Did the NFL Use and Lose Michael Sam?

Michael Sam’s NFL career may effectively be over, really before it even began and I can’t help but feel as if it came off as a stunt perpetrated by the NFL. Sam, a defensive end who had a standout career at the University of Missouri and was named SEC Defensive Player of the Year last season, was cut by the St. Louis Rams, the team that drafted him in the final round of this year’s draft, after the Rams final preseason game. Sam played well during the preseason, but the Rams were too stacked at the defensive line position to be able to hold on to him.

The Rams likely knew this the moment they selected Sam late in the draft, much later than he had initially been projected to go, which may prove the move was a hometown discount to score points with Mizzou fans, and make the NFL look like a non-bigoted, more progressive, open league especially on the heels of the Miami Dolphins/Richie Incognito bullying scandal last season.

When it didn’t look like a team would draft Sam and the Rams swooped in last second and saved the day I was immediately skeptical and wondered aloud if the NFL had called in a favor. This is quite the accusation, I know, but one I’d never put past the league and one we’ll likely never know for sure.

Before I get in too deep I should say that I think Michael Sam, as a gay athlete, playing in the NFL would be a great and important thing for the NFL, professional sports and the future of our society as a whole. I was rooting for his success. But, I don’t believe a player should make the NFL on anything but his own skill and merits. So, this isn’t so much a diatribe against the Rams, again stacked at Sam’s position, as it is against the NFL itself.

I knew when the Rams had cut Sam on Saturday, August 30 that he would not be claimed by any other organization in the league. I knew this because of the anonymous general managers who thought he would mean trouble for NFL locker rooms, and Tony Dungy’s dumb comments, and ignorant statement’s by players like Miami Dolphins defensive back Don Jones, and the fact that no other team even remotely expressed interest in Sam throughout this spring’s draft. I knew Sam wouldn’t get a shot in the NFL because NFL locker rooms have more respect for manslaughterers, dog brutalizers, wife beaters, racists, bullies, drug abusers and egomaniacs. Their transgressions aren’t locker-room “cancers,” but a homosexual athlete is just too much.

And, on Sunday, August 31, it was announced that no team had claimed Sam. The Rams still have an opportunity to place Sam on their 10-man practice squad, which would be better than nothing and they might, but it also means that Sam’s dream of becoming a NFL player may never come to light. And, I think that’s wrong because I know Sam is talented enough to play in the NFL. I know this because Sam was considered the best defensive player in the SEC, generally considered the toughest and best conference in college football. *The SEC Defensive Player of the Year should virtually be a lock to make one of the on average 288 roster spots dedicated to defensive lineman in the NFL. For those arguing Sam is too small to play defensive line in the NFL and would have to be a linebacker there are on average 224 linebackers in the NFL and a SEC Defensive Player of the Year caliber athlete should be able to make that switch as we’ve seen it from lesser lauded athletes.

I think Michael Sam was essentially used by the NFL for good press and a profit. He’s been one of the most talked about players in the league since he was drafted and his jersey was the seventh highest selling in the league, according to ESPN’s Darren Rovell.

Some would say the NFL doesn’t need any more press, but when the biggest stories of the last year involving the league have all been negative – concussions, Incognito, Ray Rice, Redskins racist name – don’t you think the NFL wanted a really good story? And, yes, I know the NFL is a billion dollar industry of its own and doesn’t “need” money off of Michael Sam jersey sales, but we also know the NFL is greedy. Why else would the league be asking musicians and pop artists to pay to play the Super Bowl halftime show? 

No, the NFL doesn’t “need” the money, but you’d never know it based on their business practices.

The NFL made a lot of good news and money off of Michael Sam and unfortunately he hasn’t gotten the same out of them; not much more than a glorified 15 minutes of fame. Hell, he didn’t even end up with his Oprah Winfrey Network docu-series– bowing to the fears and requests of the Rams.Yet, the Atlanta Falcons are on television once a week on HBO’s “Hard Knocks.”

