Pats showing the most interest in Michael Sam

QB12 · Apr 20, 2014

DaBruinz said:
Bruschi didn't come into his own until he was moved to ILB in the 3-4.
This isn't the PAC-10. It's the NFL and it took Bruschi years to become a full-time player.
Sam would be a downgrade from Spikes, IMHO, even with Spikes already gone. I've not seen anything that shows that Sam has the ability to cover TEs or RBs. On the contrary. Everything screams that Sam would be a hinderance on the football field because of being slow and not having great agility.

The Pats are planning on playing Man-Man Coverge, not Zone Coverage. Bruschi excelled in Zone coverage.

Sorry, but I find it deplorable that you are comparing Sam to Bruschi when Sam hasn't shown Jack yet.

Just no.

fgssand · Apr 20, 2014

KontradictioN said:
Well, this will ultimately turn into a debate about homosexuality that will be moved to the Political forum because, well, it's just been that kind of offseason here. But before it does, I've watched him pretty extensively even back to his Mizzou days and I'm honestly not that impressed. He seems to use raw power a little too much to get into the backfield and needs to develop quite a bit of technique. He also has a tendancy to overpursue that will get him into trouble in the NFL. I'll chalk this up as the Pats recognizing that they need a DE and seeing just how good Mizzou's defense was last year. But, if it came down to it, I would MUCH rather they pull the trigger on Ealy, his teammate, than Sam.

heh heh - the rainbow rating sure worked for this thread! I have to believe all that matters is if the kid can play in the NFL. If Sam can make it.....welcome aboard.

SB39 · Apr 20, 2014

Wildo7 said:
So people are going to think that the team that drafted the openly gay player cut him because he was gay?

Well, when Notre Dame fired Ty Willingham, they were accused of being racist. So a similar thing could happen with Sam.

Wildo7 · Apr 20, 2014

SB39 said:
Well, when Notre Dame fired Ty Willingham, they were accused of being racist. So a similar thing could happen with Sam.

iirc that was because he was given a noticeably shorter leash than any white coach with a comparable record before him at a school that had only ever hired white coaches in any sport, I don't think that's a good comparison here

SB39 · Apr 20, 2014

Wildo7 said:
iirc that was because he was given a noticeably shorter leash than any white coach with a comparable record before him at a school that had only ever hired white coaches in any sport, I don't think that's a good comparison here

Your last sentence 100% proved my point. The critics could easily say the Patriots gave Sam a noticeably shorter leash than any other comparable straight player with comparable performance.

So my comparison is perfectly accurate and your response totally proves the point I am making.

Wildo7 · Apr 21, 2014

SB39 said:
Your last sentence 100% proved my point. The critics could easily say the Patriots gave Sam a noticeably shorter leash than any other comparable straight player with comparable performance.

So my comparison is perfectly accurate and your response totally proves the point I am making.

No, it doesn't, because A) the Pats won't and B) Michael Sam is the first openly gay player in the NFL, Ty Willingham was not even close to the first black coach in CFB. ND was susceptible to an argument that they had actively avoided minority coaches and were grudgingly hiring Willingham to placate the critics; whoever drafts Michael Sam will be going out of their way to take him. It's just not the same situation at all.

ETA - and if they were to give him a noticeably shorter leash they would deserve the criticism anyway

SB39 · Apr 21, 2014

Wildo7 said:
No, it doesn't, because A) the Pats won't and B) Michael Sam is the first openly gay player in the NFL, Ty Willingham was not even close to the first black coach in CFB. ND was susceptible to an argument that they had actively avoided minority coaches and were grudgingly hiring Willingham to placate the critics; whoever drafts Michael Sam will be going out of their way to take him. It's just not the same situation at all.

ETA - and if they were to give him a noticeably shorter leash they would deserve the criticism anyway

My analogy is perfectly valid. The argument has been put forth that if NE drafted, and subsequently cut, Michael Sam then no one would accuse them of being anti-gay because if they were anti-gay, they wouldn't have drafted him in the first place.

That logic is a fallacy as demonstrated by the perfect analogy of Ty Willingham at Notre Dame. Even after hiring a black coach, certain critics were obsessed with finding racist intent behind firing him by complaining of unfair treatment. So even after hiring (i.e. drafting) Sam, the team could very easily be on the receiving end of criticism for unfair treatment while he was here.

The critics could easily say virtually word-for-word the exact same thing to NE that they said to ND: "Sure you hired/drafted him, but you never gave him a fair chance so you are racist/anti-gay for treating him the way you did and letting him go the way you did."

