Guice said that one NFL team asked him if he was gay and another asked him if his mother "sells herself"GETTY IMAGES
The NFL is "investigating whether questions posed" to former LSU RB Derrius Guice at the NFL Combine "were inappropriate," according to Darron Cummings of the AP. Guice in a recent podcast said that one team "asked if he was gay and another asked if his mother 'sells herself.'" The NFL in a statement said, "A question such as that is completely inappropriate and wholly contrary to league workplace policies. ... The league annually reminds clubs of these workplace policies that prohibit personnel from seeking information concerning a player's sexual orientation" (AP, 3/8). NFLPA Exec Dir DeMaurice Smith said, "If the league really wanted to end ridiculous questions like this, find out what team did it and ban them from the combine next year. That's it. The question is inappropriate. Questions along these lines have always been inappropriate. You wouldn't want these questions asked of your daughter, asked of your son in a regular job interview.” Smith noted the players are in a unique situation, as they "right now are not union members because they are not drafted players" and they also are "no longer represented or protected by the NCAA because they have declared for the draft or at the combine." Smith: "These are young men that literally fall into the doughnut hole of not having anyone there to protect them. The only reason that system exists is because [NCAA President] Mark Emmert allows it to exist and [NFL Commissioner] Roger Goodell allows it to exist” (“PFT,” NBCSN, 3/8). NFL Network's Ian Rapoport reported recording interviews with teams is "going to be discussed going forward." Rapoport: "Then maybe if you need to go back and review, you can do that just to make sure that none of these questions are asked in the future” (“NFL Total Access,” NFL Network, 3/8).
DISCIPLINE ISSUES: In Indianapolis, Suzette Hackney writes the line of questioning Guice describes depicts "homophobia and racial prejudice on full display." This "isn't an 'oops' moment for the NFL," as team reps and coaches have "been disciplined for this behavior in the past." It is "time for teams that engage in this type of degradation and discrimination to be heavily fined and face hefty lawsuits" (INDIANAPOLIS STAR, 3/9). USA TODAY's Mike Jones asks, "Why are those questions seen by some teams as fair game?" Though the NFL often "operates by its own rules, there are state and federal laws that prohibit discrimination in the workplace based on sexual orientation." It is "disturbing, then, that NFL talent evaluators would think nothing of directing such a question at Guice." The fact that they "even were raised indicates just how little progress the NFL has actually made in the area of social justice." Goodell has to "take action, especially since he hasn’t in the past" (USA TODAY, 3/9). The NATIONAL POST's John Kryk writes Goodell "surely would balk at any suggestions he lightly punishes owners, executives, coaches and scouts." But that belief is "out there, and in some cases it has merit." Barring the "guilty questioners themselves" for the '19 Combine "sounds right, on top of monetary fines that hurt both these men and their club." Kryk: "Whatever you do, Roger, make these punishments hurt" (NATIONAL POST, 3/9).
ABOVE EVERYONE ELSE? NBCSPORTSBAYAREA.com's Ray Ratto wrote this practice "continues unabated because teams believe they have unfettered rights that other employers do not." They believe their "search for whatever knowledge they deem interesting, appropriate or just fun to know supersedes all other considerations, and because the NFL believes itself to be more important than all other walks of life." It is "one more reason" why the Combine "reveals more about what is wrong with the business than what is right" (NBCSPORTSBAYAREA.com, 3/8). ESPN's Dan Le Batard said those working in the NFL in this "primitive workplace think that they can, because they're making investments, treat people differently than you would treat them in any other workplace because there are laws about asking your interview people questions that are this kind of invasive." Le Batard: "What needs to happen is the NFL ... has to find the name of the team, find the name of the person who did it, publicly put that person in front of us and let there be consequences" ("Highly Questionable," ESPN, 3/8). ESPN's Michael Wilbon said the people who asked Guice those questions "have to be made an example of" ("PTI," ESPN, 3/8).
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH: FS1's Colin Cowherd said, "I almost wonder if they should cancel the interview process because you're not gaining much from it. This is the 13th straight year I have heard this story" ("Speak For Yourself," FS1, 3/8). The Dallas Morning News' Tim Cowlishaw said the Guice incident is "just embarrassing for the NFL." Cowlishaw: "You people look like you're cavemen when it comes to how you're dealing with things. If you want to be a progressive league you have to root this out. It should be a fireable offense on every level" ("Around The Horn," ESPN, 3/8).
TWITTER REAX: Fox News Radio's Jared Max: "When we consider that NOT ONE player in our 4 major pro sports leagues (over 3,4000 players) feels comfortable enough in 2018 to live as his true self, openly gay, this story reveals insight to how archaic/ignorant/hurtful modern sports mentality remains." ESPN's Michael Eaves: "How many of you have ever been asked if you were gay or if your mother is a prostitute during a job interview? If the #NFL had any decency, it would ask Guice to name the teams." The Wall Street Journal's Jason Gay: "This is illegal. The NFL can find out in 5 minutes who did it; let’s see how serious they are." Bleacher Report's Mike Freeman: "It's really easy to stop stupid combine questions: 1. Record all the interviews. 2. If player complains of question, review the tape. 3. If inappropriate question was asked, ban questioner from attending future combines. 4. Take away draft pick. 5. Team can appeal."
