Tony Dungy: I wouldn’t have taken Michael Sam

[Prime Time]

Even if he didn't mean anything homophobic by it, given his track record, it's very easy to see the dots connect there. Further more even if he explains it different, I doubt that everyone will be convinced that it's not just damage control for the backlash he has gotten as a result.

Here's my question, why does there have to be a backlash at all for giving one's honest opinion when asked?

 

[DCH]

Here's my question, why does there have to be a backlash at all for giving one's honest opinion when asked?

Because opinions are meant to be agreed with, disagreed with, debated, attacked, and generally scrutinized, especially when the opinions are given the platform and airtime of someone like Dungy. He's more than free to share his opinion, just as we're free to respond to it as we find appropriate.

 

[Prime Time]

Because opinions are meant to be agreed with, disagreed with, debated, attacked, and generally scrutinized, especially when the opinions are given the platform and airtime of someone like Dungy. He's more than free to share his opinion, just as we're free to respond to it as we find appropriate.

To me the word backlash brings to mind more than scrutiny and debate. It's about being vilified and ostracized and eventually negatively branded for having an opinion different than the majority. This is exactly what will happen to Tony Dungy.

 

[DCH]

To me the word backlash brings to mind more than scrutiny and debate. It's about being vilified and ostracized and eventually negatively branded for having an opinion different than the majority. This is exactly what will happen to Tony Dungy.

And people have to be aware that unpopular (or even controversial) opinions will result in backlashes from certain groups of people. It's the price of free speech. If Dungy had come out and said that he thought Sam should have gone much higher and was being blackballed by much of the league due to his sexual orientation, there would have been a backlash of roughly the same size, just from different segments of the populace and filtered through different media channels.

 

[Prime Time]

And people have to be aware that unpopular (or even controversial) opinions will result in backlashes from certain groups of people. It's the price of free speech. If Dungy had come out and said that he thought Sam should have gone much higher and was being blackballed by much of the league due to his sexual orientation, there would have been a backlash of roughly the same size, just from different segments of the populace and filtered through different media channels.

I don't believe that last sentence to be reality considering the PC world we live in today. But I do agree that when one has the platform Dungy has, there will be criticism for going against the majority opinion. Thanks for the conversation.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Here's my question, why does there have to be a backlash at all for giving one's honest opinion when asked?

Why can one give an honest opinion on something they're asked and another cannot give an honest opinion on what they think about said opinion?

 

[Prime Time]

Why can one give an honest opinion on something they're asked and another cannot give an honest opinion on what they think about said opinion?

That's what debate is and that's perfectly fine. But when it becomes a backlash of anger and accusations then it's not. Try giving a contrary opinion on certain social issues these days and watch where the cordial debate ends and the name calling begins.

 

[bluecoconuts]

That's what debate is and that's perfectly fine. But when it becomes a backlash of anger and accusations then it's not. Try giving a contrary opinion on certain social issues these days and watch where the cordial debate ends and the name calling begins.

Well that's the thing, everyone sees things differently, I have certain stances on different issues and I get called out by both sides regularly at times when the conversation does start up. Nobody is really innocent in all this. However crying because times are changing and it's no longer socially acceptable to say or act a certain way is just silly to me. It used to be socially acceptable to do a lot of things that it isn't today, and nobody bats an eye because it happened before their time. However now they want to hold on to trivial things for what reasons exactly? Nobody is physically stopping people from yelling sexist or racist or any other type of hate speech, but if people want to go against the grain of what society deems as acceptable then they should be ready to face what happens as a result, the backlash. They are the ones that are going against the "norm" and blaming the rest of society is pretty pointless. It's not that one day everyone sat down and made a list, every generation brings forth changes as some things become acceptable (tattoos for example for this generation) and others do not (homophobic behavior). If people want to refuse to change then that's their own issue. It's not society's fault, it's their own.

Dungy has his beliefs and that's fine, others agree, hell there are even posters here that agree and that's fine too. Society has evolved to the point where it has deemed it socially unacceptable, and that's not "PC police" that's just how things go. The ball has been rolling since the dawn of civilization, and the homosexual issue certainly won't be the one that stops it.

 

[Mick]

No the principle is exponentially different, every team has scads of black players , not scads of gay players , a black coach made sense on many levels ,FEAR of hiring a black coach is a level of unreasonable trepidation far and away more potentially bigoted than throwing one openly gay player into a cauldron of testosterone.
Race is NOT an instinct ,like it or not there are instinctive problems some heterosexual men will have to gay men,they need to be suppresed but not voluntary ,toatl difference like it or not there is no logical basis why anyone would want an openly gay player if they didn't have one, but a black coach is going to have a connection to a black athlete through common cultural commonalities. Conflating those two situations is erroneous IMO.