I can’t help but feel Sam got used and in some ways those fans hoping for something a little different from the NFL did too. Maybe to show that the NFL isn’t that greedy or that they weren’t just profiting off of Sam they should offer all those snookered into buying Sam jerseys a refund or exchange. It may sound crazy or ridiculous to refund jerseys when the fans knew Sam might not make a NFL roster, but we’ve recently seen precedence for doing just that when the Cleveland Cavaliers offered fans refunds or exchanges for Andrew Wiggins jerseys after drafting the collegiate star first overall in the NBA Draft and then trading him months later for superstar Kevin Love.

It may seem simple for the NFL and the Rams to give some money back for Sam jerseys, but it would also go a long ways in saying it wasn’t just a rouse for attention and money.

That would be a step in the right direction, but it still wouldn’t do anything in giving hope to any gay athletes hoping one day to make it to the biggest stage of professional sports. 

*Here are the last 10 SEC Defensive Players of the Year and the round they were drafted in ...

Michael Sam (7th), Jarvis Jones (1st), Morris Claiborne (1st), Patrick Peterson (1st), Rolando McClain (1st), Eric Berry (1st), Glenn Dorsey (1st), Patrick Willis (1st), Demeco Ryans (2nd), David Pollack (1st)

To Say Redskins or Not Say Redskins ... That Is the Question.

The controversy surrounding the Washington Redskins team nickname is the sports controversy that just won’t die and with good reason. The name is offensive. There’s no denying it. If you deny it I have to question your intentions. There’s no denying it because the term “Redskin” by definition is a racial slur.

Go on, look it up in the dictionary, both dictionary.com and Merriam-Webster.com have the word defined as “offensive” and “disparaging.” The same words you’ll see if you also look up the word “nigger” in the same dictionaries.

Nobody in their right mind would defend a team nicknamed the N-words, so why do so many attempt to defend the Redskins nickname?

Some are taking a stand against the offensive team nickname. In an Associated Press article on Monday (August 18), CBS NFL analyst Phil Simms, who will cover almost twice as many NFL broadcasts as the next guy this season thanks to CBS’ partnership with the NFL Network on Thursday Night Football, and NBC’s NFL commentator Tony Dungy both said that they were certainly leaning toward not using the nickname on telecasts this season due to its offensiveness.

Simms and Dungy would join a growing list of media opting not to use the Washington nickname. Among others refusing to use it are ESPN’s Keith Olbermann (who’s gone on many a crusade against the name on his ESPN2 show), Bill Simmons, Tony Kornheiser, NBC’s Bob Costas and Cris Collinsworth, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and MMQB.com’s Peter King. Entire media publications like Slate.com, San Francisco Chronicle and Kansas City Star have banned the nickname, as well.

Then there are those journalists like Simms’ CBS broadcasting partner Jim Nantz, Fox’s Troy Aikman and CBS’ Solomon Wilcots who will continue to refer to the team as the Redskins because it’s the team’s name and it’s not their business to take a stance on. Nantz was quoted directly as saying “it’s not my job to take a stance.”

I understand the stances of both sides here.

In fact, the decision to use the word “Redskins” in both print and on my sports podcast, Basement Sports, is one that I’ve thought of a few times recently, even though like Simms who was quoted as saying, “I never really thought about it, and then it came up and it made me think about it. There are a lot of things that can come up in a broadcast, and I am sensitive to this” it’s something until recently I hadn’t put too much thought into either.

I believe the word “Redskins” is offensive. As I said earlier, you really can’t deny this by its very definition. So, this makes me want to side with Simms, Olbermann, Costas and others.

But, I also see Nantz’s point when he says it’s not his job as an objective and unbiased broadcaster to take a stance on the team’s name.

It’s probably something I’m going to have to take a little longer to think about before making a decision on the Washington team name for myself, but I will say that’s with each and every passing day I’m leaning toward a boycott of the team name, despite the fact that it inserts my opinion on the name into whatever it is I’m doing.

I think the Redskins nickname is one that is probably eventually going to change, but I don’t believe it’s going to be anytime soon. Change is a slow movement, and for some reason it always seems just a little slower when it involves the NFL.