Thread: Michael Sam waived by Cowboys

Originally Posted by GEM

Alright, knock it off guys.

Man, I had a really good one lined up for my next response. Way to spoil my fun!

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

Just so we're clear, you dig up and old thread and post a bs article just to call a guy you're obsessed with a loser, and I'm the disrepectful person in this thread. Gotcha!

Not once did I say anything condemnatory toward a member of this board, as you have chosen to do. Making personal attacks on other members who dont share your viewpoint is your prefered method.
Once again, you have chosen your typical abusive ad hominem attacks. Not really sure why attacking members of the board as you continually do is tolerated on here. I really dont think that is the purpose of this board, but maybe I am wrong.

"Michael Sam -- I'm Not in the NFL ... Because I'm Gay"
This is the incendiary headline of the article that was on the first page of yahoo Sports today.

Originally Posted by Dzone

"Michael Sam -- I'm Not in the NFL ... Because I'm Gay"
This is the incendiary headline of the article that was on the first page of yahoo Sports today.

But not what he said. Sometimes headline writers try too hard to make a story interesting and end up misquoting someone

Originally Posted by Pudge

But not what he said. Sometimes headline writers try too hard to make a story interesting and end up misquoting someone

Try not to let those pesky facts get in the way of a good ol fashioned vendetta.

Originally Posted by Pudge

But not what he said. Sometimes headline writers try too hard to make a story interesting and end up misquoting someone

To be fair, in this quote from the same article he was asked if it was talent that kept him out or if it was his decision to come out that kept him out.

"I think I was the SEC Defensive Player of the Year last year," Sam responded, when asked if it was the level of competition in the NFL or his decision to come out that was preventing him from sticking with a team. "So I don't think it had to do with talent."

So based on that i can see why the article might draw that conclusion. Obviously, Sam came out and clarified his stance on twitter but according to that above quote one could perceive that he was blaming the sexuality aspect and not that he wasnt talented. Either way, some of the venom you guys dropped on Dzone was unnecessary from the word go.

Originally Posted by Northman

To be fair, in this quote from the same article he was asked if it was talent that kept him out or if it was his decision to come out that kept him out.



So based on that i can see why the article might draw that conclusion. Obviously, Sam came out and clarified his stance on twitter but according to that above quote one could perceive that he was blaming the sexuality aspect and not that he wasnt talented. Either way, some of the venom you guys dropped on Dzone was unnecessary from the word go.

That quote could have very well meant that he's not on a team because of the media distraction that would come with it. It's definitely not fair to him to title an article "I'm not in the NFL because I'm gay" based on that quote.

I think the main reason dzone is being "attacked" (a term which I think is a stretch in this case) is because he just outright called him a loser for really no good reason.

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

That quote could have very well meant that he's not on a team because of the media distraction that would come with it. It's definitely not fair to him to title an article "I'm not in the NFL because I'm gay" based on that quote.

Yea, but he wasnt asked if it was due to talent or media distraction. He was asked point blank if it was talent or because he came out. Could the article writer dug a little deeper? Probably. But i can still see why one might conclude that he was pointing towards his sexuality.

I think the main reason dzone is being "attacked" (a term which I think is a stretch in this case) is because he just outright called him a loser for really no good reason.

Well, you've been here long enough to know that politicians, athletes, and celebrities are free game to be called anything in here whereas flaming each other is not. You may not think its fair but those are the rules that in place. Just saying.

Originally Posted by Northman

Yea, but he wasnt asked if it was due to talent or media distraction. He was asked point blank if it was talent or because he came out. Could the article writer dug a little deeper? Probably. But i can still see why one might conclude that he was pointing towards his sexuality.



Well, you've been here long enough to know that politicians, athletes, and celebrities are free game to be called anything in here whereas flaming each other is not. You may not think its fair but those are the rules that in place. Just saying.

No I'm fine with people calling out public figures. I certainly do it all the time. I just thought it was kind of a stupid comment and let him know why.

Originally Posted by Northman

Either way, some of the venom you guys dropped on Dzone was unnecessary from the word go.

His blatant bigotry in multiple forms, and in multiple threads has justified these types of responses IMO.

Originally Posted by tomjonesrocks

His blatant bigotry in multiple forms, and in multiple threads has justified these types of responses IMO.

For sure. If you want to express those kinds of views that's fine, but don't get all huffy when you get called out on it.