Tony Dungy woudn't want to "deal with" Michael Sam

Not drafting someone is not denying him a work opportunity; that much is true. But not drafting someone and then admitting you didn't do so because he's gay is denying him a work opportunity.

 

Dungy did not admit that he would have passed because Sam is gay. He said it was due to his concern that Sam would create a distraction. The leap you are making is certainly a reasonable one, but Dungy did not admit it.

 

basically, Dungy would have taken Jackie Robinson but not Larry Doby.

 

Would Dungy be willing to deal with Ray Rice?

 

Not this old, washed-up Ray Rice.

But the version from 5 years ago? Absolutely.

 

Wife punching really isn't a distraction in the NFL.

 

As noted in this thread and elsewhere, "distractions" aren't an issue if you can either get into the end zone or prevent somebody else from doing so.

The NFL obviously draws the line at murder. Pretty much anything less is fair game.

Rice knocking his wife unconscious in an elevator isn't gonna cost Ravens brass or Goodell any sleep.

 

Surprised at Goodell. His job is to protect "the league" above all else. Two more games and this stays about Rice and not about the League in general. The radio silence has been curious. My guess is the league is adopting a formal policy on domestic abuse covering all league personnel, an outreach program and a special themed week "Knock Out Domestic Violence."

 

Will they be painting black-and-blue ribbons on the 35-yard lines?

 

Goodell would be setting a bad precedent by commenting every time someone made a comment about Sam. Nevermind that Dungy said his comments were misconstrued. Goodell does not want to comment on Dungy's "not agreeing with the lifestyle" comment because more than likely a handful, if not several, coaches agree with Dungy.

If Dungy was still coaching, that would be a different story. I'm waiting for someone to ask (maybe someone already has) one of Dungy's proteges (Caldwell, Lovie) if they agree with him.

 

The Lions didn't take Sam. The Bucs didn't take Sam.

Regardless of what their answers would be to the question, the answers already were provided on draft day.

We've spent 14 freaking pages on a hypothetical ("Would you have drafted . . .?") answered by someone no longer coaching and whose religious leanings were sure to cause a lightning rod whether they had anything to do with his answer or not.

How about asking the other 31 coaches/GMs why they DIDN'T draft Sam? Would that not be more relevant?

 

Maybe they thought he was a great UFA value and were gambling no team would have the guys to pick him, then they'd get a steal for no monetary risk.