The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Earlier, Gase announced that Dolphins players must stand for the anthem or remain in the tunnel.  But shortly after that, the NFL issued a memo saying that all players "should" be out on the field standing for the anthem (with further clarification on "should" possibly forthcoming).

Ross has generally been one of the more player-supportive owners on this subject.  It seems likely that he would have been aware that this memo was coming.  Did he get out in front and (have Gase) tell players that they can stand in the tunnel to give them some leeway to continue protesting?  I guess we'll see on Sunday.

The NFL owners are meeting next week to discuss it so this weekend will probably be the same as last week per each team  ... meaning the three Phins players will be in the tunnel during the anthem. After next week I'd expect something league wide unless Ross implements a Jerry Jones initiative. Based on his history I don't see this happening.

As well I don't think Ross had anything to do with Gase's new rule ... other than approving it.  I really think Gase is the kind of coach who would want the players to be out there as he wouldn't want to add any more distractions to the team so I'm guessing this new Dolphins rule came directly from him.

I think that the NFLs best path here is to take no action.   That way, it's up to each individual to represent himself how he sees fit and they don't have to be involved or piss off anyone -- just fall back to the CBA allowing for it.  Eventually this will die down as uninteresting.  I pretty much thought that the kneeling story was over until Pence re-ignited it with his thing.

But it isn't going away. It's talked about every single game and that's a distraction the NFL doesn't like. There is genuine concern that the popularity of the product is suffering because of this.

The easy way out for both owners and players is to shift the protests away from the anthem by providing the players with a sufficiently prominent soap box. As always, the devil is in the details and the league will have a hard time convincing players unless there are some very concrete and long term elements to the plan. One of the better suggestions I've read about is to dedicate one or two weeks every season to these issues (however you want to define them), similar to Crucial Catch, Breast Cancer Awareness, etc. There would probably need to be some associated activities, but something like that could allow both owners and players to walk away winners. The players can say they got what they wanted and the owners can say that they always agreed with the sentiment behind the protesting players, just not how it was done.

If done right, it could actually even make something of a difference in the broad scheme of things.

fyo, as I see it your plan has a critical flaw.

The real, underlying problem here is that many NFL fans fundamentally disagree with the position these players are taking: that there is a problem with the way law enforcement treats minorities in America.  (This shouldn't be too surprising (http://images.thepostgame.com/sites/default/files/How-Politics-Correlate-With-Sports-Interests_FULL.jpg).) They believe that these protests are just as illegitimate as the rest of the Black Lives Matter protests around the country.  Therefore, any solution by the league that gives a voice to players to express that opinion will be rejected, and instead of saying that "players are disrespecting the troops," we will return to the previous "players are disrespecting law enforcement" complaints that occurred when NBA and WNBA players wore t-shirts in protest.

This is why most solutions will not work.  To approach the situation as if the problem we need to address is the anthem or the troops or the flag can never work, because players aren't protesting those things.  They are protesting injustice at the hands of law enforcement.  Thinking that an officially sanctioned method to protest police brutality will make this go away is like thinking that the way to address Rosa Parks' protest was to build more buses so that black people would no longer have to sit at the back.  The issue then was not about transportation, just like it's not currently about The Star Spangled Banner, or even kneeling.

Keep in mind Kaepernick originally started kneeling after speaking with a local veteran to try to figure out a way to protest that would not be seen as disrespectful; in every other circumstance, kneeling is seen as a sign of EXTRA respect.  It is seen as disrespect here solely because of the issue he is protesting.  If Kaep had instead said that he was kneeling for the anthem because the VA is underfunded and there are homeless veterans in every major city, he would have been cheered wildly.

Even the Dolphins' solution of having protesting players remain out of sight and come to the field after the anthem ultimately won't work, because the objectors will know why those players aren't on the field, and will continue to complain.  The only solution that will "work" is for all athletes to shut up and completely stop talking about it.  Not on the field, not in press conferences, not in magazine articles, not on Twitter.  They must cease discussion of this issue.  Then, and only then, will the objectors be happy.

I think it's perfectly possible to couch the solution in a way that doesn't feel divisive and would be unobjectionable to the VAST majority of both players, viewers and "NFL fans" (i.e. anyone with a twitter account). There are always going to be some vocal people in the last group that are going to be pissed off no matter what.

The NFL doesn't need to come up with a solution that UNIFIES and HEALS all rifts. What it needs is to separate the protests from the anthem.

