Deletion of O. J. Murdock

Comment: Some people stated previously that redirects are only |cheap if they exist already.  Therefore, I created a redirect to History of the Tennessee Titans#2012 and changed it back to what it was before.  Now the redirect "exists", and is "cheap" to keep.  Therefore, this article should be redirected in a similar manner to Pete Hoekstra 2012 Superbowl advertisement in Michigan.  If not, my three bullet points above need to be addressed
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Redirects are cheap (WP:CHEAP)

Comment: per . I can't see how it fails the GNG criteria. 1) ''sources address the subject directly in detail'': The two cited sources at CNN and USA Today do this. These are not trivial mentions; they're directly about the subject of the article. 2) ''Reliability'': these sources are no doubt reliable; they're national news outlets. 3) ''Sources'': The sources are obviously secondary. 4) ''Independent of the subject'': These sources clearly aren't the subject's family, friends or anyone else close to him; they're national news outlets. 5) ''Presumed'': This is where the debate should be...this isn't about GNG, really, but about perhaps what Wikipedia is not. To recap, this fails  no question and passes  up to the fifth criterion. But does it pass ? I'm inclined to say it does, because this is not a memorial in the usual sense. I think because the player was a member of an NFL team at the time of his death, his demise adds to his notability. It may also be premature to delete the article because his notability could be enhanced if it turns out his suicide was in some way related to hits/concussions sustained in football: several recent cases of suicides have highlighted the head trauma that can result from playing the sport, although this player is younger than the others
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NGRIDIRON||WP:GNG||WP:NOTMEMORIAL)