Previous post
Some of the Left asked last week – where is the Right’s reaction to University of Missouri football player Michael Sam coming out?
They were expecting a homophobic reaction from conservatives and were perplexed when it didn’t happen.
There are two points to consider here.
Pro-traditional marriage conservatives don’t have any desire to limit the talent of a football player (or anyone in any profession), nor do they wish anyone ill will because of sexual preference. They believe “all people were created equal,” and that includes football players who happen to be gay.
Sam’s announcement didn’t offend conservatives and the negativity liberals expected didn’t arrive.
The second point is this: conservatives are not a monolithic group. They have lots of different opinions and one of those they are split on is the issue of gay marriage. [Side note: conservatives of all stripes are NOT divided on the idea that all people deserve respect and love]. Many support gay marriage, many don’t. There are two large groups identifying with the gay community on the Right – Log Cabin Republicans and GOProud. And did anyone happen to see this campaign ad? Reminder: This is the present.
As to the question of why more mainstream conservative outlets didn’t report on Sam’s coming out – frankly, conservatives are more focused on issues like the national debt, corruption in government and the consequences of Obamacare than a football player being gay.
Recently, MSNBC has had a few major faux pas – they were called out for blatantly assuming that conservatives are racist. The same thing happens with the issue of homosexuality. Liberals assume that conservatives are homophobic. Neither assumption is usually true.
Making broad assumptions based on misguided and aging stereotypes doesn’t advance anything.
Michael Sam had generally been considered a middle-round draft choice. If that holds true, then every team in the league will pass on him at least twice, so that means that they’ll all be called homophobic by the homosexual lobby and their left-wing allies.
However, were I an NFL executive, I would not draft Mr Sam, period. He would be as big a distraction as Tim Tebow was, someone who would be watched far more intensely than any other middle-rounder, and virtually uncutable even if he performs poorly in training camp and the exhibition games; he could not be fairly assessed as a player. And as a middle-rounder, there are plenty of other players of very similar talent levels, at his position, available.
If he was a first-round talent, the assessment would be different.
I don’t think the comparison between Tebow and Sam holds up very well. It is true that the media coverage of both was/will be intense, but in Tebow’s case it was mostly negative. An alarming number of sports reporters – and even NFL players – went out of their way to mock Tebow’s Christian faith, something they would never dare do with Sam and his sexual orientation. Tebow was certainly not uncuttable: after leading a very mediocre Denver team to the playoffs and a first-round victory he got cut in favor of Peyton Manning. (FWIW: I thought the switch from Tebow to Manning was an upgrade, although it has not worked out as well as the Denver had hoped.)
By contrast, any sports reporter who writes something critical of Sam will be taking a career risk. Sports journalism – like journalism in general – is heavily political, and seems to be more interested in manipulating public opinion than reporting the facts (the obsession with changing the name of the Washington Redskins is just one of many examples). Sam is a defensive end, but unless he never gets a sack or forces a turnover I predict the sports media will be willing to give him a free pass longer than others with his level of talent.
Denver coach Josh McDaniels didn’t really want Tim Tebow, although he said all of the right things. New coach John Fox really didn’t want him, but Kyle Orton was playing poorly, and Mr Tebow, the third string QB, was put in as the starter. In New York, coach Rex Ryan obviously didn’t think much of him as a quarterback.
I’d say that the comparisons are apt, because I’m talking about the media and public pressure, not the direction from which it comes.
The fact that the Denver coaches didn’t want Tebow is nothing new: some NFL owners have a fetish about signing players the coaching staff has no use for (Jerry Jones, anyone?). Much of the media criticism of Tebow was football related (which was fair), but there was also a nasty anti-Christian element to some of it. By contrast, no one seriously expects the media to mock Sam for his sexual orientation the same way Tebow was mocked for his religious faith.
Besides, I think you are arguing that heavy publicity can be a bad thing in the NFL. I am not so sure: the signing of Tebow generated a ton of fan interest (good and bad), and if Sam is signed I predict we will see a similar interest. Michael Vick’s criminal past generated some mockery from the fans, but fans still payed for tickets and bought Eagles merchandise. Drug suspensions, domestic altercations, gang activities – if the extracurricular activities of NFL players can damage the NFL’s bottom line I have yet to see it. For some owners, a player like Tebow or Sam is a way of generating fan interest (and nothing else).
(The New York Jets are arguably the NFL’s version of the Bermuda Triangle. With the possible exception of the Arizona Cardinals no other franchise has done less with more. So the fact that Tebow disappeared there without a trace is to be expected.)
Jen says: Agree. Many of us remember Rush Limbaugh getting fired from one of the big three networks as an NFL broadcast commentator that the media wanted a black quarterback to do well and therefore were championing Donovan McNabb, whom Limbaugh through at the time was a mediocre quarterback. The racist kerfluffle that resulted ended in Limbaugh leaving and then several years later, resurfaced when it was disclosed that he was one of a group who wanted to buy an interest in an NFL team. The screaming was so loud again with shouts of racist that Limbaugh’s groups offer was rejected by the owners association from permission to purchase.
So heaven help anyone who says ANYTHING the least bit critical of the new symbol of PC for the left.
Xavier says: I’m just glad he’s not a Center.
ALman says: It’s a game, or at least it used to be. Now, it’s big business which, of course, means big money. Any time big money takes over it ceases to be a game, but some other thing. I was watching some kids playing in the snow: sledding, snowball fights, and building a snowman (yes, it was a snowMAN, though, as yet, he hadn’t indicated whether he was gay or not). Now, that was fun for them and for me, as I recalled some childhood memories.
As an additional note, I just wish one of these sportscasters who, upon learning that a player had announced his gay-dom, would simply say, “So? So, what? Now, returning to our interview with Franco, about your double play in the bottom of the 8th . . . “
Melanie says: Libs get upset when conservatives don’t react according to the left’s stereotype of them.
9 Comments