So you may or may not have heard that Michael Sam, a linebacker for the University of Missouri, and SEC Defensive Player of the Year, came out as gay.
He had been projected to be a middle round draft pick for the next NFL draft, with various handicappers projecting him going anywhere from the third round to the seventh round. There was some question of his pro career as he was somewhat of a tweener. Some considered him too large to play outside linebacker in the NFL, but too small to play defensive end which many felt would be his natural pro position. Still the only question wasn't whether he would be drafted, but when.
But all that changed with his announcement. Now his draft stock is expected to slide.
One source, NFLDraftScout.com, had Sam projected as 9th best defensive end in the draft. After his announcement he slid to 14th. CBS had Sam as the 90th best player overall for the draft before his "coming out". Afterwards, he is now 160th.
To what is this attributed? He was considered one of the best pure pass rushers in the draft. That hasn't changed. What has changed is that Michael Sam is now considered a "distraction". Several anonymous NFL execs, player personnel directors, scouts, general managers, etc. have talked about how the NFL just isn't ready. It has nothing to do with him personally or his being gay. But the culture of the NFL locker room isn't ready you understand. Camaraderie in the locker room is apparently a fragile thing, and all you need is one player who gets a little more attention than others feel is warranted to derail the whole atmosphere and presumably the team's season. In that regard since Sam will now be the focus of media attention rather than the superstars of the team it just won't work. Teams and players don't like distractions or controversy. Apparently having a gay teammate might not be accepted by everyone and so again that delicate locker room balance will be upset. So you know, they aren't bigots or have anything against Michael Sam being gay, but think of the poor locker room.
But wait. Stop me if you've heard these arguments before. And you have.
This was the exact same argument that was made against desegregating the armed forces. The lines were something like, I'm no bigot, but, having blacks and whites in the same unit will lead to complications and distractions and destroy the effectiveness and cohesiveness of the outfits. And on a battlefield that will get people killed.
So Harry Truman did it anyway, and guess what, no issues.
The argument in various forms has been used again and again since then. It was used as an excuse to not have women in the same military outfits as men, or serving in combat.
It was the argument against allowing gays to serve openly in the military. The effectiveness of fighting units was again raised as the reason not to do it. And again was shown to be false.
And so here we go again. Someone has to be the first to break the barrier, but "we're not ready yet". And the usual excuses are made about the effectiveness of the team being imperiled by the "controversy" and the "distraction".
Only once again we can already know that the narrative is a false one. You see Sam came out to his University of Missouri teammates before last season. And it was a non-issue. They had a fine season and went to a bowl game. All that despite having such a "distraction" on the team.
So sorry anonymous NFL execs, but you are simply bigots, or at best, enablers of bigots.