I disagree....the principle is this: What is a distraction, and when does it become too much to take on for a team looking to avoid such things? Clearly, being the first to hire a black head coach, AND being the first to draft the first openly gay player are very similar in that they are BOTH distractions. I believe you are going off point here....the simple question I asked was....would Tony Dungy, based on his take on avoiding a distraction, have accepted the notion that he was passed over as the first black head coach simply due to the avoidance of distraction. Would he have just said, "Meh....ok...I understand"? Would he be ok with having done to him what he suggested he would have done to Sam? All this about what is racism and testosterone...that's all for another topic. So I stand by my statement....the principle is the very same...making a decision, not on talent, not on can the kid play, but on not wanting the baggage that comes with it.

Also, reading some of the other posts.....I don't believe Dungy is anti-gay at all, nor do I believe he wants to deny Sam an opportunity to play in the NFL. He even says so in his remarks, which are really being unfairly edited to omit this part.."Not because I don't believe Michael Sam should have a chance to play", which he clearly says. And Michael Sam already proved Dungy's point even before he made it, by trying the reality tv stunt....say what you will about Dungy, but he was right about the distraction.

 

[blue4]

forgetting what Tony Dungy said for a moment, to the part where they quote Snead as saying it would have been a challenge to sign pass rushing defensive ends. That does make sense. iit'll be far easier for an undrafted cornerback or safety or linebacker to make this team than a defensive lineman, so I can see how signing a free agent there would be easier, and why drafting a DE would become required to met pre draft goals. To me, that makes more sense than anything else thats been said about the drafting of Michael Sam. I'll leave this alone now, and find something else to armchair quarterback.

 

[DCH]

forgetting what Tony Dungy said for a moment, to the part where they quote Snead as saying it would have been a challenge to sign pass rushing defensive ends. That does make sense. iit'll be far easier for an undrafted cornerback or safety or linebacker to make this team than a defensive lineman, so I can see how signing a free agent there would be easier, and why drafting a DE would become required to met pre draft goals. To me, that makes more sense than anything else thats been said about the drafting of Michael Sam. I'll leave this alone now, and find something else to armchair quarterback.

Interesting, I missed that quote. Makes sense... UDFAs want to go where they have a shot at making the team. Who's going to want to go into camp competing for one spot? Maybe two, if Sims moves on.

Kinda makes me wonder how they convinced Westbrooks to come to STL.

 

[blue4]

Interesting, I missed that quote. Makes sense... UDFAs want to go where they have a shot at making the team. Who's going to want to go into camp competing for one spot? Maybe two, if Sims moves on.

Kinda makes me wonder how they convinced Westbrooks to come to STL.

Didn't they have to give him a guaranteed amount?

 

[PrometheusFaulk]

I am not writing this to condemn Dungy, I don't find him to be any better or worse for saying he wouldn't wish to coach a team with media attention not related to football if he had his druthers.

That's ok. Fisher's a different kind of coach, neither of them are better or worse for it, IMO.

That being said, a "distraction" doesn't always have a net negative effect on a football team.

Like how about how Namath's guarantee galvanized the Jets in Super Bowl III.

Like how about how two of the guys who broke the pro football color barrier in 1946 were on a championship Browns team.

Sometimes a football team functions best when everything is internally driven, like when Dungy was building up those Bucs teams in the late 90's. Sometimes it functions best when things are a little hectic.

Even if Sam's presence is a "distraction" by way of media attention, it could still work. And frankly, it's an idea whose time has come. Someone had to be the first.

 

[blue4]

I think the media is frustrated with this. I think they had visions of hard hitting controversies, and strongly worded editorials prewritten for the NFL. but the overall reaction from the players seems to be more, "I dont understand why this is a big deal." I don't think they realize just how much the players are a product of a different generation.

 

[DCH]

Didn't they have to give him a guaranteed amount?

They did, yeah. Have to think he could have gotten that elsewhere with a better chance of making the team, but at the same time maybe he sees how Fisher and Waufle develop DL and how much they instill DE/DT flexibility in their players. I still think he has a better chance of making the team than Sam, although it may come down to special teams with Sam getting the edge.

