03-30-2014, 02:52 PM
I agree with Garvin's point. The examples added by WIM (promiscuity and alcoholism) make the point even stronger. The effort to twist into a pretzel to avoid considering these external factors seems misguided. Are we to believe that a business should be indifferent between two otherwise identical candidates for a position if one has a history of alcoholism or drug abuse and the other has no such history. Does the decision-making framework and self-esteem of a promiscuous person have no effect on their personal interactions in conducting their business responsibilities. I think it is presumptuous to assert that we have some perfect sense of the interactions of these various dysfunctions that we can isolate those that we should consider relevant and those that aren't. I presume there are wide receivers without the complicating considerations of this player. However, if the airing of the gang connections was done for malicious reasons, that would be low class and an indication of the team's lack of character.
"It's not what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you think you know that just isn't so."
Mark Twain
