Michael Sam

[shecolt]

I am delighted that he came out, mainly cause it pisses conservatives off. However, anyone acting like this will not be an issue is kidding themselves, it shouldn't be, but it is.

 

Also, he is not that good. His numbers were inflated against weak opposition. 9 of his 11.5 sacks came in three games against putrid o-lines.

 

Average-to-below average players being the most polarizing figure on the team is never ever a good thing.

 

Bringing politics into this discussion is just as bad as bringing religion into this discussion.

 

Not to mention that both are using a broad brush to paint a sterotype that isn't true as I happen to know many religious/conservatives who would have no problem with Michael Sam being given the opportunity to excel in the NFL. 

[Jared Jammer]

His stock should take a hit as many people consider being gay to be a character flaw, and could be uncomfortable with it, meaning there could be very real locker room issues. Those are legitimate concerns that warrant a slight hit in stock.

 

Remember: GM's have to live in reality, not ideal P.C. fantasies. That any of you think there shouldn't be any locker room issues doesn't mean there wont be, right or wrong.

[Blackhawk4]

His stock should take a hit as many people consider being gay to be a character flaw, and could be uncomfortable with it, meaning there could be very real locker room issues. Those are legitimate concerns that warrant a slight hit in stock.

 

Remember: GM's have to live in reality, not ideal P.C. fantasies. That any of you think there shouldn't be any locker room issues doesn't mean there wont be, right or wrong.

How many is "many people" and just as many could not care about the thing either. It's different with every player. There are some who will be uncomfortable with it, but let's not make it seem like this is a large majority who could possibly be uncomfortable with it. 

[Superman]

His stock should take a hit as many people consider being gay to be a character flaw, and could be uncomfortable with it, meaning there could be very real locker room issues. Those are legitimate concerns that warrant a slight hit in stock.

Remember: GM's have to live in reality, not ideal P.C. fantasies. That any of you think there shouldn't be any locker room issues doesn't mean there wont be, right or wrong.

Without co-signing your theory, how many players with known character flaws get drafted every year? How many character flaws were known about Dez Bryant or Aaron Hernandez or Montori Hughes, or any number of players drafted from the top of the deaft to the bottom?

Again, I'm not a lawyer, but refusing to employ someone on the basis of their sexual orientation is discrimination, whether you consider it a character flaw or not.

[Valpo2004]

To those pointing out that the NFL culture won't accept him and that he'll likely be "razzed" or harassed by other teams...

 

Don't you think Jackie Robinson faced the same situation, only on a much larger scale? I never saw "42" but have read some books... I mean, some of his teammates even refused to accept him. He wasn't allowed to stay at some team hotels. This was two decades before the Civil Rights movement. 

 

Of course there will be some ignorance in reaction to Sam's announcement, both on and off the field. There's no denying human nature. I'm sure Sam knows that, yet he has embraced his role as the "first."

 

I for one fully support what he's done and where he's going. 

 

He'll face some discrimination, especially from other teams but I don't think it's gonna be to the level of Jackie Robinson.  

 

The acceptability of discriminating against people because of their sexuality is dying very quickly.  

 

When Jackie Robinson played baseball, it was very acceptable, especially in the south to discriminate against people of color.  In fact it was so socially acceptable that you where discriminated against if you didn't discriminate against people of color.  Which made it so being the guy's friend and/or standing up for him took a lot of courage in and of itself.

 

He's gonna face some discrimination and people on the field are gonna call him some names.  But it's just not gonna be systematic like it was for Jackie Robinson.

[Valpo2004]

Without co-signing your theory, how many players with known character flaws get drafted every year? How many character flaws were known about Dez Bryant or Aaron Hernandez or Montori Hughes, or any number of players drafted from the top of the deaft to the bottom?

Again, I'm not a lawyer, but refusing to employ someone on the basis of their sexual orientation is discrimination, whether you consider it a character flaw or not.

 

For private businesses it depends on what state you are in.  Cases like that are hard to prove though.  

 

I'm not sure if this sort of thing could apply to the NFL though because all of these guys are on a contract which is subject to completely different rules then regular employees. 

 

Religious organizations are pretty much exempt from discrimination laws nationwide which makes sense.

 

As far as this I think for the GM there needs to be 2 concerns.  One is if you have a locker room culture that would accept this.  Every locker room is different, so you have to have a understanding on the culture of your locker room to know if this is gonna work or not.

