Sage Steele Adamantly Defends ESPN Colleague Sam Ponder After USA Today Columnist Called Her A 'Bigot'

Published|Updated

Being part of a team means having your teammates backs. Sage Steele takes that responsibility very seriously. After USA Today columnist Nancy Armour attacked ESPN host Sam Ponder in a weekend column, Steele fired back.

"Pathetic attack on a WOMAN who is simply fighting for other WOMEN in sports," Steele tweeted Tuesday. " chooses to lead her emotions vs facts. 'Follow the science', right?! When in doubt, just pull the bigot/race card! Comical. Stay strong @samponder .. this is a lonely fight, but it's worth it!"

That's how you get your colleague's back! Steele took the complete opposite approach of Sarah Spain, another ESPN employee.

The funny part is that while Steele blasted Armour's tweet, Spain "liked" the exact, same tweet.

The column in question, penned by Armour, is a ridiculous takedown of Ponder for simply saying we should not allow biological men to compete against women.

The majority of American's agree with Ponder and Steele on this issue.

I rebutted Armour's ridiculous column on Sunday, and you can read that here.

Sage Steele and Sam Ponder, despite working for left-wing ESPN, are pushing back against ridiculous narratives

But the basic point is this: believing that biological men do not belong in women's sports does not make someone a bigot. It makes him or her a rational human being.

If anything, believing that men should be allowed to dominate women's sports makes someone a bigot.

After USA Today columnist Nancy Armour attacked ESPN host Sam Ponder in a weekend column, colleague Sage Steele fired back at Armour.

After USA Today columnist Nancy Armour attacked ESPN host Sam Ponder in a weekend column, colleague Sage Steele fired back at Armour. (Photo by Meg Oliphant/Getty Images)

How sexist is it of Nancy Armour and Sarah Spain -- herself a former track athlete, by the way -- to say that men deserve a spot in women's sports?

I guarantee if Spain had been displaced by a man on her track team she'd sing an entirely different tune.

Armour, too, but I'm guessing she's not much of an athlete. That's probably why she has such insane beliefs about sports in the first place.

Sage Steele is correct: fighting this fight isn't fun. I'm nowhere near the public figure that either Steele or Ponder is, so I'm certainly not comparing us. But I get some of that blowback, too.

I do like when race gets brought into a discussion for no reason. That tells you that the person doesn't have a good argument.

Which, by the way, is what I wrote about Armour: "It’s ironic that Armour accuses Ponder of 'telling on herself.' Armour is using name-calling and ad hominem attacks. She’s the one telling on herself. People who don’t have logical or rational arguments use personal attacks to take down opponents."

Those like Armour and Spain resort to name-calling because they know they're argument doesn't hold any water.

People like Ponder and Steele must press forward through those attacks.

This is a fight worth fighting.

Tags
Written by
Dan began his sports media career at ESPN, where he survived for nearly a decade. Once the Stockholm Syndrome cleared, he made his way to Outkick. He is secure enough in his masculinity to admit he is a cat-enthusiast with three cats, one of which is named “Brady” because his wife wishes she were married to Tom instead of him.