Skip to main content

Says He Wouldn't Want To "Deal With" Taking Michael Sam

 

"I wouldn't have taken him,'' said former Bucs and Colts coach Tony Dungy, now an analyst for NBC. "Not because I don't believe Michael Sam should have a chance to play, but I wouldn't want to deal with all of it.

"It's not going to be totally smooth … things will happen.''

 

 Perhaps Mr. Dungy and Mr. Sam should "crack open" a Sam Adams and settle their differences face to face. 

 

Great ideas rooted in love.(R)

Last edited by Rusty
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

"I think Michael deserves the chance to show people he has changed and learned from past mistakes, but my true hope is that he will make sound decisions about his future and, at the same time, let people know more about the person that I’ve come to know recently.

 

This could be a Mike Sam quote if Mike would show people he has changed and learned from past mistakes

 

#buttsex

This should help clear it up

 

"Dungy is an evangelical Christian and at one point in his coaching career considered leaving football for the prison ministry. 

 

  On March 20, 2007, Dungy aligned himself with a socially conservative organization, the Indiana Family Institute, and openly supported an amendment to the Indiana constitution which would have defined marriage as solely between one man and one woman. Dungy also appeared in a testimonial video on I Am Second, in which he shares his story of his personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Dungy has also been a spokesman for the Fellowship of Christian Athletes

 

Bringing back POS Vick? No problem, kid deserves a shot at redemption.

 

Bringing in a gay guy? No thanks, too much of a distraction.

 

That's some shiit, coming from ostensibly one of the classiest guys in pro football.

in reply to Satori's last post:  jesus tap dancing christ on a cracker.

 

the word "sanctimonious" comes to mind.

 

too bad Noll didn't have a problem breaking down barriers - maybe we wouldn't be reading about what dungy thinks now.

"I'm not going to take him" said Steeler coach Chuck Knoll.  "Not because I don't believe Tony Dungy should have a chance to coach, but I wouldn't want to deal with all of it"
"It's not going to be totally smooth … things will happen.''

The best press conference in Tony Dungy's life that  never happened. Because Chuck Knoll wasnt a hypocritical ****.
Last edited by ChilliJon
Originally Posted by Satori:

This should help clear it up

 

"Dungy is an evangelical Christian and at one point in his coaching career considered leaving football for the prison ministry. 

 

  On March 20, 2007, Dungy aligned himself with a socially conservative organization, the Indiana Family Institute, and openly supported an amendment to the Indiana constitution which would have defined marriage as solely between one man and one woman. Dungy also appeared in a testimonial video on I Am Second, in which he shares his story of his personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Dungy has also been a spokesman for the Fellowship of Christian Athletes

 

Good for him, but isn't there some **** in that stupid book about how lying is a sin. How about you just tell the truth, Tony. You don't like Sam, because he bangs guys.

Tim Tebow was a huge distraction.  I'm guessing TCTD would not have hesitated to sign him to his team, though.  I'm guessing if I cared enough to look I could find oodles of quotes from TCTD about Timmy and how god has a special team in mind for him and some such.  

 

Hypocrite.  

Last edited by JJSD

A few quotes...

I was asked whether I would have drafted Michael Sam and I answered that I would not have drafted him.  I gave my honest answer, which is that I felt drafting him would bring much distraction to the team. At the time of my interview, the Oprah Winfrey reality show that was going to chronicle Michael’s first season had been announced.

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.

I just find this whole thing surprising.  Dungy himself was passed over way too many times for HC jobs because of his race.  It had nothing to do with his merit - owners/GMs simply did not want the 'distraction' hiring a black coach at the time would have brought.  He was one of the pillars of the coaching world that proved that stupidity wrong.  

 

How he doesn't see this the same way strikes me as at best hypocritical, at worst just someone using the BS term 'distraction' as a cover for his own beliefs.  

I've never been much of a Tony Dungy fan, so I've never quite understood just why so many have put him up on some kind of pedestal.  However, having stated that, my personal opinion is that Dungy is getting raked over the coals by a lot of folks for no really good reason.  Johnny Manziel is a potential distraction because of his openly flamboyant lifestyle, and more than a few NFL teams questioned whether he will be good enough and sturdy enough to last in the NFL.  Michael Sam is a potential distraction because of his openly chosen sexual preference and more than a few teams have questioned whether he will be a good enough player to last in the NFL.  Frankly, what's the difference?

 

Government statistics indicate that less than 3% of the U.S. population is LGBT.  It seems to me that there's a mountain being made out of a molehill.

 

 

Originally Posted by JJSD:

Dungy himself was passed over way too many times for HC jobs because of his race.  


He became an NFL head coach in 1996 at the age of 40.  Got a second head coaching job in 2002 eight days after he left the first job.  Sounds like he pretty much went straight to the top and stayed there.