 

The second is how much media attention is this player going to draw and how long will it continue?  If the media is going to for the whole season or for several years beat down the doors to interview this guy even if he's just a role player on your team then that causes problems.  

 

There is also the special concern that if this guy doesn't pan out and you try to cut or trade him there will be people out there saying that you did it because he was gay.  (Although IMO that wouldn't make sense because if you are gonna cut a guy cause he's gay why in the world would you draft him knowing that ahead of time?)

[Gramz]

I havn't seen him play, so I know nothing about him.

 

I think in this day and age, and particularly when people want to turn a blind eye to

 

an athlete convicted of DUI or vehicular homicide   or

obstruction of justice connected to a murder           or

accusations of sexual assault                                  or

killing innocent dogs and burying them             

 

and so on..............  Judging someone on their sexuality, which is in NO way harmful to anyone else  makes me

[Coffeedrinker]

I think that totally depends on how he handles it.     Will be flaunt it?  Or will he just go "no comment" from here on out?  IMO, why would he state the fact if it is not public knowledge?    His sex life is HIS sex life.   Why make a scene of it?

 

He has already made a scene.  How many news reports have you seen that say Player X from team Y is straight.

 

I will quit being a Colts fan if the Colts draft him.

[cdgacoltsfan]

He has already made a scene.  How many news reports have you seen that say Player X from team Y is straight.

 

I will quit being a Colts fan if the Colts draft him.

Question for you. Did you say the same thing when the Colts signed Christian Peter?  

[Gramz]

He has already made a scene.  How many news reports have you seen that say Player X from team Y is straight.

 

I will quit being a Colts fan if the Colts draft him.

Perhaps the Front Office will take this into consideration..  :?:  

[Coffeedrinker]

Question for you. Did you say the same thing when the Colts signed Christian Peter?  

What difference does it make?  The situations are completely different.

 

But to answer your question I did something similar.  On the Indystar forum I posted that I would ot post there anymore plus, I quit writing for a Colts website, I did not attend any games in 2001 nor did I buy any Colts related items that year (which I have bought at least one Colts item every year since they have been in Indy).

[Blackhawk4]

He has already made a scene.  How many news reports have you seen that say Player X from team Y is straight.

 

I will quit being a Colts fan if the Colts draft him.

 

[Coffeedrinker]

Perhaps the Front Office will take this into consideration..   :?:  

Perhaps they will, probably not though.  I don't base my values and morals on the reactions of others.

[In Luck We Trust]

The way I see it is this, IF he comes out and performs very well on the field and makes a name for himself by his play of the game the whole " gay " thing will no longer be a factor. well atleast not for teams and the other NFL players. but the press will keep talking about it and pushing the subject more and more,, they're good at the whole not dropping certain subjects.

[MAC]

He has already made a scene.  How many news reports have you seen that say Player X from team Y is straight.

 

I will quit being a Colts fan if the Colts draft him.

 

Perhaps they will, probably not though.  I don't base my values and morals on the reactions of others.

It always amazes me how hanging out on an internet site can delude us into becoming comfortable with people when in fact we know nothing about them.

 

Feel free to stop being a Colts fan. No need to wait until draft day.

[Coffeedrinker]

It always amazes me how hanging out on an internet site can delude us into becoming comfortable with people when in fact we know nothing about them.

 

Feel free to stop being a Colts fan. No need to wait until draft day.

Your mistake.  Why would I stop now?  I'm not a fan of the Colts because all the fans feel the same way I do about everything.  But the intolerance of the "tolerant" is quite amusing.

[MSColtsFan]

For private businesses it depends on what state you are in.  Cases like that are hard to prove though.  

 

I'm not sure if this sort of thing could apply to the NFL though because all of these guys are on a contract which is subject to completely different rules then regular employees. 

 

Religious organizations are pretty much exempt from discrimination laws nationwide which makes sense.

 

As far as this I think for the GM there needs to be 2 concerns.  One is if you have a locker room culture that would accept this.  Every locker room is different, so you have to have a understanding on the culture of your locker room to know if this is gonna work or not.

 

The second is how much media attention is this player going to draw and how long will it continue?  If the media is going to for the whole season or for several years beat down the doors to interview this guy even if he's just a role player on your team then that causes problems.  

