Jim Mora, Brett Hundley appear in UCLA’s ‘You Can Play’ video

Of the more than 10,000 men playing major college football, none have yet come out as gay. UCLA football coach Jim Mora did his part to try and pave the way, appearing in the school’s “You Can Play” video this week.

Mora shows up at 0:20, while star quarterback Brett Hundley and defensive back Librado Barocio join in at 1:35. Women’s gymnastics coach Valorie Kondos Field and women’s basketball coach Cori Close open the video, which also features athletes from numerous other UCLA teams.

The video was follows an on-campus seminar moderated by Outsports’ Cyd Zeigler on Monday, one attended by over 600 athletes and 100 coaches. Mora told Outsports that though he hasn’t addressed the topic of homophobia or a gay player with his team, the Bruins would all welcome one.

“It doesn’t matter to me,” he said. I don’t judge people on their color of their skin, their sexual orientation, their religious beliefs. It doesn’t matter to me.”

The coach added that two of his fraternity brothers from Washington have come out of the closet since they graduated, and is optimistic that NFL would embrace an openly gay athlete. Former Baltimore Raven Brendon Ayanbadejo recently said that multiple pros may be considering coming out.

(h/t Yahoo! Sports)

Share this post:Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditShare on TumblrShare on LinkedInEmail this to someonePrint this page
  • What a surprise.

    • Sam C

      Acceptance is a good thing to promote. We tolerate your idiot comments don’t we?

      • Yep, loud and proud

        • Marc

          You strike me as a conspiracy believer.

      • Protecting others’ reputations, bodies, and property is good.

        Enabling their sinful and self-destructive behavior is not.

        • whatwhatwhat

          Sinful to whom? How do you define sinful in a country that has repeatedly established that it has no state religion, and respects the beliefs of all, even non-believers?

          • You’re confusing objective morality with man-made laws and human opinion.

            Plenty of nations have endorsed or required that which is immoral (Germany of the ’30s and ’40s and all Communist and Islamic states — even the United States — come to mind).

            What is good or evil is such no matter the time or place or who wears the crown.

            All law is the codification of someone’s morality. What will you do when someone finally makes an effective push for legalizing pedophilia? Stand up for what is right or demonize
            those who do?

            A few other points:

            -America had a number of state religions; the Establishment Clause was set up to protect We the People from the federal government.

            -Not all beliefs are respected (some do not deserve it), but every person’s right to believe what they want is protected.

            -The religious tolerance that we enjoy is the direct result of Christianity’s influence in our Founding.

          • whatwhatwhat

            In no sense are “laws against slavery, rape, and murder” founded on the christian religion. The bible specifically discusses ways in which slaves can be owned. Murder is often commanded by God himself (Abraham and Isaac). Rape is not even on the 10 commandments, and is discussed as a crime SO VILE that you must marry the girl you rape. Terrible fate, indeed.

            Your clear misunderstanding of years of jurisprudence and even the founding documents themselves belies a clear agenda.

          • (At least that last bit’s ironic.)

            The Founders were the product of a civilization founded on Christianity. Nearly all of them were Christian. Even the few who were not — Thomas Jefferson’s always mentioned in this context — attended church services in the capitol, used taxpayer money to educate Indians in the Christian religion, and declared that he considered Christ’s teachings more sublime than all others and was sincerely devoted to them.

            And you’re woefully misrepresenting the Old Testament texts (intentionally, no doubt).

            There. Lying didn’t work. Care to try again?

    • Maui13

      Joe are you repressed and closeted?

      • Ask your wife.

        • maze949

          He didn’t have to…already asked your husband

          • Better than your dog

          • maze949

            How would you know, unemployed trOJan?

          • You’re vet is a friend of mine. He said the dog was so lucky you are sooooo small. LMAO

          • maze949

            Did you find work today, jobless trOJan?

          • The only thing I own is YOU

      • maze949

        Yes, he is. He’s the drunk, unemployed trOJan who posts on this blog ALL day (literally). His husband left him weeks ago, and pretending to be a Bruin is how he copes.