I think pretty much every single team has a "community outreach" program of some sort. These programs cover a lot of different things, including events with local law enforcement, Martin Luther King Jr. Day (at least for the Dolphins' program), and a 9/11 "National Day of Service and Remembrance". Just this week the Dolphins (plus Goodell) did ride-alongs with Broward Sheriff's Office as part of program called RISE (Ross Initiative for Sports Equality), which has a stated goal of improving race relations.

My point is that the NFL need "merely" supply an appropriate alternative soap box, it need not support every opinion voiced from said soap box. A few weeks dedicated to community outreach in various forms could be part of that -- and could certainly be couched in a way that no one (barring the twitter trolls) would find objectionable.

Given the general conservative predisposition of the average NFL fan, I suspect that a league-sanctioned venue for player criticism of law enforcement would cause no less blowback than what we are seeing today.  It's one thing to have ungrateful players behaving poorly; it's quite another for the league itself to officially give the players a podium from which to attack the police.

Dave I don't know how you thought it was over. Ratings are constantly dropping. I cancelled my Sunday Ticket as well as many other people I know because I was sick of the whole thing. Why is it such a bad thing to just want to watch football? It's supposed to be a distraction from the Trump vs the View mentality and not just another dumb arse argument we are forced to endure.   

That's the thing CF, I've been going out to watch mostly so I don't hear a lot of it. Are they really talking about it on the broadcasts that much? Is anyone really forced to hear about it during game coverage? I expected most of the talk comes during the Monday Morning QB shows where they like to hear themselves talk.

I don't know. Maybe because I'm conservative and that's a lot of who I surround myself with but I felt it hasn't let up since the season started with the whole "someone sign Cap or you're racist thing". The Trump comment was just a speed bumb as far as I know.

^ It's interesting that you see the conversation that way.

I always saw it as Kaep probably had enough talent to make a roster, but it was a distraction risk.  And then the double standard of allowing certain types of distractions (like domestic violence or whatever), but not this.

I would say that if these millionaire protesters want to protest. They should do it on their own time and their own dime. Don't ram it down the throats of people that don't give a shit what they're talking about. When you force things like your opinion or views on people, they usually don't usually like it. You know like those goofy bible thumpers that try to convert you over to their magical man in the sky.

Let these attention seeking clowns go out and get their own audience for their message/protest and stop riding on the back of the NFL's paying customers. I have a feeling that if they had to go out and actually do that on their own, most people would tell them to fuck off. Half the population or more doesn't agree with them. That's not going to change and they already know that. They're just trying to agitate whitey, in which they have succeeded. Good job guys, now STFU and go play your child's game for millions of dollars. 

I'd say the vast majority of the talk about the protests comes from political commentators, 24hr sports networks (TV and radio) filling their content day, or fans on social media.  During the game broadcasts, it's rarely addressed, if ever.  And obviously, if you're physically at a game you have to go out of your way to notice it; if you are watching a flag or the person singing (as you should be) then you won't even see what the players are or aren't doing.

If you just want to watch an NFL game, these protests do not affect your experience.  If you want to watch 4 hours of ESPN talking about football, they will affect you somewhat.  If you want to watch 4 hours of cable news, they will affect you a great deal.

BLM protesters are on their own time and their own dime.  So was Jemele Hill when she was on Twitter.  It doesn't matter where or when they do it, it's always the wrong place and the wrong time.

The only effective way to placate those who object to protests is for protesters to shut up and go home.  This has always been the case (https://storage.synaptic.att.com/rest/objects/4a08bf2eb11f2e1504f50415291d2504f600629b557c?uid=7be5f8cb9eb14188b0e40ae93aca2099%2FkingcenterATpalantirDOTnet&expires=1590984000&signature=5rLA8sfsmel9IStFkBTp1boTrk0%3D).

So if everyone's watching the flag and the singer and doesn't even notice the protests. What good are they? I mean, if as you say, these protests shouldn't be getting any attention. Then without any attention, what are they for?

Even with lots of attention, how is a millionaire grown man kneeling before playing a child's game going to help their perceived issue? Actually, the only issue related to this whole clusterfuck that people are talking about is the kneeling itself. In that respect they have already failed in their quest as social justice warriors.

I did say they generate plenty of attention outside of the game: on cable news, social media, etc.  My point was that those who say "I just want to watch a football game without all of this stuff about politics" can easily do so, as the actual game itself is almost entirely unaffected.

That's why the Dolphins' recent action won't make a difference.  Having the players stay out of sight during the anthem won't change anything, as those criticizing the players don't actually care about standing vs. kneeling; they care about players using the anthem as a vehicle to protest an issue the critics consider illegitimate.  I think all of us can agree that players who stand during the anthem, but in the locker room, will be criticized just as much as those kneeling on the field are today.  Again, it was never about kneeling.