 

There is also the special concern that if this guy doesn't pan out and you try to cut or trade him there will be people out there saying that you did it because he was gay.  (Although IMO that wouldn't make sense because if you are gonna cut a guy cause he's gay why in the world would you draft him knowing that ahead of time?)

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/av-sinensky/michael-sam-practical-gay-pro-athlete_b_4761577.html

 

According to the above, 27 of the 32 NFL teams are in states which have anti-discrimination laws which cover public and private sector employees for hiring, promotion, placement, etc., based on sexual identity.  The five exceptions are the Cardinals, Panthers, Texans, Jaguars, and Titans (based on the lack of state law, not team policy or practice).

 

Here's the difference, though...  a college football player doesn't apply for a position on a NFL team, the team picks, and then holds the rights to that player.  Unless Sam goes undrafted, and then not invited to a club as an UDFA, the above won't much matter, and as you point out, even if he doesn't get an opportunity to play professional football, it would be difficult at best to prove collusion and discrimination.  I don't know if any NFL team holds "open tryouts" any more. 

 

As for locker room culture, that, to me, is the one place Sam will be fine.  This topic is as much generational, and regional, as it is religious, moral, etc.  NFL players are young people, from college campuses, have never known a world without the upward climb of gay rights, the open discussion of the topic.  They have seen gay characters on TV and in movies their whole lives.  Gay isn't hidden away any more.  It is part of the culture and society.  We are talking about a group of people who are far better educated, informed, and aware that sexual orientation is a protected category as much as race, religion, etc.  How does that translate?  We will see.  But my guess is working with other people his age, college educated modern people, will promote the best chance that his sexual identity wont make a bit of difference to his peers. 

[Warhawk]

You can't really prove discrimination in a case like this anyway.

 

I mean, if the guy goes undrafted, barring a really terrible combine, it'll probably be because he's gay, but how do you differentiate the teams that didn't draft him because of his sexual orientation from the ones who didn't draft him because he doesn't fit their system or doesn't fill a need position, absent any statements on the record by that team's management on the subject?  Too much subjectivity in the scouting process to be able to parse who is discriminating, and who just doesn't need a tweener DE/OLB.

[Nadine]

So far people have mostly avoided getting personal with each other

Just a reminder........opinions on this are volatile 

Please think before you post

[Jason_]

He has already made a scene.  How many news reports have you seen that say Player X from team Y is straight.

 

I will quit being a Colts fan if the Colts draft him.

 

Honest question...is that because he's gay or because of the expected media circus that would possibly come with him?

[pacolts56]

Question for you. Did you say the same thing when the Colts signed Christian Peter?  

Michael Sam's declaration....considering the overwhelming liberal bias and politically correct terminal condition of the national media....is being heralded at near-Jackie Robinson levels. And any player, coach, GM or owner with beliefs to the contrary of Sam's lifestyle is already being pilloried or put on notice by that same media.

 

This is very, very different than us signing Christian Peter or more recently, the Aaron Hernandez ordeal....which faded rather rapidly considering the seriousness. Thuggery is old news and in some cases is even rationalized by the media.

 

Michael Sam has embarked on a crusade....whether he likes it or not, or whether he intended to or not....that he surrendered control of by sharing his homosexual preference publicly.

 

Regardless of what we think of the homosexuality issue...I REALLY hope Indianapolis is not at the epicenter of all this on Draft Day. And that's a view I would hold even if Sam's football ability at LB represented the second coming of Lawrence Taylor....which it clearly does not.

 

From the aspect of team and locker room distraction....this is about media attention levels....and the only increase to normal levels I care to tolerate as a Colts fan are the two weeks of hype leading up to a Colts appearance in the Super Bowl, and certainly not the discussion of what anyone prefers in the supposed privacy of their bedroom.

[Superman]

For private businesses it depends on what state you are in.  Cases like that are hard to prove though.  

 

I'm not sure if this sort of thing could apply to the NFL though because all of these guys are on a contract which is subject to completely different rules then regular employees. 

 

Religious organizations are pretty much exempt from discrimination laws nationwide which makes sense.

 

As far as this I think for the GM there needs to be 2 concerns.  One is if you have a locker room culture that would accept this.  Every locker room is different, so you have to have a understanding on the culture of your locker room to know if this is gonna work or not.