Originally Posted by Henry:
Originally Posted by Iowacheese:

Dumby just went up a notch in my book

You must be conflicted.  I know a guy.  Keel referred him.

 

 

Never gets old.

 

 

Pevre really is bored mowing Aunt Granny's yard, isn't he?

Or, to put it differently, Michael Sam is a potential distraction because he is open about having a sexual preference that is not "mainstream" (<3% of U.S.).  There may be other gay NFL players, but because they did not "come out of the closet" about it, they are just football players to their teammates and everyone else.  If Michael Sam wanted to, as he said, just be accepted as a football player, that's how he should have left it.  By coming out and making it completely public, he invited controversy.
 
Do you really think that he isn't going to be regularly hit with media questions about how he's being accepted by his team - - and that his teammates aren't going to regularly asked the same thing?  Most every other team's players will be asked about football.  By definition, that makes Michael Sam a distraction.

Michael Sam is a potential distraction because of his openly chosen sexual preference

Eh?

 

Last edited by Stevie
Originally Posted by 18c3v:
Originally Posted by JJSD:

Dungy himself was passed over way too many times for HC jobs because of his race.  


He became an NFL head coach in 1996 at the age of 40.  Got a second head coaching job in 2002 eight days after he left the first job.  Sounds like he pretty much went straight to the top and stayed there.

Then you ignored the years in Pitt and Minnesota, where there were constant questions about how it was possible he hadn't gotten a HC job.  He got a HC job when he was 40, but he had already been an assistant for 15 years.  It was actually tiring watching the Queens (among other reasons) and hearing about this every time when Dungy was the DC.  I don't feel like digging it up right now, but I know Dungy has talked in the past about what it was like feeling as though he was not being given a chance because of his skin.  He also talked about how the reality of the situation was that he needed to be 'that much better' than white folks for that same reason.

 

Whatever.  That really wasn't the main point.  The point is that it always surprises me to see folks who have lived through discrimination not recognize the same thing with regards to others.  

Last edited by JJSD
Originally Posted by Stevie:
Or, to put it differently, Michael Sam is a potential distraction because he is open about having a sexual preference that is not "mainstream" (<3% of U.S.).  There may be other gay NFL players, but because they did not "come out of the closet" about it, they are just football players to their teammates and everyone else.  If Michael Sam wanted to, as he said, just be accepted as a football player, that's how he should have left it.  By coming out and making it completely public, he invited controversy.
 
Do you really think that he isn't going to be regularly hit with media questions about how he's being accepted by his team - - and that his teammates aren't going to regularly asked the same thing?  Most every other team's players will be asked about football.  By definition, that makes Michael Sam a distraction.

Michael Sam is a potential distraction because of his openly chosen sexual preference

Eh?

 

Exactly, Stevie - 

 

Gays should just shut their damn pie holes and stop telling anyone they're gay.  Way better for the rest of us.  I'm also sure that, once again, you're freaking dead-on that those courteous gays who stayed in the closet were never known to be gay by their teammates.  Another fantastic point.  Those people really need to learn their place.  If you're going to have your big day where you decide to be gay instead of just being healthy and normal (since sexual preference = they actually make this decision - another very sound piece of thinking), at least have the decency to keep it to yourself.  

Last edited by JJSD

I absolutely think Mike Sam can be a distraction (not really the right word), that is not the issue I have with Tony.

 

The same thing could have been said about hiring Tony to be a head coach, which is ironic to me.  Tony also has advocated for other players who could be perceived as "distractions."  It seems that to Tony, being gay is a "distraction" he'd rather not deal with, but a guy out of prison for killing dogs is something teams should look past.  The message is boning a dude is to much of a distraction.  I'm sure there were other organizations who felt "being a black dude" was to much of a distraction to football as well, was Tony fine with that? 

 

I think he is ultimately correct, and there were probably more than a few teams unwilling to pick Sam because they knew there would be a media circus.  Doesn't make Tony any less of a hypocrite.  Had he said "I wouldn't have picked Michael Sam because I don't think he is talented enough to make it in the NFL" then I can stomach Tony's talk a little more. 

Good points.  It's also ironic that I don't remember really reading anything about Sam and distractions recently until the guy who said something stupid - Dungy - turned it into a distraction.  

Stevie

Anything in your handy dandy notebook of mainstream stats that shows what % of African Americans played in the Majors before Jackie? Or should he has just shut his ****ing hole about being black?

just curious... but...  since we're talking about it...

 

what day are you supposed to announce your sexual preference?  is it when you're around 13?  is it like a bar mitzvah for gentiles?  What if a jewish kid decides to announce that he or she is gay?  

 

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×