Or maybe no one gives a shit except a small but vocal minority of the population. BLM protesters are free to protest. However, I don't think that blocking traffic and shouting to "fry 'em like bacon" lends itself to winning people over to hear their message. Especially people that don't give a shit to begin with.

As far as Jemele Hill goes. She used social media to encourage people to boycott NFL/advertisers. Her employer ESPN has a very lucrative partnership with the NFL and their advertisers. Not to mention that this is her second time in violation of ESPN's social media guidelines in 2 months. Furthermore, after her first fuck up last month. ESPN chief John Skipper sent a memo that said "ESPN is about sports" and that it is "not a political organization." So it really highlights the fact that most people don't want politics in their sports. Maybe she should chose between being a sports bimbo or a politician. Because trying to be both isn't going to turn out good for her in the long run.

Like I said earlier, no one gives a shit. Given that fact, the only options the social justice warriors have is to try and force people to give a shit by inconveniencing and/or annoying them. When you force things on people your going to get blowback. Deal with the blowback or STFU and play your child's game and collect your vastly overpaid salary. It's a simple life choice!

You have just described both the reason why people protest (because "no one gives a shit") and the goal of nonviolent civil disobedience (to "try and force people to give a shit" by inconveniencing them with your protests).

So if it was never about kneeling, then why are they kneeling?

I took a shower, but it wasn't about showering. I ate a sandwich, but it wasn't about eating. I jacked off, but it wasn't about jacking off. What kind of silly ass retarded twisted logic is that?

It's more like a small petulant child that doesn't get their way. They will pester, annoy, and inconvenience you in order to get what they want. Small hint, that only works a small percentage of the time and only if you're really a child

So you're saying that people are protesting because I don't care about what THEY think I should care about? Talk about entitlement mentality.

So you're saying that it's OK to inconvience people that you don't know and have never met because they don't give a shit about what YOU think they should give a shit about?

So what happens and who's fault is it when some race baiting idiot protester gets run over for clowning around on the highway? I guess you're going to blame the person minding their own business just trying to drive from point A to point B.

I think it has already been well-established that you do not believe these protesters have a legitimate grievance.  That is exactly why I say it does not matter what form the protests take; whether it's kneeling, raising a fist, or staying in the locker room, objectors like you will continue to insist that these players should stop being troublemakers and shut up.

There cannot be a "non-divisive" way for the NFL to address protests about racially-motivated police brutality when a majority of NFL fans believe racially-motivated police brutality is insignificant (or outright non-existent) in this country.  The topic is inherently divisive: between those who believe the problem exists and those who do not.  And it is not less divisive to simply silence the former and acquiesce to the latter.

If you are trying to win support for a cause it's best not to alienate your targeted audience. I can't see Disney trying to solicit business by upsetting kids. The NFL players get camera time any time they want it. Cap and whoever else can wear shirts, raise fists, toke a knee, send letters or do interviews pretty much any time they want. They have that access to media without insulting people.

The reason they are protesting was lost so long ago it doesn't matter what they are protesting in the general publics eye. On the regular radio this morning the Djs were discussing how no one discusses football any longer like how bad the Dolphins are sucking or what a surprise the Jets have been. It's all about did you see who kneeled or didn't come out of the tunnel etc.

Some people still want to focus on the protests...I prefer to watch football.

As far as the "NFL players get camera time any time they want it." comment, that just comes off sounding so ridiculously naive that I have a hard time believing you didn't stop in the middle of typing it and think "what kind of ridiculous shit am I about to post here?"  Anyone can get "camera time" any time they want it, simply by pointing a camera at themselves. What the players want is the extra large TV audience tuning in to the game to recognize (and support) their cause...which, to point out another fallacy in your post, hasn't been forgotten at all. 

I can point my camera all I want but no one is going to watch. They can call any local station or paper and have media present. In fact I bet they are only a phone call away from ESPN as well. All of this doesn't really matter because everyday they have a ton of media at practice and games.  It's apples and oranges and you know that.

You're missing the point...hopefully not intentionally, as that would be a bit rude.  The point is that they can't "just call ESPN" and have a TV market of umpty million viewers provided to them. At the start of an NFL game, that's what they've got.

I do have to wonder how much you guys would whine if Kaepernick had taken a knee to protest homeless veterans in America or something that you actually give two shits about.