 

The second is how much media attention is this player going to draw and how long will it continue?  If the media is going to for the whole season or for several years beat down the doors to interview this guy even if he's just a role player on your team then that causes problems.  

 

There is also the special concern that if this guy doesn't pan out and you try to cut or trade him there will be people out there saying that you did it because he was gay.  (Although IMO that wouldn't make sense because if you are gonna cut a guy cause he's gay why in the world would you draft him knowing that ahead of time?)

 

Discrimination cases are usually tricky; it's hard to establish why or how someone makes a decision, especially a multi-layered decision about who to hire, and when. And that's doubly true in sports, where there are 50 candidates for every job opening. But that's not the point.

 

The point is that, plain and simple, if you decide not to employ someone on the basis of their sexual orientation, it's discrimination. Whether you make that choice because you don't like their orientation, or you make it because you're worried about the impact their orientation could have on your business, it's still discrimination. You can't say "I'm not anti-gay, but I run a bakery shop in a mostly anti-gay community, so I'm not going to hire this gay person because it would cost me business." That's discrimination.

 

The NFL is bound by labor protections and equal rights protections, just like every other business. If a team makes a hiring decision on the basis of sexual orientation, it's discrimination. Whether a lawsuit is brought or not, and whether a suit is successful or not, really isn't the issue.

[Superman]

You can't really prove discrimination in a case like this anyway.

 

I mean, if the guy goes undrafted, barring a really terrible combine, it'll probably be because he's gay, but how do you differentiate the teams that didn't draft him because of his sexual orientation from the ones who didn't draft him because he doesn't fit their system or doesn't fill a need position, absent any statements on the record by that team's management on the subject?  Too much subjectivity in the scouting process to be able to parse who is discriminating, and who just doesn't need a tweener DE/OLB.

 

Having trouble proving discrimination doesn't mean that there wasn't discrimination. Discrimination cases are typically difficult.

[Superman]

He has already made a scene.  How many news reports have you seen that say Player X from team Y is straight.

 

I will quit being a Colts fan if the Colts draft him.

 

So what if he had been outed? 

 

The story goes that many media members and NFL scouts already knew about his orientation. So what if, the week of the Combine, it came out that he was gay, and he confirmed that when asked. What then? Would you still not want the Colts to draft him?

[Valpo2004]

He has already made a scene.  How many news reports have you seen that say Player X from team Y is straight.

 

I will quit being a Colts fan if the Colts draft him.

 

Well that seems like an over-reaction.  

 

Quite frankly I'm having trouble figuring out your logic.  Is your objection that you find homosexuality immoral or are you just mad that he made it public?

[Superman]

So far people have mostly avoided getting personal with each other

Just a reminder........opinions on this are volatile 

Please think before you post

 

Quoted for emphasis.

[BrentMc11]

I thought this article about his dad's surprise is interesting.  I personally am shocked that Dad would not have known if teammates knew.  Parents talk to parents at the games ya know.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/draft2014/story/_/id/10439397/father-michael-sam-struggling-news-son-gay

[Superman]

Well that seems like an over-reaction.  

 

Quite frankly I'm having trouble figuring out your logic.  Is your objection that you find homosexuality immoral or are you just mad that he made it public?

 

I have the same question. It seems, based on what I've heard and read, that this information was eventually going to be made public. He chose to make it public himself.

 

I typically find the whole "coming out" thing annoying. I think whatever your orientation is is your business, and there's no need to make a public show of it. Brittney Griner is a WNBA player who acknowledged and confirmed her sexuality publicly, but she did so as a part of a normal conversation. She didn't call a press conference and announce to the world that she was gay; to be honest, I think everyone already knew. It came up in an interview, she made some simple comments about it, and they moved on. No big.

 

In this case, I get why Michael Sam decided to make a public announcement, and given the circumstances, I don't view it as a publicity stunt or a desire to get attention; I don't think he's trying to make a sideshow of himself. Maybe he could have chosen a different format, but whatever. Giving him the benefit of the doubt, I understand his decision in this regard. 

[Superman]

I thought this article about his dad's surprise is interesting.  I personally am shocked that Dad would not have known if teammates knew.  Parents talk to parents at the games ya know.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/draft2014/story/_/id/10439397/father-michael-sam-struggling-news-son-gay

 

Michael Sam said he doesn't spend a lot time with his parents, he doesn't go home a lot, etc.

