By Lambers Fisher
The roar of the NFL Draft has faded, the hopeful cries of newly selected players echoing into the professional arena. For approximately 250 college athletes, a lifelong dream has materialized, the chance to continue playing the game they love at the highest level. Among them, a select few, the perceived elite, anticipate not just being chosen, but being lauded as foundational pillars for their future teams. These are the players expected to make an immediate impact, perhaps even to lead legions of seasoned professionals.
This year’s draft, however, carried a particular undercurrent of scrutiny, largely focused on the experience of one player: Shedeur Sanders, son of the legendary Deion Sanders. A quarterback who demonstrably revitalized a struggling college program, transforming them into a nationally recognized winning team, Sanders was undoubtedly drafted, securing his place in the NFL. Yet, despite widespread recognition of his exceptional collegiate performance, he was not a top pick, not even within the coveted first hundred selections. Instead, Shedeur Sanders was the 144th player chosen.
The reaction was palpable. Professional players, coaches, media pundits, and passionate fans voiced their bewilderment. Speculation ran rampant, seeking to explain this unexpected outcome. Among the various theories floated, one gained significant traction: racial bias. The suggestion that Sanders’ draft position was unjustly influenced by prejudice ignited a conversation about a potentially deeper issue within the sport and, by extension, society itself.
Beyond the gridiron, I frequently encounter questions about navigating tense cross-cultural dynamics in the workplace and the underlying issues that fuel division in our communities. While I am not a sports analyst, the factors at play in Sanders’ draft experience, and the potential interpretations of those factors, resonate far beyond the realm of football, touching upon issues that can impact us all.
To navigate these complex dilemmas, it’s crucial to consider the pervasive influence of implicit bias, both in the world of sports and in our everyday lives.
Let’s establish a foundational understanding: bias, in its simplest form, is a tendency, inclination, or partiality, either for or against something, based on factors other than objective merit. Implicit, or unconscious, bias takes this a step further, operating outside of our conscious awareness. It’s a subtle leaning shaped by our experiences, cultural conditioning, and the information we’ve absorbed throughout our lives.
Based on this definition, it’s imperative to acknowledge that we all harbor biases. These inclinations often stem from a natural comfort with the familiar and a degree of unease with the unfamiliar. While the specific triggers for these biases vary greatly from individual to individual, the responsibility to understand and manage their influence rests with each of us. Furthermore, as a collective, we must hold each other accountable when individual self-awareness falls short and results in unwarranted harm.
With this framework in mind, let’s consider some key perspectives:
Consideration #1: Sometimes, it truly isn’t about you.
Returning to the NFL draft, the narrative of racial bias surrounding Shedeur Sanders’ draft position is compelling for many. The historical context of Black quarterbacks facing heightened scrutiny and unfair stereotypes lends credence to this theory. However, another perspective warrants consideration: the practical realities of NFL team needs. Many teams already have established quarterbacks, players they have invested in and built their offensive strategies around. For these teams, drafting another quarterback, regardless of talent, might not align with their immediate needs.
Furthermore, football is a nuanced game, and different quarterbacks possess different skill sets and playing styles. A team might genuinely believe that another player’s particular strengths are a better fit for their existing offensive scheme, a decision rooted purely in football strategy.
Even if one believes that racial bias played a significant role in Sanders’ draft position, it’s difficult to dismiss the possibility that for some teams, the decision to pass was based on factors entirely unrelated to race.
Similarly, in our own lives, when we face rejection or are overlooked for an opportunity, our first instinct might be to attribute it to unfair bias. However, it’s a crucial reminder that not every instance of not being chosen is automatically a sign of implicit prejudice. Sometimes, despite our qualifications and desires, we simply might not be what the decision-makers are looking for at that particular time.
Before immediately concluding that implicit bias is at play, it’s essential to explore the stated motivations and needs behind the decision-making process. If our skills and experiences genuinely don’t align with those requirements, then while disappointment is understandable, accepting their choice and moving forward is often the most productive path.
Consideration #2: Sometimes it is about you, but not for the reasons you think.
Beyond the specter of overt racial bias, other subtle factors might have influenced Shedeur Sanders’ draft position. Some analysts speculated that NFL teams, while acknowledging his talent, might have been wary of the external factors that came with drafting him. The intense scrutiny and pressure from his prominent father, Deion Sanders, or the potential for fan unrest if the starting quarterback struggled and the highly touted backup remained on the sidelines, could have been deterrents for some organizations. These are not necessarily rooted in racial animosity, but rather in a team’s desire to control their environment and avoid perceived complications.