The non-offensive protest doesn't exist.  Rosa Parks was offensive.  The American Americans who sat at a lunch counter in Greensboro were offensive.  The students who were protesting the Vietnam war on May 4,1970 at Kent State were offensive to the National Guard.

Agree with most of what you said Spider, but here you are way off base. In this country when the flag is presented and the anthem played, if you are able you stand and pay your respects. Period. If you choose not to, no one gives a damn about your reasons why. That's just how it is and I might add how it should be. You can disagree, but you are in the minority and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

How can anyone consider taking a knee during the national anthem more offensive to our country than flying a flag of a group of terrorist who committed treason against the USA?

Do we need to compare the two as to which is more offensive? They both are offensive. It's not a pissing contest where someone loses. Stand and pay your respects to the country, it's flag and it's anthem that provides the very means for you to protest any damn thing you want. You don't have that right in some countries, that's what makes the US worthy of your respect. You can respect that even if you don't agree with everything that happens in the US.

NASCAR will not tolerate protests involving the national anthem but welcomes the confederate flag.  The POTUS and VEEP will go out of there way to condemn one, but says there are good neonazis.

You do understand that It's the National Football League and not the National Protest League don't you? If you have  a problem, the correct course of action would be to address it in the proper forum with the proper people. That's how shit has somewhat of a chance to get fixed. But inconveniencing and harassing the wrong people isn't going to help the cause one bit. It's just going to make it worse. Are people so obtuse that they don't understand that?

The majority of whom don't give a shit and don't want to see the shit. Like I said earlier, don't steal an audience and hold them hostage when they don't want to listen to what you have to say. Go out and find your own audience. Better yet, if you want to preach your shit during the NFL. Pony up your fucking money to the network and buy you some airtime like the advertisers do.

In fact, that would solve this whole thing and it wouldn't bother me one bit. Stand for the anthem and keep politics out of the game. Then pay the exact same going rate the advertisers pays for airtime and play your message during commercial breaks. 

What does one have to do with the other? I'm sure that there are many people out there who simultaneously agree or disagree with both.

Up until about a year ago, kneeling would have been considered paying MORE respect than standing.

That's specifically why Kaep started kneeling in the first place (instead of sitting).  Kneeling is a form of showing respect in virtually every other context.  If Tim Tebow kneeled during the anthem no one would have said a word.

Gandhi and MLK showed that it works pretty well.  That's why people continue to do it.

This is possibly the dumbest shit you've ever uttered on this board. And that's fucking saying something.

Well in this context it's not. We stand for the flag and the playing of the anthem. Even the BBC knows this.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37208404

It should be noted that several players were kneeling in respect (for personal reasons) for YEARS before Kap started his protest and this was never even remarked upon.

If anyone has been inconvenienced or harassed by some football players quietly kneeling then those people need to see a therapist to work through their personal issues.

I was referring back to post #13 and Spiders comment about BLM, and the other "oh poor me" black people  protest groups. I would consider roving mobs of brainwashed hoodlums blocking roads, impeding traffic, shouting insults, and general disturbing of the peace to be "inconvenienced and harassed". Basically, lets bother Whitey until they give us what want. This is essentially the same thing. A bunch of millionares who who are acting like passive agressive children in order to get what they want from Whitey.

Like I said earlier, if they want an  audience on TV during an NFL game. Then they should pay the same going rate as the advertisers pay. If they were really serious about this, they would stop leaching off the NFL, owners, advertisers, fans, and pay their own way to get their message out. But instead we get grown up children with an entitlement mindset who want to throw a passive agressive tantrum to the very people that support their vastly overpaid salary and don't give a shit about their political opinions.  Good luck with that...

What you just wrote is so racist on every level and everything that is wrong with this country.

So if you are lucky enough to make lots of money you don't have the right to protest and nobody cares about your opinion? Unreal

And what exactly would you define in my post as racist? Don't just throw out the race card. Please enlighten me, lets discuss your misunderstandings.

Using terms like "brandwished hoodlums," "oh poor me black people," and "Whitey". If that is how you view people its racist, I'm sorry. Thinking that people protresting are just wanting handouts from white people (your words not mine) it totally racist. Nobody wants a free handout they are just asking for equality.

People who block traffic, shout hateful things, and harass people in the name of a problem that is not statistically significant are "brainwashed hoodlums" and "Oh poor me" groups. That includes BLM, Nazis/KKK, Antifa, Etc. If you would like to discuss those other groups, please feel free to start a thread and we'll discuss.

As far as "Whitey" goes. That's who these bogus protests are aimed at. If you can't see that, you're blind. Also, I never said anything about handouts.