[cdgacoltsfan]

Well that seems like an over-reaction.  

 

Quite frankly I'm having trouble figuring out your logic.  Is your objection that you find homosexuality immoral or are you just mad that he made it public?

Good questions and I cant wait to see the answers.

[Coffeedrinker]

Honest question...is that because he's gay or because of the expected media circus that would possibly come with him?

It is, as any type of discussion like this is, very complicated and I don't really know if I can answer that but I will try.

 

A combination of both actually.  First and foremost, I think homosexuality is wrong.  That being said, I don't really care what someone does in the privacy of their home as long as it's not hurting someone.  And I am almost positive there have been homesexuals in a Colts uniform in the past and perhaps even now.  I just make it a point to not support organizations that openly and overtly support homosexuals.  And his declaration means that any team that drafts him will be openly and overtly supporting that lifestyle choice.

 

IMO, being a homesexual is not news worthy, yet people want to act like this kid is some kind of hero because he admits he does something wrong.  Yet the same people that claim Sam is a hero chastised Tebow because he believes that unborn babies should not be killed.

 

Again it's a complicated subject and would take a lot more than this to fully explain it.  But you asked, what I believed to be a sincere question, so I wanted to try to answer it.

[Nadine]

Interesting article about this young man:  http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/12/sports/football/for-nfl-prospect-michael-sam-upbringing-was-bigger-challenge-than-coming-out-as-gay.html?hpw&rref=sports&_r=0

 

hasn't been easy for him.  And it still isn't

He's clear about who he is and that he wants to play football

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/nfl-prospect-michael-sam-i-679015

 

I don't think there is anyway the he could be who he is and not have people concerned that he is creating a circus.

 

He seems like a very centered and clear individual in spite of ........or perhaps because of what he's been through

[James Harden]

What if Michael Same become the number 1 overall pick in the draft. I'm sure that will tell the world that the NFL is ready to accept gay players. Him being number 1 will just shake up everything. Either the audience on draft day will have a standing ovation or the world country would just    

[Superman]

It is, as any type of discussion like this is, very complicated and I don't really know if I can answer that but I will try.

 

A combination of both actually.  First and foremost, I think homosexuality is wrong.  That being said, I don't really care what someone does in the privacy of their home as long as it's not hurting someone.  And I am almost positive there have been homesexuals in a Colts uniform in the past and perhaps even now.  I just make it a point to not support organizations that openly and overtly support homosexuals.  And his declaration means that any team that drafts him will be openly and overtly supporting that lifestyle choice.

 

IMO, being a homesexual is not news worthy, yet people want to act like this kid is some kind of hero because he admits he does something wrong.  Yet the same people that claim Sam is a hero chastised Tebow because he believes that unborn babies should not be killed.

 

Again it's a complicated subject and would take a lot more than this to fully explain it.  But you asked, what I believed to be a sincere question, so I wanted to try to answer it.

 

So at what point can a team draft a player who is known to be gay, without overtly supporting his lifestyle? At what point is the team considered drafting a player simply because they like him as a player, and don't care one way or the other about his sexual orientation?

[BrentMc11]

Michael Sam said he doesn't spend a lot time with his parents, he doesn't go home a lot, etc.

Makes more sense then. Just thinking how they would not know if the players did.  Maybe they did not interact with parents at games etc.  I just thought the article was interesting.

[cdgacoltsfan]

It is, as any type of discussion like this is, very complicated and I don't really know if I can answer that but I will try.

 

A combination of both actually.  First and foremost, I think homosexuality is wrong.  That being said, I don't really care what someone does in the privacy of their home as long as it's not hurting someone.  And I am almost positive there have been homesexuals in a Colts uniform in the past and perhaps even now.  I just make it a point to not support organizations that openly and overtly support homosexuals.  And his declaration means that any team that drafts him will be openly and overtly supporting that lifestyle choice.

 

IMO, being a homesexual is not news worthy, yet people want to act like this kid is some kind of hero because he admits he does something wrong.  Yet the same people that claim Sam is a hero chastised Tebow because he believes that unborn babies should not be killed.

 

Again it's a complicated subject and would take a lot more than this to fully explain it.  But you asked, what I believed to be a sincere question, so I wanted to try to answer it.

For the most part, Tebow was chastised because he was a terrible NFL quarterback..... Just curious..do you beleive in separation of Church and State?

