In a surprising turn of events during the 2025 NFL Draft, tight end Tyler Warren became the latest victim of prank calls similar to the ones experienced by quarterback Shedeur Sanders, drawing scrutiny to the league's handling of player information. Both incidents, reportedly linked by the same area code, have raised questions about privacy and professionalism in the drafting process. As reported by Jordan Schultz of Fox Sports and picked up across various platforms, the NFL is currently investigating how Sanders' private phone number was leaked, especially since he had reportedly received a unique phone from Boost Mobile that was meant solely for league communications.
Sanders, who was expected to be a high draft pick, saw his stock plummet as he remained undrafted through the first three rounds. His shock intensified when he received a prank call purportedly from New Orleans Saints general manager Mickey Loomis. The prankster led him on, saying he would be selected but would have to wait longer. The moment became a pivotal point in Sanders' draft night and raised pressing concerns about how he was perceived by teams. Later on, he was selected by the Cleveland Browns in the fifth round, which many are interpreting as a mixture of his declining on-field performance and potential off-field antics as a significant factor in his draft stock drop.
Browns coach Kevin Stefanski called the individuals behind the prank "morons," pointing to a broader cultural issue regarding how young athletes are treated and respected during such significant life moments. While Sanders himself stated that he wasn’t overly affected by the prank, he did describe it as a "childish act" and chose to focus on his potential start with the Browns and not dwell on what was clearly a distressing situation.
Moreover, the incidents also open the door for larger conversations around the pressure on high-profile sons of athletes, like Sanders, who faces extra scrutiny and defined expectations. With Sanders coached by his father, Pro Football Hall of Famer Deion Sanders, many evaluators have been unconsciously drawing comparisons and questioning whether they are looking beyond potential solely based on preconceived notions regarding his upbringing and professional attitude.
The NFL is grappling with how to allow players to maintain privacy while promoting their visibility through the draft process. Questions remain about how this intrusive behavior may affect a player’s mental health and overall readiness to step into the spotlight—an element that the league must address, especially amid growing sentiments about mental health in professional sports. Despite being drafted, Sanders' path forward bore marks of an arduous journey rather than a celebrated achievement, and the implications of this draft experience could resonate for years to come in how young athletes navigate their routes to professional leagues.
The prank calls not only bring to light the vulnerability of young prospects but also highlight the daunting pressures that come with expectations. It serves as a reminder for the NFL to prioritize the well-being of its players as they step into a world where they are often treated less as young adults taking their first steps into professional careers and more like pawns in a money-driven industry. As the league explores further reforms, one can only hope that future drafts may find a balance where the excitement of opportunity doesn't have to be marred by such negative experiences.
AD
AD
AD
AD
Bias Analysis
Bias Score:
45/100
Neutral
Biased
This news has been analyzed from 23 different sources.
Bias Assessment: The reporting on Sanders' situation appears to present factual occurrences, such as his drafting process and the reaction from teams and coaches. However, there is an implicit bias in the way narratives around Sanders' character and the thematic elements of privilege and expectation related to his father's stature are drawn. While factual, the portrayal of Sanders can reflect judgment from those within the league and a sense of disdain towards how he constructs his professional journey. Thus, the article emerges somewhat neutral in reporting but carries an undertone of skepticism, leading to a moderate bias score.
Key Questions About This Article