Have fun at the next Klan meeting. The fact you can't see the terms you are using such as "whitey" and "hoodlums" are code words for a racist I don't know what to tell you.

Good day!

Klan meeting? I don't condone that group.

I am whitey! Whitey is a white person. Am I racist towards myself?

Hoodlum
noun
a person who engages in crime and violence; a hooligan or gangster

Not sure how that term is racist. It can apply to any color person in the world. That fact is that BLM has been involved in crime and/or violence. That's not debatable, it's a fact. The thing that's funny is that anything said derogatory about a black person is met with the race card, even if it's 100% true. If you call a black criminal a criminal, you're racist. I guess black people are perfect and beyond reproach. Silly world we live in. Are there black hoodlums in the country? Serious question.

Basically, what they want is for "Whitey" law enforcement officials to stop shooting them dead in the streets.


Rather than just pointing out how ridiculous this comment is, I'd ask:

1) What is the going rate for asking people not to kill you? Prime-time and off-schedule.
2) If a bunch of black people showed up on a commercial imploring you to "Please stop killing us!," would you be more likely to pay attention? Would you be less likely to whine about their protest?


I think it's fair to say that your posts on this topic come much closer to the definition of "passive aggressive tantrum" than anything the players are doing.

Also, and again, their political opinion is that they shouldn't be shot dead in the streets so darned much...

I'd take it more seriously if

1) there wasn't riots in the streets for obvious criminals
2) They act like they cared about inner city kids killing each other at a much, much higher rate.

As it is the protesting comes off more as an attack against "the man" and less to do with caring about black lives. I mean they don't even want to compromise with "All Lives Matter".

No one is shooting NFL players dead in the streets. And if you're talking about blacks being shot dead in the streets. Go look at the official stats. Look up the number of unarmed blacks shot dead in the street yearly and compare that to the total number of blacks in the country. And then compare that to the number of people in the US struck by lightning. Lightning strikes are rare, yet more people die from lightning strikes than unarmed blacks killed by law enforcement. 

So it is statistically insignificant and NOT an epidemic like they would lead you to believe. The numbers don't lie. Not to mention that I'm sure that there are black law enforcement officers that have killed unarmed black suspects . Also, it  seems that many of the cops acquitted have had plenty of blacks on the juries that acquitted them. 

Again, no one is killing NFL players or anyone else in mass proportions in relation to population levels. The only difference is the unbalanced media coverage of blacks killed vs others killed in order to portray a false narrative.

No, I wouldn't pay more attention and neither would most of the NFL fan base. So if no one cares, what's kneeling going to solve other than pissing people off?
 
I can assure you that I'm not whining about anything. I'm just stating my opinions in a thread dedicated to the subject. A thread that I didn't start, might I add. My life isn't going to change one way or the other and I won't lose any sleep over it. It's all just silly non sense to me.

Don't change the subject, it's not about me. This is a forum thread about player protests. I'm giving my opinion about this topic, just like you. If you would like to start a thread about ME, feel free. I could care less what you think of me. To me, you and your opinion are statistically insignificant.

Well then they should contact their elected officials and local law enforcement and work it out. The NFL isn't a political forum, it's entertainment.

Couldn't care less....

Carry on.

Well, thank you fine sir. Must be a pet peeve of yours, haha.

Haha, it really is. :D

1) "Obvious criminals" who are unarmed do not deserve summary execution.
2) The issue with asking "What about all the black people killed in Chicago?" in discussions about Black Lives Matter and police brutality is that when civilians kill other civilians in the inner city, it is acknowledged that a crime has been committed, for which someone should be arrested, tried, convicted, and go to prison. In contrast, when police kill unarmed black people:

- the prospect of an arrest is unlikely
- the prospect of a trial is remote
- the prospect of a conviction is nearly non-existent

"Black Lives Matter" is a movement demanding justice for black victims of police brutality and an end to racial profiling by law enforcement.
"All Lives Matter" should then logically be expanded to demand justice for ALL victims of police brutality and an end to racial profiling by law enforcement.
Yet the people saying "All Lives Matter" do not believe racial profiling is a problem and think the police violence was justified.

This is why "All Lives Matter" makes no sense as a response.  It is merely an attempt to silence BLM protesters.

But this is all just another example of what I'm talking about.  The people who object to the player protests are really doing so because they don't think the players have a valid reason to protest.  Their outrage over "disrespecting the flag" is based almost entirely on the fact that they believe the outcry is baseless.  It is "statistically insignificant," it is "media hysteria," it is a "false narrative."  If the protest was about something they agreed with - say, how Christians are being persecuted at historic levels in America - you would hear a different tune.