[MAC]

Your mistake.  Why would I stop now?  I'm not a fan of the Colts because all the fans feel the same way I do about everything.  But the intolerance of the "tolerant" is quite amusing.

Why would you stop THEN?

 

I live an incredibly boring life. If I tried to hold athletes to my beliefs I'd never get to root for ANY team. It's just sports.

 

But more to the point, we aren't talking about Hernandez or Vick. You might as well be protesting the fact that he's 6'2".

 

Live and let live. I tolerate people of any height.

[Coffeedrinker]

For the most part, Tebow was chastised because he was a terrible NFL quarterback..... Just curious..do you beleive in separation of Church and State?

No, Tebow was an excellent college QB and the chastising came before he was even drafted.

 

I'm not sure what separation fo Church and State has to do with this conversation but before I answer let me ask a question.  Where in the Constitution does it state the Church and State are to be separate?  The only thing the Constitution says is that the State cannot establish a religion.

[Coffeedrinker]

So at what point can a team draft a player who is known to be gay, without overtly supporting his lifestyle? At what point is the team considered drafting a player simply because they like him as a player, and don't care one way or the other about his sexual orientation?

I don't have an answer to that.  I guess I will know it when I see it.

 

Why would you stop THEN?

 

I live an incredibly boring life. If I tried to hold athletes to my beliefs I'd never get to root for ANY team. It's just sports.

 

But more to the point, we aren't talking about Hernandez or Vick. You might as well be protesting the fact that he's 6'2".

 

Live and let live. I tolerate people of any height.

Ahh I see, so to make your point you are going to create a completely bogus and nonsensical scenario, try to act like it is the same thing and make your point based on your bogus scenario.

 

To answer your legitimate points, it is just sports and I'm not pushing to close down the NFL because they draft gay players.  But I do have a choice how I spend my time and my money and it will not be to an company that gets so far outside what I consider right.

 

As far as comparing to Hernandez or Vick.  All three are wrong and if Hernandez gets off and the Colts sign him I would stop being a Colts fan.  If the Colts had signed Vick, I would have stopped being a Colts fan.

[Valpo2004]

It is, as any type of discussion like this is, very complicated and I don't really know if I can answer that but I will try.

 

A combination of both actually.  First and foremost, I think homosexuality is wrong.  That being said, I don't really care what someone does in the privacy of their home as long as it's not hurting someone.  And I am almost positive there have been homesexuals in a Colts uniform in the past and perhaps even now.  I just make it a point to not support organizations that openly and overtly support homosexuals.  And his declaration means that any team that drafts him will be openly and overtly supporting that lifestyle choice.

 

IMO, being a homesexual is not news worthy, yet people want to act like this kid is some kind of hero because he admits he does something wrong.  Yet the same people that claim Sam is a hero chastised Tebow because he believes that unborn babies should not be killed.

 

Again it's a complicated subject and would take a lot more than this to fully explain it.  But you asked, what I believed to be a sincere question, so I wanted to try to answer it.

 

I find having sex with someone whom you are not married to to be morally wrong. . . Yet I'm pretty sure the Colts have drafted and signed some players who have openly made that lifestyle choice.  

 

I find divorce outside of cases of adultery, abuse or abandonment to be morally wrong.  Yet I'll bet the Colts have signed players who have made that lifestyle choice.

 

Is drafting a player that's openly gay an endorsement of his homosexuality or maybe it's just acquiring a good football player and his lifestyle choices are really none of their business??

 

Seriously since when has employing someone been an endorsement of their lifestyle??  Because my employer never asked me who I was having sex with or what kind of people I liked to have sex with.  That would IMO be a pretty important question if their employment of me ment that they where endorsing my lifestyle.

 

Are the Steelers endorsing Rothlisburger's promiscuity?  Are the Vikings endorsing AP's promiscuity and having children with a bunch of different women and NOT BEING IN THEIR LIVES.  

 

Where the Eagles endorsing Vick's dog murder??

 

Maybe some things are just about football and not an endorsement on what a player does off the field?

 

And for the record, yes I think homosexual acts are morally wrong.  But I also don't think it's any of my business unless the person is a member of my church.

 

As far as if they are a player on my favorite football team.  I don't really care.  If I did then I would never be able to cheer for any football team.  

 

Andrew Luck openly lives with his girlfriend whom I might point out he's not married to.