  • Equating what a person chooses to do with their skin color is absurd. Behavior is a choice; skin color is genetically-determined.

    Sanctioning immoral behavior is not “respect,” tolerance of evil is no virtue.

    • Marc

      Wow! You almost sound Westboro there!

      • A ridiculous ad hominem is all you’ve got?

        You ought to be embarrassed.

        So, do you have anything substantive to say?

        • Marc

          Referring to one’s sexual preference as you did is on par with those Ids. It is 2013, and if you haven’t noticed the wave of humanity passing you by on their way to a higher ground, then, well, keep your head firmly planted where it may be.

          Coach deserves a high five for his courage. I, myself, am a straight man and I have no problems either. I do, however, have problems with people who believe in sixteenth century religious dogma and people who cling to guns and religion and people who identify themselves as “truthers”.

          Ad hominem all you want, it is backwards thinking. I don’t care what sixteenth century bs cosigns it.

          • (So, sodomy is “higher ground.”

            Well done.)

            I asked if you had anything more substantive to offer than name-calling, and you denigrate:

            -the 1500s

            -the God-given and unalienable right to self-defense enshrined in this little thing called the “Constitution”

            -religious faith in general

            -Christianity in particular

            -those who think 9/11 was an inside job.

            (I happen to agree that “truthers” are not dealing honestly with the facts.)

            Thanks for proving my point.

            Is there any “sexual preference” you would consider less than “higher ground”? What about zoophilia? Is that good? Polygyny? Incest? Pedophilia? Necrophilia?

            All those are good and “courageous” in your book, because you’re “straight and problem-free,” right?

            (Now, if you disapprove of any of those “preferences,” then you’re a bigot, right? Right?

            What is your obsession with the 16th Century? And how is pointing out your shameless use of ad hominems an ad hominem?

          • Santo, these guys are proof of the “pussification” of America. You are correct. If Coach Lessa told them murder, or rape in the case of BB or WP, was ok, they’d agree.

          • Joe Blow,

            You’re not endorsing me, but using this “debate” as another chance to snipe at UCLA.

            Be honest.

          • Not really. It’s the best of both worlds. Look at our country, our world. Everything has to be PC. What you said is correct. Please don’t try to figure me out before asking.

          • While I abhor false dichotomies, past experience has shown your eagerness to antagonize. You’ll have to forgive me if I doubt your sincerity.

            I’ll believe your good will if you revise the “Coach Lessa” remark out of your comment. Leave it at “You are correct.”

          • Just because I think most of the bloggers on this site are full of it does not mean I cannot be sincere.

          • maze949

            Why do I think Sandy M. and Blow Joe secretly have designs on one another? It’s uncanny…

          • Because you are gay.

          • maze949

            Takes one to know one, my little unemployed condom

          • Really? Ask your wife.

          • Marc

            There’s the problem right there!

            You equate homosexuality with zoophelia, pedophilia and necrophilia?!?!

            That is the backwards thinking sixteenth century dogma that we who choose to move to a, yes, higher ground, have come to abhor from so called “traditionalists” or “fundamentalists”.

            You may claim that I trampled things, but I know of many Christian churches that are being much more inclusive and open to the twenty-first century.

            You got it! People who believe in sixteenth century dogma, cling to their guns and believe in “false flag” are really one in the same. Obama was right about some Americans when he described those who cling to their religion and their guns.

            That is not an attack on gun owners or an attack on religious people. It’s a clear observation of the people who so cling to both those ideals that they become irrational and full of hate.

          • I see that critical thinking isn’t your game, Marc.

            My point was not to equate those practices (though they are all evil to varying degrees); it was that you’re a logically-inconsistent hypocrite.

            You disapprove of at least some of those practices, don’t you? What right do you have to judge? What makes your morality any better (or different) than theirs?

