The Inside Story of How the NFL's Plan for Its 1st Openly Gay Player Fell Apart

[Patler]

Well, this is almost a self enclosed lockout. The best players, the ones the teams would HAVE to accept or would be crazy to not sign as FA, have too much outside income to risk coming out first. You could never say it won't happen, but I think the incentives are strong to stay hidden.

So almost inevitably, the first out player will be more pedestrian, like Jason Collins was in basketball. Veterans with less to risk but very willing to continue their careers if possible. That player, by definition, is fungible. And can be replaced by a number of non-out or straight alternatives every year. A team has to want to do this because unlike the color barrier, there is no long term advantage accrued for going first.

Given the strong current (and successful) incentive to stay closeted, I am not sure how a team can judge accurately how the player might react to the inevitable publicity. A player choosing to do this is obviously thinking about more than football. But that is true of any barrier that is broken. Its also true of every player in the League who worries about their next contract. Teams do relinquish rights to these players to avoid distractions, but they also take the risk to sign them.

Employing closeted homosexual players and avoiding open ones is just dishonest and cowardly.

I disagree with your premise. There is a large class of players who fall between the "best players, the ones the teams would HAVE to accept or would be crazy to not sign as FA" and those who are totally fungible".

The error they are making is waiting until they are FAs to come out. A starter who recently signed a moderate extension should be the first to do it, and without great fanfare. Teams are full of those kinds of players, and I suspect some are gay.

[Upnorth]

I disagree with your premise. There is a large class of players who fall between the "best players, the ones the teams would HAVE to accept or would be crazy to not sign as FA" and those who are totally fungible".

The error they are making is waiting until they are FAs to come out. A starter who recently signed a moderate extension should be the first to do it, and without great fanfare. Teams are full of those kinds of players, and I suspect some are gay.

If it's a starter signed to a moderate extension we are a likely place to be. If it's a recentl signed FA the first won't be in GB

Woody that is a pretty modern opinion for such an old fart!

[woodbuck27]

If it's a starter signed to a moderate extension we are a likely place to be. If it's a recentl signed FA the first won't be in GB

Woody that is a pretty modern opinion for such an old fart!

Then in your opinion the Packers wouldn't go after S Kerry Rhodes (who's not seemingly admitting to being GAY) or any GAY that might wish to come out of the closet.

[woodbuck27]

If it's a starter signed to a moderate extension we are a likely place to be. If it's a recentl signed FA the first won't be in GB

Woody that is a pretty modern opinion for such an old fart!

" Woody that is a pretty modern opinion for such an old fart! " Upnorth

Upon examination I feel I've been complimented. Thanks Upnorth.

I was referred back to this thread by Patler RE: Did Rodgers flirt with pro sports immortality last summer? thread started - Dec. 31, 2013.

This thread:

It's a rather calm and open and may I use the word 'liberal' discussion of the matter/topic.

GO PACKERS ....GO PACK GO !

[pbmax]

The error they are making is waiting until they are FAs to come out. A starter who recently signed a moderate extension should be the first to do it, and without great fanfare. Teams are full of those kinds of players, and I suspect some are gay.

There is certainly logic to that approach from a financial aspect in the immediate term. But I doubt the player sees it that way. I think they view coming out as a risk, to both the current and future contracts. To them it would also be a risk with teammates and coaches to drop that after signing. I suspect some teams in the article passed on the entire possibility just to avoid the issue. To have it dropped in their lap after a signing likely will not go over well. Some will see the logic, others will see duplicity.

I think the likeliest candidates will be older and wanting to start afresh, on honest terms, with a new deal (probably what they view as the last deal) so there is no surprise and some announced support from within the organization.