League mum on Combine questions inquiry

Getty Images

Last week, the NFL said it will investigate whether teams were asking impermissible questions at the Scouting Combine.

This week, the league said it won’t be saying anything more about the situation.

“We are not commenting on the [Nick] Kasa matter beyond what we said previously,” NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told PFT by email on Thursday, in reference to the Colorado tight end who said he was asked at the Scouting Combine questions such as, “Do you like girls?

The league’s position means that the matter will be handled internally and privately.  If one or more teams are found to have violated league policy or the law, there will be no press release or other announcement.  If discipline is imposed, no one will ever know (barring a leak).

The lack of transparency isn’t surprising.  But it stands in stark contrast to last year’s handling of the bounty scandal.

Of course, the league’s transparency regarding the Saints’ practices was selective and incomplete.  But some transparency is better than none.

The difference could be that taking public action against bounties shows that the NFL is vigilant about player safety, which influences the jurors who may eventually sit on the concussion lawsuits and which potentially slams the door on future lawsuits from current players.  With no litigation pending or likely from players who were asked inappropriate questions at the Scouting Combine, there’s no benefit to be gained from airing out dirty laundry.

11 responses to “League mum on Combine questions inquiry

  1. … or naybe …just maybe… the league may not want it coming out just how many coaches and front office people aren’t exactly straight/hetero. Double standard hypocrisy. At the end of the day, a person’s sex life is nobody else’s business except the people they are sexually involved with.

  2. Correction:::::
    Taking public action against ALLEGED and MADE UP , but never PROVEN bounties shows that the NFL will lie and defame anyone to help defend itself and its money, against current and future lawsuits

  3. I’ve done some hiring in my time.

    What the NFL is doing at the Combine is looking at potential candidates for employment. Would anyone disagree with that?
    In any other private sector hiring, questions concerning one’s sexual preference would be considered discrimination.
    Of course, it would need to have evidence and be proven, probably in court. But in Manti’s case, if his draft stock dropped to say, the 4th round, I think he would have a case to say that kind of discriminatory questioning lowered his potential contract’s value.
    There would be your case. Of course he won’t pursue it because it would lead to a blacklisting in the league.
    Still think things favor the employees in today’s work world?

  4. Every day the NFL looks more and more like North Korea. The only difference is their subjects aren’t dying of starvation.

  5. Seems to me that a lawyer representing a player who’s stock – and earnings potential – may be falling because of rumors he’s gay might be paying attention to this.

    There’s a handful of states, including some that host NFL teams, that have deemed discrimination based on sexual orientation to be illegal.

    The fact that these questions were asked provides some pretty compelling evidence that NFL teams don’t want gays in the locker room.

    Of course any attorney for Te’o will have to make a distinction between Te’o’s drop in performance as a draft day factor, and concerns about his sexuality – but if Te’o feels like he’s not welcome in the NFL, and thus sees fewer earnings, because of just the rumor of being gay, he might have a case to make.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!