Even with context, Ireland in the Wrong

The question du semaine as the fallout from the 2010 NFL Draft settles on the landscape deals with the scandal of why Dez Bryant, the talented wide receiver formerly of the Oklahoma State Cowboys, fell as precipitously as he did from a top-10 talent to the Dallas Cowboys late in the first round.

Bryant, who was suspended for 10 games by the NCAA this past season for lying to an investigator about his relationship with Deion Sanders, came from a troubled background, but appears to have overcome it to put up prodigious numbers while in uniform in Stillwater.

Apparently, though, his background came up during his visit with the Miami Dolphins. According to a story by Yahoo! Sports Michael Silver, Bryant was upset about being asked this question by Dolphins General Manager Jeff Ireland:

"Last Wednesday, the night before he was selected 24th overall by the Cowboys, former Oklahoma State wide receiver Dez Bryant(notes) told me that during one of his predraft visits, a high-level executive of one NFL franchise had asked him if his mother, Angela, was a prostitute.

“No, my mom is not a prostitute,” said Bryant, whose background – including his mother’s lifestyle and past legal troubles – was under great scrutiny prior to the draft. “I got mad – really mad – but I didn’t show it.”

Ireland, after being outed as the executive in question, later apologized for asking the question.

Well, naturally, a firestorm broke out and debate ensued. People were on both sides of the issue, including former players, some who thought the question was inappropriate and unnecessary and others who thought it was within bounds for the team to ask the question.

Now, here comes full context from SI.com's Jim Trotter:

"Two sources familiar with the situation contend that Ireland's question was nothing more than the logical follow-up to comments Bryant had made about his family. According to the sources, Ireland began the meeting by asking Bryant about his upbringing and his relationship with his siblings. Then he asked what Bryant's father did for a living when Bryant was growing up. The following exchange allegedly ensued:

"My dad was a pimp."

"What did your mom do [for a living]?"

"She worked for my dad."

"Your mom was a prostitute?"

"No, she wasn't a prostitute."

Dan Levy of Sporting News is also reporting that this is how the exchange went, with an assist from The Dan LeBatard's Show Twitter feed.

Trotter goes on to say that Bryant should apologize for characterizing the exchange, and believes that it was a logical follow up question to ask:

"[W]hat if Bryant took them there? I would have connected the dots in the same way that Ireland did based on what Bryant allegedly said. Bottom line: There's a major difference between asking a logical follow-up and knowingly wrapping an insensitive and incendiary accusation in the form of a question. Ireland, I believe, asked a logical follow-up question that was coated with neither malice nor prejudice."

Here is where I diverge.

It might be a logical follow up.

But you still don't have to ask it.

This idea that you have to gauge how a player is going to react to an incendiary comment or question is something that continues to baffle me.

Yes, I understand that I didn't play the game, so I can't understand what goes on in the huddle, blah, blah, blah.

But at some point, what becomes out of bounds?

I thought that the all-powerful NFL had crack security and law enforcement folks on speed dial?

Wouldn't they have already smoked this out in the background check?

So why ask?

Yes, I know: He lied to NCAA investigators because he was nervous, and he comes from a "shaky" background that was the talk of the league at the combine.

Fine. Then hook him up to a polygraph. Hell, hook all of the prospects up to polygraphs and then we'll know for sure if they're lying or not.

I also wonder, as does Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk, why Ireland or the Dolphins didn't talk to Silver before the story ran to give their side of events.

And, if their version of events is "true," why did Ireland apologize after he was identified as asking the question.

Don't tell me he apologized to save face; clearly if he wanted to save any face, he wouldn't have gone there in the first place.

Furthermore, we still actually don't know how the exchange went down. Tone means more than just viewing a written transcript of how the exchange allegedly went. Even if the interview was being transcribed by a stenographer, I would rather have a video tape to hear tone of voice, body language, etc.

Otherwise, it still remains a he said, he said where I am inclined to side with the young, nervous 22 year old than with the professional football executive who should know how to ask a question.