NFL should punish teams’ insensitivity
A 20-year-old sits down for an interview at a job fair, positioned across from an intimidating lineup of men.
Over the course of the 15-minute interview, the employers ask him about everything from his résumé to his influences and aspirations. And then, “Do you like men?”
A while later, in a subsequent session with another organization, the young man fields more questions about his professional life. Then, “I heard your mother sells herself. How
do you feel about that?”
Such was the NFL scouting combine experience LSU running back Derrius Guice says he endured. He expected team officials to put him through strenuous questioning, perhaps to see how he would respond to an uncomfortable situation.
But he was truly thrown off by queries about his sexuality and whether his mother is a prostitute, experiences he revealed Wednesday during an interview with Sirius XM NFL Radio.
“It was pretty crazy. Some people are really trying to get in your head and test your reaction,” Guice said.
But why are those questions seen by some teams as fair game?
Although 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’s disturbing, then, that NFL talent evaluators would think nothing of directing such a question at Guice.
It’s the height of ignorance that such a topic would come up in today’s climate. And regardless of the reasons behind those questions, the fact that they even were raised indicates just how lit-
“It was pretty crazy. Some people are really trying to get in your head and test your reaction.”
Derrius Guice LSU running back, on questions he was asked by teams during interviews at the NFL combine
tle progress the NFL has made in the area of social justice.
After learning of the questions directed at Guice, the NFL said the right things.
Spokesman Brian McCarthy said in a statement, “A question such as that is completely inappropriate and wholly contrary to league workplace policies. The NFL and its clubs are committed to providing equal employment opportunities to all employees in a manner that is consistent with our commitment to diversity and inclusion, state and federal laws and the CBA.
“The league annually reminds clubs of these workplace policies that prohibit personnel from seeking information concerning a player’s sexual orientation.”
But what the league will do to address the matter — and put an end to such practices — is another matter. Commissioner Roger Goodell has to take action, especially since he hasn’t in the past.
Two years ago, Giants cornerback Eli Apple said a Falcons assistant — later revealed to be current defensive coordinator Marquand Manuel — asked if he liked men. In 2013, former Colorado tight end Nick Kasa said he was probed about his relationship status.
That same year, Steelers running back Le’Veon Bell revealed he, too, fielded questions about his sexuality during combine interviews.
And in 2010, Cowboys wide receiver Dez Bryant was asked during a pre-draft visit with then-Dolphins general manager Jeff Ireland if his mother were a prostitute and if she still used drugs.
As McCarthy said, the league has stressed to teams to avoid such topics during interviews.
The league sends memos instructing what kinds of questions not to ask incoming rookies.
But some teams still refuse to take heed, and the league has yet to issue discipline for such infractions.
For some organizations, the rules are still seen as pliable.
Because excelling in the NFL often requires an ability to react to the unexpected and maintain composure, it’s possible team officials would want to ask an inappropriate question such as the one Guice faced just to see how the player would behave.
But the desire to gauge a player’s response in such a scenario doesn’t justify crossing that established line.
Guice’s case could merely represent two incidents that stray from the norm. When asked about the issue by USA TODAY, representatives from multiple teams, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject, said they deem such questions appalling. But even if the two questions to Guice were the lone instances that such topics were raised at the combine, that’s still two too many.
In 2017, NFL owners, coaches and players grappled with their role in the fight against social injustice, with many focusing on racial inequality and police brutality.
But embarrassments such as this show how far the league still has to go on a wider range of issues. And if teams think they can push players on their sexual orientation or family background during the draft process, the NFL has a serious problem.
Getting all teams to comply with the stated standards could require substantial punishments. Whether it’s issuing a fine for the general manager or coach that presided over the interview or the docking of a draft pick, the league has to take action.