I can’t speak for all NFL fans, but I am still eagerly watching the post-season unfold. I thought for sure I would be less interested after last week’s round of games just because I was certain my New England Patriots would lose to the Baltimore Ravens. But the Pats are still in and I’m still interested.

I can’t help but wonder who Michael Sam is rooting for at this point. Both St. Louis and Dallas are out of the playoffs and both share the distinction of having Sam on their practice squad. Both teams cut Sam from their practice squad, presumably because Sam did not meet their expectations as a player.

Then again, if you ask Michael Sam why he was cut he will give a different answer.

TMZ recently caught up with Sam in the airport and asked him “Do you think that you coming out had anything to do with it, or do you think it was just the level of talent you went up against after college?” To which Sam replied:

“I think I was the SEC Defensive Player of the Year last year … so I don’t think it had to do with talent.”

Obviously Sam thinks he should be playing for an NFL team right now. It’s no doubt irritating that not a single NFL team agrees with Sam’s assessment. But the question is why?

According to Sam the reason he is not on an NFL team is because he “came out” as gay. Sam was the first openly gay player drafted by the NFL. But from the minute Sam made his world-wide declaration, speculation surrounding it abounded.

Yes, Sam received accolades from the likes of Oprah and President Obama. And yes the media made him a household name overnight. This previously – relatively – unknown football player with (according to football analysts) mediocre credentials, suddenly had all but ensured he would be drafted. Could this have been the most brilliant PR stunt in college football history?

That is the very question football analysts were afraid to ask or even discuss. Any mention that Sam revealed his sexual preference in order to gain a spot on an NFL roster would be met with swift retribution from the LGBT supporting public and network higher ups. We simply cannot allow the free exchange of ideas in this country; especially in journalism. So the talking points were stuck to and reporters and analysts “cheered” Sam and his NFL dreams.

But, and this is important, President Obama and Oprah don’t make roster decisions for NFL teams. And NFL teams don’t care about sexuality near as much as they care about talent, winning, and championships. So while Sam’s sexual orientation announcements and draft pick were loudly cheered with media reports galore, his release from both teams were barely a whisper in the days’ news cycle.

(To be fair, there is plenty of Heisman winners and players of the year that never were never drafted, never saw a practice squad much less the NFL. College accolades do not translate to NFL potential.)

Michael Sam’s efforts to insulate himself from being cut failed. It was the same tactic aging basketball player Jason Collins employed. And it failed for Collins as well.

When Jason Collins announced to the world that he was gay the basketball world and media cheered for him. They praised his courage and called him an example. Collins got phone calls from President Obama and other “important” people to tell him how proud they were of him.

Never mind that Collins, also considered a mediocre player, was aging and had no prospects for a continued career in the NBA. Everyone cheered and told us that he deserved to be in the NBA because of his bravery. But, like Michael Sam soon found out, President Obama and other “important people” don’t make roster decisions for NBA teams. NBA teams, like NFL teams, are more interested in talent, winning, and championships. NBA teams are just fine winning the NBA championship with no gay players rather than sitting home during the playoffs with the first ever gay NBA player.

So now Michael Sam and Jason Collins can share a drink and lament with one another.

The question that now must be asked is whether people – athletes or otherwise – will seek to insulate themselves from any negativity by announcing to the world they are gay?

If a low-producing, mediocre employee senses that he will soon be fired will he reveal that he is “gay” as a form of intimidation against his boss? If an employee does something wrong (though not illegal) and believes she will be fired will she discuss her sexual orientation to try and avoid it? Will gay people use their sexuality as a weapon against others, an instrument of insulation against any and all negativity?

I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that such activity is currently happening. Just as those who dare to voice their support for traditional marriage are immediately and viciously attacked, some even losing their jobs (think Brenden Eich). It appears that our society is already giving preferential treatment to homosexual on many levels. And I thought the goal was equality? When did that change?

The problem here is that sexual orientation has nothing whatsoever to do with qualification. Neither Michael Sam nor Jason Collins’ sexual orientation was able to boost their athletic skill. And just as NFL and NBA teams are looking for talent, so too are businesses and companies around America; talent not gained or lost based on sexual orientation.

It’s very dangerous indeed to elevate sexual orientation to a place of reverence. Michael Sam and Jason Collins thought it would insulate them from being cut; they were wrong. If we were wise we would use them as an example of the problems of elevating sexual orientation and seek to make it a non-factor in places of business. Protecting business owners and their ability to make decisions regardless of non-essential factors like sexual orientation is critical to success in the NBA, NFL, or the mom and pop store across the street.