone I've ever met.

 

[outofplace]

You're right, I shouldn't discuss a player from my alma mater whom I've been watching for the past few years. I'm a YF plant.

Ah, so it's a fanboy thing. Thank you. Now we know where you are coming from.

I never even suggested you were intentionally aiding YF. It is more a matter of you being duped into his foolishness.

You are both way off on this one and you are both trying to convict NFL teams of some crime even though the draft is still months away. This idea that he somehow dropped into the round 3 to 5 range after the Senior Bowl is based on what exactly? That one opinion by one guy from early November that had had Sam among the top 25 players? Every other ranking along the way supports the third-to-fifth round rating and multiple posters have tried to explain to you both that it is not unusual at all for a player ranked early in the process in those rounds to end up drafted later or not at all.

But let's go back to the one ranking I've seen posted to this thread that had Sam higher than that. It was from Nov. 12 if I remember correctly, with four games remaining in the season. Still early enough to be an overreaction to Sam's nine sacks through the first five games of the season and not taking into account his 2.5 sacks over the final seven. Let's just say I find the quality of that particular source to be questionable at best.

 

[LongTimeListener]

You're such a thread dingleberry, oop.

 

[Boom_70]

Stuck by this blog post by Seth Godin. As good a place as any to post:

" 'Refresh' four weeks later

Remember that controversy you couldn't stay close enough to? The one where breaking news, updated comments, emails flying back and forth had you at the edge of your seat?

Now, four weeks later, you're no longer even checking to see what's new.

Is it that the crisis changed or your need for reassurance did?"

 

[outofplace]

You're such a thread dingleberry, oop.

My apologies if being confronted with the truth upset you. The point remains, you and YF are trying to convict NFL scouts and front office types of a crime based which hasn't been committed based on evidence that does not exist. I'm just glad we now have a better understanding of why you are overrating Sam as a draft prospect. We already knew why YF was doing it.

 

[LongTimeListener]

I'm not trying to convict anyone of anything.

My point all along has been that he has been a 3-5 prospect, and now it is 3-7/undrafted.

Nobody in 15 pages of this thread was insulting anyone. It's been a damn good discussion.

And then dingleberry shows up.

 

[Songbird]

COMPREHENSIVE!

I would love to hear Laurence Fishburne Samuel Jackson say that word with great inflection like he greatly inflected during Pulp Fiction.

"An initial drop to 160 from 90 on Monday morning was part of a comprehensive adjustment in the rankings leading up to next week's Scouting Combine that generated movement among hundreds of prospects," Rang wrote.

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2014/02/michael-sam-drops-70-spots-in-cbs-draft-rankings-after-saying-hes-gay/

That's a whole lot of comprehensive'ing overnight, huh?

 

[Dick Whitman]

I'm not trying to convict anyone of anything.

My point all along has been that he has been a 3-5 prospect, and now it is 3-7/undrafted.

Nobody in 15 pages of this thread was insulting anyone. It's been a damn good discussion.

And then dingleberry shows up.

Where is "undrafted" coming from? The SI piece?

Keep something in mind: Reporters writing draft preview stories at this stage don't usually ask the follow-up question, which is, "Is there a chance he might not be drafted at all?" I wrote this story every year, and if a guy told me 3-5, I'd write 3-5. I never asked, "What are the chacnes he won't be drafted?" If I were writing about Michael Sam starting two nights ago, though, I ask that follow-up. That has to play into his widening draft range. That and Senior Bowl evaluations starting to factor in now.

 

[Boom_70]

I'm not trying to convict anyone of anything.

My point all along has been that he has been a 3-5 prospect, and now it is 3-7/undrafted.

Nobody in 15 pages of this thread was insulting anyone. It's been a damn good discussion.

And then dingleberry shows up.

It's a terrible point. Happens draft after draft. Specially at this juncture as teams
are just gathering all information.

Let's say a team has dropped Sam from a 5th to a 7th rating because they do not
feel that they want to or are equipped to deal with the circus. Is this unreasonable on part of teams to factor that into their thinking? From what we know a lot of teams
passed on Tebow because of not wanting to be part of circus.

 

[outofplace]

I'm not trying to convict anyone of anything.

My point all along has been that he has been a 3-5 prospect, and now it is 3-7/undrafted.

Nobody in 15 pages of this thread was insulting anyone. It's been a damn good discussion.

And then dingleberry shows up.

As I said, I'm very sorry that you can't handle my very valid argument without lobbing personal insults, but that is your failing, not mine.

The flaws in your argument have been pointed out repeatedly all over this thread. You just refuse to listen because it doesn't fit the story you so badly want to sell. Aside from Boom's point, we don't know if this has had an impact on his draft status. You are making, at best, an educated guess and even that might be generous. You are presenting what his rating was and what you think it is now as fact when you don't have the fats.

 

[LongTimeListener]

I'm not trying to convict anyone of anything.

My point all along has been that he has been a 3-5 prospect, and now it is 3-7/undrafted.

Nobody in 15 pages of this thread was insulting anyone. It's been a damn good discussion.

And then dingleberry shows up.

Where is "undrafted" coming from? The SI piece?

Primarily, yeah, but that sentiment has popped up elsewhere. Plus, really any draft projection that includes Round 7 automatically raises the specter of "undrafted."

It isn't unusual for someone in the 3-5 range to go undrafted. However, as you noted with the player who had failed a drug test, there are usually "character concerns" that teams know about but reporters and fans don't. So if Sam is a 3-5 projection and goes undrafted, it is something of a surprise by itself, and then isn't this the "character concern" that would otherwise be kept secret? Or the "distraction" that we also hear about?

I go back to Mike Mayock, as much as I dislike him on games he does do a good job on the draft stuff, and he said Sam is a pass-rush specialist who can play all special teams well. And that's a mid-round pick, or always has been.