Bottom line is this (short version): It is ridiculously foolhardy to think that drafting him would indemnify them from criticism if they had to cut him.

Wildo7 · Apr 21, 2014

SB39 said:
My analogy is perfectly valid. The argument has been put forth that if NE drafted, and subsequently cut, Michael Sam then no one would accuse them of being anti-gay because if they were anti-gay, they wouldn't have drafted him in the first place.

That logic is a fallacy as demonstrated by the perfect analogy of Ty Willingham at Notre Dame. Even after hiring a black coach, certain critics were obsessed with finding racist intent behind firing him by complaining of unfair treatment. So even after hiring (i.e. drafting) Sam, the team could very easily be on the receiving end of criticism for unfair treatment while he was here.

The critics could easily say virtually word-for-word the exact same thing to NE that they said to ND: "Sure you hired/drafted him, but you never gave him a fair chance so you are racist/anti-gay for treating him the way you did and letting him go the way you did."

Bottom line is this (short version): It is ridiculously foolhardy to think that drafting him would indemnify them from criticism if they had to cut him.

The "critics" could say anything, it doesn't mean it will carry any weight if he has in fact been given a fair shot and the Pats went out of their way to draft him.

SB39 · Apr 21, 2014

Wildo7 said:
The "critics" could say anything, it doesn't mean it will carry any weight if he has in fact been given a fair shot and the Pats went out of their way to draft him.

It will carry weight with the Patriots haters just like accusations of racism carried weight with the Notre Dame haters. Everyone, including you and me, will believe what they want to believe.

It's just incredibly foolhardy not to realize that there would be some criticism if those events all came to pass.

Wildo7 · Apr 21, 2014

SB39 said:
It will carry weight with the Patriots haters just like accusations of racism carried weight with the Notre Dame haters. Everyone, including you and me, will believe what they want to believe.

It's just incredibly foolhardy not to realize that there would be some criticism if those events all came to pass.

So the Pats might as well do what they want. There were reasons why the ND criticism carried weight that wouldn't be present in this situation as I just outlined. Afaict you are saying nothing here.

PatsFanSince74 · Apr 21, 2014

As much as I admire Sam for being a trailblazer and as much as I empathize with the issue over which he is blazing that trail, I think it does a disservice to Sam and the game to draft him for any reason other than his ability to contribute to the team. If he meets that criterion, then, yes, if I were a member of the Pats management, I would put his advocacy in the "plus" column as I made the decision whether to draft him.

JoeSixPat · Apr 21, 2014

All the media infatuation with this kid seems to have died down making this more of a possibility in my eyes

There will be an initial story when he's drafted, and a story if he makes the team and a story when he initially plays

But as long as his presence isn't more disrupting than that, Belichick would take him I'm sure

meatface · Apr 21, 2014

SB39 said:
It will carry weight with the Patriots haters just like accusations of racism carried weight with the Notre Dame haters. Everyone, including you and me, will believe what they want to believe.

It's just incredibly foolhardy not to realize that there would be some criticism if those events all came to pass.

When the Patriots ever cared what other people thought of them? If Michael Sam is drafted by the Patriots and fails to make the team it will be because they thought he could not help them win, no other reason. I hope that if Sam does make an NFL squad it will allow other players to come out.

Deus Irae · Apr 21, 2014

meatface said:
When the Patriots ever cared what other people thought of them?

Every year, during the lead up to the draft. It's strictly regarding draft purposes, though (See Gholston, Vernon).

meatface said:
If Michael Sam is drafted by the Patriots and fails to make the team it will be because they thought he could not help them win, no other reason. I hope that if Sam does make an NFL squad it will allow other players to come out.

If you want the first sentence to be true, the second should never pop into your head.

SB39 · Apr 21, 2014

meatface said:
When the Patriots ever cared what other people thought of them? If Michael Sam is drafted by the Patriots and fails to make the team it will be because they thought he could not help them win, no other reason. I hope that if Sam does make an NFL squad it will allow other players to come out.

I never said the Patriots cared what other thought of them, did I?

There was a comment that if the Patriots drafted and cut him, then they would not be criticized as being anti-gay because, if they were anti-gay, they wouldn't have drafted him in the first place. All I am saying is that that logic is a fallacy.

strngplyr · Apr 21, 2014

I don't want this team to even think about Sam in the draft for the sole purpose of I don't feel like he has an NFL career in front of him. He is, to me, too small to play his natural position and I'm much less in favor of converting DE's to OLB than I am when it comes to converting an OLB to DE.