They have every right to protest. However, they don't have a right to protest at their place of employment, and they are employed to entertain us. Let them go play in the streets on their off time and if they get ran over, fuck 'em. Let them go get physical with the wrong person on their off time and if they get fucked up, fuck 'em. There are procedures and protocols to deal with issues in this country. Harassing and inconveniencing people that have nothing to do with your problem isn't one of them. Again, the NFL isn't a political platform. It's a damn child's game played for our entertainment. Would it be OK to flash pictures of Jesus across your computer screen while you jack off to your porn?

Say's who? YOU ARE NOT THEIR EMPLOYER!!!!!!!!! Every employer is different. You can get away with things on some jobs that you can't on others. All jobs aren't created equal.


So when I go to a Kid Rock or Ted Nugent concert and I am there there for "entertainment" and they are just there to entertain us I don't have to listen to those two idiots preach how they want Obama to suck on a shotgun and wish death to democrats inbetween songs? I mean just shut up and play the music right, they are just there to be our entertainment and its not a political platform? Guessing you don't have a problem with that though and just laugh along with Kid Rock and Ted Nugent cause they agree with you and because they are white like you.

Says me silly guy. If you notice my post has "right" in bold. Just because their employer allows it doesn't make it their right. The employer could just as easily bench people that do it. Furthermore, at the end of the day, the NFL fans are the owners employers in a sense. Piss the majority of them off and it rolls downhill from there. Fans>owners>players. Therefore if they want to maximize their profits, like all companies do, it would be wise not to piss off the people who pay your salary.

No, I don't agree with all white people. Hey wait, that's racist! Oh yeah, nevermind I don't care. See, It doesn't matter if people say racist things to me, because I don't care. Because I'm not weak and I know that words don't matter.

Anyhow, yes I totally agree with you. I don't listen to Kid Rock or Ted Nugent. I've owned an album or two from them back when each one was relevent in their era. But yeah, entertainers should STFU and do what they are paid to do while on the public stage. If they want to push a social or political agenda they, should do it on their own time. See what happens when you assume things. And to think, we probably actually agree on lots of stuff...

No they aren't. Not even close. That's idiotic

Packers

Great you found the one outlier.  ::)

Doesn't change the overall point that for 31 of 32 teams the fans aren't the employers of the players on the team

I know that is great.  Thank you for verifying!

First of all I said "in a sense", that is what you conveniently overlooked. It's amazing that out of my whole post, that's the only thing you picked to quote and respond to. It's very telling.

Second of all, the fans pay the NFL and Team owners. Who in turn pay the players. So therefore, ultimately everyone is paid by either the fans or the advertisers who are targeting the fans. So without the fans, no one is getting paid, that's the bottom line. That's why, "the customer is always right". Because they keep the business open and viable. This is pretty much common sense. Why are you being so obtuse?

So if some NFL customers object to the player protests, and other NFL customers support the protests (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/colin-kaepernick-rally-draws-huge-crowd-outside-nfl-headquarters-n795441), which group should the owners acquiesce to?

I mean, the owners could just stay out of it and let each player speak for himself.  But I think there are a lot of owners who are happy to shut down this kind of discussion of uncomfortable topics, and the anthem is the mechanism for doing so.  Let a player stand for the anthem while holding a picture of "obvious criminal" Tamir Rice and we'll hear about some new protocol to shut the players down.

Technically right is the best kind of right

Unless it's far right...

(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/99/9971f40f6ad8ac1ce54d96b08b3cc0dd2d2650a87c42cb6a7913fe3ffd153ef0.jpg)

^^^ I loved that guy in Groundhog Day...

^ this whole discussion has a very Groundhog Day feel to it.

Round and round we go...

Actually the network TV money pays the owners and players. Fans money is pennies on the dollar in the big picture. Network TV gets their money from advertisers who want to advertise on NFL games which...guess what, hasn't gone down any cause its still the hottest programming going today and the highest rated. A fan spending $7 for a coke at a stadium isn't paying a players salary

Get a clue

"In a sense" in the same sense that movie goers are owners of the movie studios.  (Hey I own some Disney stock so I am a part owner of a movie studio, to give the Packers example). 

That is bullshit.  People who attend games (even packers fans) are the consumer of the products.  not owners not employees. 