            You are deranged. I point out millennia-old morality (not the sixteenth century; I see history isn’t your cup of tea, either), and you call that “irrational and full of hate.” I refer to — by any definition of the term — abnormal behavior, and you attack “God-and-gun-clingers.”

            Where did I say “trample”? You’re not even responding to what I write.

            Is this what UCLA produces nowadays? Brainwashed bigots unable to read or reason themselves out of a paper bag?

            So, you ducked the question (again): Are any of those practices immoral? If you think so, then you’re an intolerant Neanderthal from the sixteenth-century.

          • Maui13

            Yes you are

          • Maui13

            Nothing better than a BBBJ from a hot stud

          • Just ask Maze

          • maze949

            Says the guy with the crush on Jim Mora…hence the constant trolling and no meaningful existence.

          • Why did you exclude “Womanizing? Adultery? Polygyny?”

            Is it because you’re a liar who had to twist my comment to fit your ridiculous talking points? Are you even aware of how confused you are?

          • jpkb85

            Marc, quit wasting time on this Neanderthal. He is getting left behind as surely as all his cavemen forefathers did,

          • So, approving of sodomy makes one “progressive”?

            That’s progress, but toward what?

            Name-calling, the last resort of cowards.

          • Maui13

            You must be proud

          • Brevity is the soul of wit.

            That was brief, at least.

          • maze949

            And you’re a homophobe…we get it.

          • How is it even possible to have an “irrational fear of the same”?

            Really, you’re just trying to silence any criticism of your depravity, which makes you illiterate and pathologically-dishonest.

    • ThaiMex

      Santi….does your B.S. while on The Soap Box, come in “pill” form? I know lots of people have the need to take the occasional “sleep aid”. You might be onto something.

      • Yet, you’re riveted.

        Is trite mockery the best you’ve got?

        (I suppose it’s better than maze. All he can muster is the digital equivalent of a wet willy.)

  • TK Bruin

    Can’t we enjoy our football without all this gay crap?

    • Marc

      Sure you can. You could have seen the headline, or read a few sentences and saw it wasn’t for you, then you could have moved on to the next article or anything, really.

      But, you chose to stop and make a comment.

      I find that odd.

      • You dislike TK’s remarks, but you chose to stop and make a comment.

        I find that odd.

        (For the nuance-challenged, that’s a subtle poke pointing out the irony of someone’s judging others’ morality.)

        • Nothing but crickets, Marc?

          • maze949

            “Morally untenable”? Take your sanctimonious, intolerant BS back to Westboro. This is a blog for UCLA Athletics, not your holier-than-thou agenda. Tell your story walking…

          • (Speaking of “sanctimonious, intolerant BS.”)

            How is evaluating a behavior as immoral “intolerant”? How is it “holier-than-thou”? Whom am I condemning? Where do I state that I’m “holier” than anyone else?

            You’re not honest.

            Are you seriously arguing that no behavior can ever be judged? Of course not, since you’re defaming me for pointing Marc’s utter lack of intellectual integrity (a characteristic you possess, apparently).

            What you really mean is that only those who agree with you can be tolerated.

            So much for the Freedoms of Speech and Conscience. So much for Tolerance.

            Thanks, Adolf!

            (And if this is a ‘blog for athletics, why is UCLA trying to normalize sodomy? If you want to blame someone, blame Wang and Mora. They brought it up.)

          • maze949

            Once again, a blog for Athletics…quit proselytizing, Bible-thumper. Please stop embarrassing yourself.

          • Others can demonize, lie, and question, but I can’t respond.

            You’re such a Trojan. (No offense to Trojans.)

          • maze949

            By the way, weren’t you hurling racial epithets at Jack Wang right after he took over for Miguel? (which you’ve since deleted). Yeah, you have wonderful credibility around here, bigot.

          • You are such a liar.

            I never utter racial epithets.

          • maze949

            What a loosely-woven web of simplistic contradictory hate messages you’ve developed. Thank GOD, you’re not a Bruin alum!

          • How nescient.