I could not care less about who he brings into his bedroom, that's none of my business nor anyone else outside of his significant others.

However, that's just my opinion, if BB and his scouts believe he can help, I'd be happy if they proved me wrong as it'd mean we gained a player worth keeping on the roster.

If him being gay is good for league PR, that's fine, it won't affect my every day life and I doubt it will affect anyone else life. I'll only start to care if it becomes a locker room distraction, which I hope it wouldn't, we as a people shouldn't believe we're good enough to judge another human being we don't know regardless of what your interpretation a book written thousands of years ago tells you.

lurker1965 · Apr 21, 2014

fnordcircle said:
http://nesn.com/2014/04/report-patriots-among-six-teams-showing-most-interest-in-michael-sam/

At the risk of starting a politically or emotionally charged discussion (ehehe risk) I really want this team to sign this guy. Even if it means passing over a better option or reaching for him in the 5th or 6th.

Sam won't be Jackie Robinson but as a civil rights slacktivist I still think it will be something remembered for a long while and and I want that associated with my team. Between Hernandez and Spygate the team's reputation as an organization has taken some hits. I'd like to see us be the team that helps a player break that barrier.

Wrong. Say the guy is not the best line backer and is legitimately beat out by an undrafted free agent. You cut him and the "homophobe" chants start.
Besides do you know the crap Jackie Robinson went through? Translated that to football. He'd be a magnet for every lunk head wanting to cheap shot a guy because he is gay and maybe a bigoted ref won't call it - or penalize him.
No thanks. I'll take the second out player.
Besides, do you seriously want to start making football decisions based on Hernandez? The one active murder (alleged and that we know of, and other legal disclaimers) in over 75 years?

lurker1965 · Apr 21, 2014

Brady6 said:
I have to look at the situation without considering his sexuality, and when I do that, he is not an impressive prospect at all in my opinion. He is undersized, and his athletic metrics were poor and that is putting it nicely.

Combine Invite: Yes
Height: 6020
Weight: 261
40 Yard Dash: 4.91
20 Yard Dash:
10 Yard Dash:
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 17
Vertical Jump: 25 1/2
Broad Jump: 09'06"
20 Yard Shuttle:
3-Cone Drill: 7.80

If he drops to UDFA I would be all for them signing him but to use, a draft pick on him seems like a poor decision. This is about winning football games, and he just does not have that much talent.

Exactly. But saying so will get you (the generic "you") tarred as a homophobe.

Kontradiction · Apr 22, 2014

fgssand said:
heh heh - the rainbow rating sure worked for this thread! I have to believe all that matters is if the kid can play in the NFL. If Sam can make it.....welcome aboard.

So did the disagree one. I guess a certain poster that I have on ignore disagreed with my post (that was clearly a joke, but this schmuck has never had a sense of humor anyway). I like the new forum. I wasn't even alerted to that until I went back and read the thread and it's just like this guy has completely disappeared from the face of the earth. It's great. I'm surprised you didn't get more "thumbs down" for throwing the rainbow rating out there.

Deus Irae · Apr 22, 2014

KontradictioN said:
So did the disagree one. I guess a certain poster that I have on ignore disagreed with my post (that was clearly a joke, but this schmuck has never had a sense of humor anyway). I like the new forum. I wasn't even alerted to that until I went back and read the thread and it's just like this guy has completely disappeared from the face of the earth. It's great. I'm surprised you didn't get more "thumbs down" for throwing the rainbow rating out there.

I hear you about that poster. So far, every negative (post-switch) rating I've gotten has been either from someone I have on ignore and who knows I have them on ignore, or from my stalker mod. They just can't help themselves. But I only know because I was checking out the functions box where the screen name is at the top of the posts, and clicked on the "ratings given" and "ratings received" to see if they were working. If I hadn't been doing that, I'd never have seen anything of theirs beyond that "ignore" bar, so that's a real improvement over the old system. It's not quite Ffvb, but it's close enough.

Good stuff.

Pats showing the most interest in Michael Sam

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

Totally Full of It

In the Starting Line-Up

Totally Full of It

In the Starting Line-Up

Totally Full of It

In the Starting Line-Up

Totally Full of It

PatsFans.com Supporter

Pro Bowl Player

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

On my retirement tour.

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Similar threads