Season tickets, concessions, merchandise, parking, and not to mention all the money that goes to support the local economy(although that doesn't benefit the players) is a lot more than $7. I'd be interested to see the high, low, and average amount of money that a fan is out of pocket to see just one game at a stadium. I haven't been to a game in years but it's probably close to $150-$200 a head once you figure in all the costs. So that ain't small potatoes like you're trying to portray it to be. I will admit that advertiser money is probably more, but guess what. Who is it aimed at? The same people that the actual game is aimed at, the fans. So if fans boycott the NFL, they are boycotting the advertisers also.

Of course it's not bullshit. The consumer ultimately dictates the business direction and therefore dictates the business decisions. If you go to the movies and the popcorn bimbo behind the counter decides to push her political/religious/social views on every customer. Then guess whats eventually going to happen the majority of the time? If you don't think that consumers decisions directly relate to business decisions, then you don't live in reality.

nobody is boycotting the NFL that is a joke. You are making up a false narrative to try and prove a point that just isn't there. Get your head out of Trump's tuchus for 5 minutes and look at reality.

You have just contradicted yourself with this above statement. The consumer's haven't changed anything as there are no mandates that the players "must stand" for the national anthem and players are still kneeling every week. So the business direction hasn't changed one bit and this whole story is a lot to do about nothing.

I'm not entirely sure that Trump can fit a second head up his tuchus...his own head is taking up all the tuchus space.

And again, just because it's fun to type... Tuchus.

 ;D

False narrative? I've clipped and highlighted the relevant part of my post below to help you out little fella. I swear, sometimes I think you people willfully attempt to spin and twist people's words. Either that or you can't read and comprehend the English language. I'm betting on the former rather than the latter. But who knows at this point?

Contradicted? No, I don't think so. Again, your reading and comprehension skills must be sub-par. Relevant info in my post is again highlighted below to help you understand.


Not yet it hasn't changed direction. However, I don't know what's going to happen with this whole situation and neither do you. We'll let it play out and see. I do know that the NFL, team owners, and a few select players had a meeting about it this week. And if they had a meeting there must be a problem somewhere. And I'm fairly sure that it won't be the last meeting about this issue, but we'll see.

Maybe, just maybe, eventually those top 1% evil billionaires in the NFL and team owners will have to pick between maximizing their business profits OR their employees political and social opinions. Hmmmm, I wonder what they will do? The NBA doesn't seem to have this problem, do they?

I see you want to take this to the gutter and start with the personal attacks about "reading comprehension skills" and attack people here now.....a sign you know you lost the debate and have no leg to stand on. So you just parrot Trump and his views and now will start with the petty childish name-calling like Trump and act like him too.  Let me guess you are dressing up like Trump for Halloween too?

Your act and agenda is old and tired. You are talking in circles but if calling me names and saying I have low reading comprehension level makes you feel better to prop yourself up, go for it champ.

I'm not calling you anything. I'm simply pointing out that you don't seem to be reading and/or comprehending my posts. To help you, I reposted the relevant portions of my post and highlighted the words that you either willfully ignored in your attempt to twist or didn't understand. And yet you still didn't address the fact that you twisted my words. Be a man and admit you were wrong.

Furthermore, you only complained that your feelings were hurt because you were caught spinning and twisting. You addressed nothing that has to do with my this topic or my reply.

AGAIN...

Not yet it hasn't changed direction. However, I don't know what's going to happen with this whole situation and neither do you. We'll let it play out and see. I do know that the NFL, team owners, and a few select players had a meeting about it this week. And if they had a meeting there must be a problem somewhere. And I'm fairly sure that it won't be the last meeting about this issue, but we'll see.

Maybe, just maybe, eventually those top 1% evil billionaires in the NFL and team owners will have to pick between maximizing their business profits OR their employees political and social opinions. Hmmmm, I wonder what they will do? The NBA doesn't seem to have this problem, do they?

You are the one that needs help.....clearly! You are coming off like a lunatic in this thread and sadly can't see it. Contradicting yourself, posting false information, creating a narrative then coming out against it.

Have a nice night.

pondwater, why do you keep citing the NBA?  That league has players wearing t-shirts supporting BLM and head coaches loudly denouncing Trump.  The NBA is FAR more political (and liberal!) than the NFL.

Thanks, my nights are always nice. Anyhow, it seems that you can't have a simple conversation. Again you are making the topic about me instead of the topic of the thread. Your passive-aggressive attempts of deflecting from the topic highlight how desperate you are to be "right".