          • maze949

            Still not a Bruin alum…glory be to “God”. Go thump your Bible somewhere else, moron.

    • What do you think ucla football IS?

  • Rob M

    It’s a good message and sentiment, but what is up with the production value of that video??? Were they purposely trying to make it look like it was made in the 1970’s? The music was just awful. All it was missing was some blocky graphics and those horrible, “Mr. Wizard” video transitions to make it into a VHS-era Public Service Announcement.

  • WEB_Dupree

    Hey, Amillienialist is back, debating about the gays and throwing in an anti-Muslim reference! It’s like old times on this blog. Where is Charlie Bucket to condemn the homophobia? Oh, that’s right, he’s busy trolling Wolf’s blog.

    ThaiMex, it’s up to you! You probably only post here once for every 10 times you post on Wolf’s blog, but make this that one time in 10!

    • “debating about the gays”?

      I have nothing against homosexuals — I’m a sinner, too — but if someone’s going to define their entire sense of self-worth by their depravity and then try to jam that down our throats (pun unavoidable), I’m going to point out the impropriety of that.

      As for “anti-Muslim”? I quoted Muhammad. You call that “anti-Muslim,” which shows *your* opinion of that command.

      What are you, racist?

      WEB, precise and lucid, as always.

      • WEB_Dupree

        Me, racist? But some of my best friends are jihadis!

        I was addressing world-renowned trolls Bucket and ThaiMex, not you. You can just keep on doin’ your thing. Over the years, I’ve come to appreciate the free-wheeling nature of the threads on these Daily News blogs (especially Wolf’s), and I get a kick out of watching someone hijack (no pun intended!) these discussions.

        Actually, you and Nobs (I mean Joe Blow) should team up like a mismatched pair in a buddy-cop movie. Just watch your mouth when it comes to Mike Garrett!

  • catdaddy

    All religions are cults. Stop arguing over books that were written overr 3500 yearss ago!

    • Only Job was written before 1500 B.C.

      I wish this were a debate about the texts; so far it’s mostly name-calling in defense of sodomy.

      • Marc

        That is some sexy talk. You have a great literary sense; I must give you that.

        That, however, does not set you above the rest of us.

        You’ll get far more enjoyment out if life if you just let your hair down.

        • There you go again, Marc.

          Nowhere have I tried to “set myself above” anyone.

          I merely made a general statement on Coach Mora’s comments posted and highlighted by Wang, to which you responded with slanderous name-calling.

      • Maui13

        Sodomy doesn’t need to be defended against close-minded bigots

        • It’s certainly being defended by close-minded bigots.

          • maze949

            Pot meet kettle…your “logic” is as scatterbrained as all get-out. Go get a job, Bruin-wannabe.

          • That’s the best you’ve got.

            How sad.

      • Marc

        Literary questions for you, sir Santiago:

        The Bible states that slavery is fine so long as your slaves come from adjacent countries. So slavery is cool?

        Where did Jesus find guys named Matthew, Mark, Luke and John while living in the Middle East?

        Why isn’t there anything in the Bible about Jesus during his teenage years?

        • Marc, you haven’t had the decency to apologize for libeling me, and you never dealt forthrightly with the issues raised.

          Now, you’re changing the subject.

          (However, since I like that subject…)

          The Bible does not state that “slavery is fine.” There were provisions under the Mosaic Covenant (the contract between YHWH and Israel into which the ancient Hebrews entered voluntarily) that were intended to limit the deleterious effects of slavery, which was ubiquitous in the ancient world.

          If you consider also the New Testament, you find St. Paul advising Christian slaves to serve their owners well (primarily in an effort to evangelize them).

          Most importantly, you find Paul declaring that “it is for freedom that Christ has set you free,” and “if you can gain your freedom, do so,” the seed of Liberty that blossomed in America’s Founding.

          Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are Anglicized versions of their names. The Apostles were all Jews (which makes historical “Christian” anti-Semitism not only evil, but absurd).