Similarly, in our own careers, when we feel passed over for a promotion or a job opportunity, the immediate thought of implicit bias can be powerful. While it’s a valid consideration, it’s also possible that other, less obvious factors were at play. Perhaps another candidate possessed similar core skills but also demonstrated superior leadership qualities or a stronger ability to thrive in a less-than-ideal team environment. These considerations, while potentially subjective, can legitimately influence hiring and promotion decisions. A preference for a candidate who can elevate the performance of those around them is also a potential factor that organizations sometimes value.
Consideration #3: Sometimes, it is precisely the implicit bias it appears to be.
While it’s vital to avoid jumping to conclusions and to explore alternative explanations, we must also confront the uncomfortable reality that sometimes, the negative and discouraging possibility of implicit bias is exactly what it appears to be.
In the case of Shedeur Sanders, while factors like team needs and perceived external pressures might have played a role, the historical context of how Black quarterbacks have been evaluated in the NFL cannot be ignored. Despite the fact that African-American athletes constitute a significant portion of the league (approximately 53%), a long-standing narrative has questioned their intellectual capacity to lead and subjected them to heightened scrutiny regarding their character, both on and off the field.
Historically, non-Black athletes have often been lauded for their confidence, even bordering on arrogance, as long as their on-field performance justified it. In contrast, Black athletes, like Shedeur Sanders, have often received the implicit message that their confidence might be perceived as a liability. This suggests a double standard where humility and a willingness to defer to predominantly white ownership and coaching are the desired traits for Black quarterbacks.
This subtle but significant difference in evaluation criteria, where confidence is celebrated in one group and viewed with suspicion in another, exemplifies how implicit bias can manifest. It forms a key part of the argument for those who believe Sanders’ draft position reflects an unwarranted prejudice.
It is crucial to reiterate that no athlete is entitled to be drafted, nor is any team inherently biased for not selecting a particular player. However, just as non-biased explanations for draft decisions are plausible and deserve consideration, so too does the possibility of implicit bias warrant serious examination.
The critical question becomes: are we solely focused on assuming the best intentions at all costs and consequently dismissing complaints of injustice because they are inconvenient or uncomfortable, or are we willing to consider the possibility of less admirable motivations and ask the necessary follow-up questions to discern the truth?
Similarly, in our daily lives, situations that feel tainted by racial bias might indeed have other explanations. However, we must also be open to the possibility that our initial instincts are correct, and that we are witnessing or experiencing the very injustice that it appears to be.
The ultimate question is: what are we willing to do about it? Are we committed to reflexively dismissing concerns of bias to avoid discomfort, or are we prepared to listen to all perspectives and honestly confront any discrepancies that arise?
The goal is not to engage in punitive action but rather to identify and address any unjustified and unfair treatment, and helping cultivate a system that provides truly equal opportunities where merit dictates outcome.
Finally, it’s important to address a potential misinterpretation. The acknowledgement of the value of merit is not an endorsement of anti-DEI efforts in favor of what many claim to be new merit-based initiatives. After all, the very purpose of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives is to dismantle the biases that prevent individuals with genuine merit from being recognized and afforded equal opportunities. The flawed logic lies in the assumption that professionals from minority groups inherently lack merit. If that is a concern, I encourage you to spend time in self-reflection on the origins of such assumptions and an honest investigation into whether reality supports them.
In conclusion, whether we are athletes on the field or individuals navigating the complexities of the wider world, we must commit to examining our own biases and acknowledging their influence. We must resist the urge to dismiss or negatively prejudge what is unfamiliar. We should hope for the best in others’ intentions but also rigorously test reality at every turn. And when we uncover unfair treatment, let us be active participants in fostering the change that ultimately benefits everyone.
Lambers Fisher is a licensed marriage & family therapist, award-winning author, viral TEDx speaker, and host of The Diversity Dude Podcast. Disappointed by the lack of culturally competent mental health care, Lambers has spent over a decade providing positive and shame-free multicultural awareness and diversity training for helping professionals in a variety of fields as they work to meet the greatest variety of needs possible.