Here's a hint. No one's right, political and social opinions are all bullshit. I'm not right. You're not right. We simply disagree on the topic at hand. When and if you ever get you emotions in check, maybe you'll be able to have a simple conversation and agree to disagree. Until then, good luck ;)

I can't be sure and don't want to go back through this whole thread. But I think that I brought up the NBA one time and reposted it in an attempt to get Baby Booea to reply to the actual topic. But it really doesn't matter.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I didn't think we were talking about players wearing t-shirts supporting BLM, head coaches loudly denouncing Trump, or how liberal anyone is. I don't give a shit about any of that stuff. I'm specifically discussing the current protesting situation in the NFL. The NBA currently doesn't have that problem. I wonder why?

The NBA hasn't had that problem because they have been in the offseason while most of this uproar has been going on.  Their season literally started yesterday.

To say that this discussion is solely about players protesting is a mischaracterization of this thread, in which multiple people (including you) have talked about overpoliticization of sports, television ratings, who the real owners of a team are, the responsibility of NFL media partners and their employees, the validity of the protesters' cause, etc.  Even in the post I responded to, you spoke of NFL owners "maximizing their business profits," which has more to do with television ratings and ticketed attendance than it does with the anthem.

So if we are going to talk about how to maximize profits, is the NFL better than the NBA, or worse?  What does the answer to that question say about each league's approach to the smaller issue of anthem protests and larger issue of political activism in general?

The point I was making is that the NBA doesn't have this problem simply because they have existing rule that everyone is required to stand for the national anthem. That is exactly what the NFL should do if they plan on maximizing their profits. I don't hear people complaining that the NBA actually has a rule requiring people to stand. Even if they did, I doubt that the NBA cares. I don't watch basketball, but they are smart for protecting their business interests. The NFL is a business, not a social/political organization and will eventually have a decision to make instead of straddling the line and playing both sides.

And to prove Pondwater wrong (AGAIN) this just happened last night.  https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/justine-skye-takes-knee-brooklyn-nets_us_59eafce9e4b0958c46824570?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

Yeah the NBA doesn't have a problem though... ::)

Huffingtonpost? You're silly, you haven't proven anything. That's a singer, not a player. No one knew she was going to do that beforehand and if they did she wouldn't have been allowed to sing. Here is a quote from your source that supposedly proves me wrong. It actually proves you wrong in your desperate attempt to prove me wrong, how ironic.


Again, a singer is not bound by the rules of the NBA. If it had been a player, they would have been in violation of the rules and subject to league and/or team actions. Why don't you waste your weekend and scour the web to prove me wrong some more. If nothing else, this is entertaining, LMFAO......

So because the Huffington Post reported this story (as did many other outlets)  it didn't happen? The video of her taking a knee didn't happen...LOL. Oh my god you are such a Trump parrot its sad. Just because you don't like the story and it blows up your entire stance and proves you wrong, doesn't mean this really didn't happen or the story is "fake."

And FYI: It happened at an NBA game so its an NBA problem whether its a singer or player. And the fact nobody knew beforehand means nothing either.

Nobody is wasting any weekend searching for anything to prove you wrong. I came across the story this morning and decided to come here and post a link to it. That's all, not wasting more than 3 seconds to prove you to be wrong or a clown. You did a great job of that all week and do not need help from anyone here in that arena. And the fact you are taking shots at me with your not so snappy comebacks and not so funny one-liners, proved you lost this debate and want to be Trump Jr with the insults and not seriously debate a topic which you clearly have already lost.

Huffpost is just as bad as Fox news. 

Less about the article and more about the video in the story. Unless you are denying the event actually happened and the video is fake  ::)

naw, just I hate huffpost bias.  Foxnews too, but that's common knowledge right?

Almost, but not quite. Huffington Post at least "occasionally" criticizes the folks on the left, while Fox is pretty much state-run TV at this point. I try occasionally to tune in Fox News, just to hear what they're feeding to the right, but I never make it more than 5-6 minutes before I have to turn away. I kept expecting to hear some Starship Troopers propaganda come across "Service equals Citizenship...would you like to know more?"

With Huffington Post, after 5-6 minutes of browsing, I come away thinking "Quit whining already, ya liberal pussies!"

CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC and a few others seem "middle" enough to suit me....

Splitting hairs, but yeah, you essentially laid out the gist of it.  CNN is bias too, but it's not as obvious.

The story and video are totally unrelated to anything I said about the NBA rule. The NBA rule affects the players. There is nothing the NBA can do to some goofball singer trying to get attention, except not let her sing again. I Didn't see anything about players breaking the rules. Are you trying to counter my point about the NBA rule by deflecting to an entirely moot point about a random singer kneeling? Umm ok, LMFAO...