 

[DCH]

I think the media is frustrated with this. I think they had visions of hard hitting controversies, and strongly worded editorials prewritten for the NFL. but the overall reaction from the players seems to be more, "I dont understand why this is a big deal." I don't think they realize just how much the players are a product of a different generation.

Ain't that the truth. What's nice is this should also serve to show other gay NFL players just how little pain there is in coming out in the league. Hopefully it'll open the doors to being a "gay NFL player" meaning no more or less than being a "black NFL player" or a "NFL player with tats."

 

[Angry Ram]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/

Tony Dungy elaborates on his Michael Sam comments
Posted by Mike Florio on July 22, 2014, 1:21 PM EDT

Getty Images
On Monday, the Tampa Tribune published Tony Dungy’s answer to the question of whether he would have drafted Michael Sam, the NFL’s first openly-gay player. Dungy’s 38 words triggered a flood of debate and controversy, and plenty of pointed criticism.

On Tuesday, Dungy issued a statement elaborating on his comments. The full text of itappears here.

Dungy explains that the quotes were obtained in the aftermath of the draft, following the news that Oprah Winfrey would turn Sam’s story into a reality show. (The plug has since been pulled on the project.)

“I gave my honest answer, which is that I felt drafting him would bring much distraction to the team,” Dungy says.

“I was not asked whether or not Michael Sam deserves an opportunity to play in the NFL. He absolutely does.

“I was not asked whether his sexual orientation should play a part in the evaluation process. It should not.

“I was not asked whether I would have a problem having Michael Sam on my team. I would not.”

Dungy notes that he had been asked those questions in the preceding three months, and that he consistently said that playing in the NFL “is, and should be, about merit.” The question posted by the Tampa Tribune focused much more narrowly than that.

“What I was asked about was my philosophy of drafting, a philosophy that was developed over the years, which was to minimize distractions for my teams,” the former Buccaneers and Colts head coach says. “I do not believe Michael’s sexual orientation will be a distraction to his teammates or his organization. I do, however, believe that the media attention that comes with it will be a distraction. Unfortunately we are all seeing this play out now, and I feel badly that my remarks played a role in the distraction.”

While not mentioned by Dungy, Sam’s status as a marginal prospect likely was a factor in that analysis. Some players are good enough to justify the distractions that come along with employing them, from Lawrence Taylor toMichael Vick to Ben Roethlisberger to Johnny Manziel. Sam, the 249th selection in a 256-man draft, may not be good enough to make it. Thus, Dungy and plenty of other coaches would choose not put on the roster bubble a player whose mere presence could be the equivalent of signing up for Hard Knocks.

And then, if/when the player is cut, the scrutiny intensifies. “Did his teammates not accept him?” “Was there a power struggle in the front office?” “Is the coaching staff split?” “Did something happen?”

Dungy is expected to talk about the situation later this week, on The Dan Patrick Show. Until then, his statement and the context of his original comments should be considered, regardless of whether Dungy’s position is being criticized or praised.

Mike Florio's dumbass analysis aside (lol at the calling Michael Vick a good player), all Tony Dundy said he wouldn't draft him b/c of media distraction. And lo and behold, it's happening.

 

[Ramhusker]

I have to say this thread is a glowing example of what a great forum looks like. Post after post is insightful, respectful and well thought out. From day one, I think we all knew drafting Sam had the potential to be a powder keg for our team but luckily everyone associated with the team has handled it pretty damn good to date. Of course, when and if Sam gets cut will bring scrutiny of a different kind if it's warranted or not. Puzzling how much attention this issue gets when less than 3% of the population is gay but I guess activists will be activists and media whores are always chasing a bone.

As far as Sam the football player goes, I think he is destined for the PS for now. He doesn't seem to have the speed or coverage skills to be a LB in the NFL and he sits on a roster pretty damn flush at DL. I think more than one team that may have needed help at DE probably passed on him in the draft and it will be curious to see if they have a change of heart once he becomes available on our PS.

 

[Mick]

Let's hope Dungy's clarification puts an end to the whole mess. Interesting that the original quote from him that started all this hoopla was made after the draft, and when it was revealed that the reality show was in the works. Context is everything....in that context, his comments make perfect sense.

 

[Thordaddy]

Let's hope Dungy's clarification puts an end to the whole mess. Interesting that the original quote from him that started all this hoopla was made after the draft, and when it was revealed that the reality show was in the works. Context is everything....in that context, his comments make perfect sense.

Dungy will be smeared by the storm troopers,he's damaged and if he was Rush Limbaugh he'd lose his broadcasting gig.