          (A side note: Jesus “found” Matthew and John; Mark was Peter’s disciple and Luke was a physician who set out to verify the facts reported about Christ by interviewing known living eyewitnesses at the time.)

          As for Jesus’ teenage years, you’d have to ask the authors. My sense of it is that the Gospel writers focused on what was most important: Christ’s origins and birth, His public ministry (the last few years before the Crucifixion), and His death and resurrection (Passion Week).

      • maze949

        What’s your defense of idiocy?

        • There is none, which is why you resort to nescient name-calling.

          • maze949

            UCLA ATHLETICS, FOR A UCLA ATHLETICS BLOG…you’re not an alum, be gone!

          • Guest

            What are you afraid of?

          • maze949

            I like how you registered 5 different screen-names to vote “down” my comments. What a weirdo…

          • Everyone votes down your d u m b comments

          • maze949

            Especially “dumb” Figueroa HS grads…how’s that woman-punching investigation going? Did you find work today, drunk slob?

          • Delayed. Working on water polo rape case

          • Your entire idea of “debate” consists of name-calling, slander, and outright lies.

            Must be a Trojan.

          • When name-calling and libel don’t work, try censorship!

            (What a Trojan.)

          • maze949

            Says the guy who never received a degree from UCLA.

          • Heard they closed down YOUR school today

          • maze949

            I heard you went to the best little whorehouse on Figueroa, SUC Tech

          • I did, your house.

      • Spedjones

        I’m always intrigued by people so upset by others’ sodomy. Even trolls.

        • You’ll notice that the foaming-at-the-mouth here is from the pro-sodomy zealots.

          • Spedjones

            I don’t believe supporting the rights of people who enjoy so dome necessarily equates to a pro-sodomy position. I’m pro-choice but would never choose abortion myself.

          • I did not intend to imply that you are pro-sodomy; it was just a little hyperbole in response to those enraged at a position they don’t hold (some might call that “bigotry”).

            I would say that it is impossible to be morally-neutral on some issues. For example, can a moral person say, “I’m pro-choice on slavery, but I would never enslave anyone myself,” or, “I’m pro-choice on rape, but I would never rape anyone myself”?

            Ironically, I’m not for harming or discriminating against someone because of their sexual proclivities; I merely stated that promoting homosexual behavior as morally-neutral or even praiseworthy is wrong. It’s some of those who dislike my position who have gone apoplectic.

            Maybe they’re just enraged at what they perceive to be a Christian/Conservative viewpoint. In which case, what a disservice has been done to them by their “mentors.”

  • Maui13


    Who is endorsing sodomy and why are you so hung up on what people do in their bedrooms? And who decided that sodomy is a “bad” thing? You’re argument is so infuriating and intellectually poor.

    • Your questions (and conclusion) indicate that you haven’t really read my comments.

      What someone does in private is none of my business. When someone forces their private immorality on everyone, then it becomes everyone’s business.

      • Spedjones

        I missed the part where people are forcing it on you. Are you being sodomized right now? Did you catch gay when you saw the video?

        • With his ranting and raving like a pathetic lunatic, at least maze provides some entertainment value.

  • Geezus Christ!!! if Jesus were here he would line up all the anti-gay sanctimonious bible thumpers and kick you all in the crotch!!

    in any case the literature clearly shows religion has nothing to do with anti-gay sentiments, its almost exclusively the dominion of latent self loathing homosexuals and pure dumbbells!!

    this debate is over anyway, why not argue about the Earth being flat?? at UCLA if you can play, you can play!!!

    at Southern Cal they say: if you can play, you get paid!!

    • At ucla, if u can play, you’re g a y

    • Another illiterate, name-calling, mendacious, anti-religious bigot? Who can’t tell the difference between advocating sexual perversion and an observable fact of Nature?

      Did I pass out and wake up at Bruinsnation?

    • Jethro G Sabbath


      Is this Matamoros your latest creation? It seems he is only here to provoke others, just like most of your other characters.