indyagent17

NFL adopts new Anthem policy

Recommended Posts

Just now, aaron11 said:

i dont know anyone that is allowed to protest at work, i dont see why nfl players think they should be able to

 

Since you didn't answer my first question, I'll follow your lead. I don't know anyone who is allowed to kill unarmed people at work, why should the police be able to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bshultz said:

 

Since you didn't answer my first question, I'll follow your lead. I don't know anyone who is allowed to kill unarmed people at work, why should the police be able to?

the nfl has nothing to do with the police!  what happens in the streets is not their fault 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

the nfl has nothing to do with the police!  what happens in the streets is not their fault 

 

Right, the NFL doesn't use police for security? They also don't take any taxpayer money to build stadiums? They weren't a tax exempt non profit for many years? If you're going to take all that taxpayer money, I'd say you have a moral obligation to advance the common good. So I ask again which is the bigger crime, kneeling or someone being killed?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DougDew said:

Well, civil disobedience doesn't count as just just because MLK did it.  There has to be a reason that makes sense.

 

Its about 12 pages now.  Again, what are the protests meant to address?  That cities with black mayors, black police commissioners, and black officers beat up and kill black citizens 1% of the time they tangle?  I'm all for being against that.  Always have been before I even became a Colts fan. Didn't need a rookie free safety to ruin my anthem party before I was against it.

 

What does Malik Hooker and Dwayne Allen want me to do about it?   Ignore data and assume they get beat up 91% of the time because that's what their posse's tell them police do?

Small point of order and apologies if I’ve missed this, but where did you get 1% from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Compromises mean very little to some see Adolf Hitler and PM Neville Chamberlain 

 

I don’t wish to throw the topic down a tangent but that wasn’t so much compromise but appeasement and there is a difference. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Buck Showalter said:

A song that's original lyrical content contained significant racist undertones. And, it is still just a song, if the anthem is important to you great. However in a free country expecting someone else to  behave a certain way during a song seems like insanity to me.

UNITY has to start SOMEWHERE. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, DougDew said:

Yep and nope.  Yep, that's what he said, but nope, that's not the reason.

 

The kneeling began almost immediately after chatter about, and finally, being benched in favor of Blaine Gabbert.  B L A I N E  G A B B E R T.    The chatter and final benching also signaled he was going to be released sometime soon.

 

When asked why he knelt, he said it was about inequality in this country.  And people took him at his word. 

 

People taking him at his word that his kneeling had some sort of social meaning rather than just being a baby not wanting to participate in a normal NFL ritual anymore is what started this whole thing.

The coinciding timing doesn't mean it's a cause-and-effect relationship between him being benched and him kneeling

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kinda wish that these kneeling players would ride along with some of the cops in these areas ( i know some players have and they are not typically the ones kneeling). We are all human and we all make mistakes and sometimes those mistakes may cost a life. I'm sure there are plenty of innocent whites, hispanics ect also killed.

Military and First Responders are paid PENNIES compared to what NFL athletes make and risk their lives daily. Maybe they should tell their followers to follow what the authorities ask of them. 

 

What if all the military and first responders decided today im going to boycott this call. So people of this country take things for granted and we as a country are still learning. I am very sure IF we instituted some laws and actions of other places in the world there would be ALOT less crime and "violence": in the country. However this is what makes us the UNITED STATES of AMERICA. 

 

Rant over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I apologize to anyone that I may have offended @csmopar

 

IMO as long as one person researches and/or works to solve the current racial/minority problem because of the protests they have been successful 

 

Final Reminder from TigerTown 

  People must be careful not to attack people without understanding their background 

 

   

Never was offended.  I have a much higher tolerance for that than 95% of the world's population.  Takes far more than anything you've ever posted to offend me.

5 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

No apology needed for that but turning this into your own personal thread? Maybe.

 

5 hours ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I have a rule when someone addresses me I answer them back

 

  my goal in life was to be a politician of some kind

I can see why

9 hours ago, PrincetonTiger said:

And millions do not 

 

 

  So you are okay with a player sitting out a series instead

sure. Actions have consequences. If I don't like something happening in the public domain but chose to protest it on the property of a private company, then yes I should be fired/suspended etc.

15 hours ago, NFLfan said:

 

I disagree about the reason Kaepernick did it. He has invested a lot of money into many causes since he has been out of the NFL. If he did not care he would not be as involved. From what I have read, he seems very invested in what he is doing and it is impacted many people.

 

And some change has occurred. Some police departments are working better with the community since the protests started. It made other players want to get involved in their communities in ways they never have. What Doug Baldwin and others are doing is impressive. 

I didn't say he didnt care. I'm saying that many, including myself, believe he chose to kneal to draw attention onto himself after being benched for subpar performances and then scapegoated it when it got such publicity/backlash into a social issue.  

15 hours ago, Nadine said:

Not that I'm aware of. There are extremists on all issues but, I would guess the vast majority of us just want to get rid of bad cops

I know that was the intent

The Mayor of Chicago for one...

15 hours ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Not credible

 

  tell me who

see above^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I hate to tell you there is a lot more than the NFL in the world 

    The protesters are not concerned about making things better for others not about an almighty dollar

You said a mouthful there. Needs a little fixing but you are on the right track. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Never was offended.  I have a much higher tolerance for that than 95% of the world's population.  Takes far more than anything you've ever posted to offend me.

 

I can see why

sure. Actions have consequences. If I don't like something happening in the public domain but chose to protest it on the property of a private company, then yes I should be fired/suspended etc.

I didn't say he didnt care. I'm saying that many, including myself, believe he chose to kneal to draw attention onto himself after being benched for subpar performances and then scapegoated it when it got such publicity/backlash into a social issue.  

The Mayor of Chicago for one...

see above^

Chicago is the murder capital of USA with the progressive mayor as their leader. He is so anti-police.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JColts72 said:

Chicago is the murder capital of USA with the progressive mayor as their leader. He is so anti-police.

i think its either 1st or 2nd highest on the cities with most murders in the world too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Four2itus said:

I know that we could all use a little more love. 

My father always told me, there are only two emotions, fear and love.

If you are not acting with love, you are acting out of fear.

Came across this this morning and it reminded me of dad

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Fans are not the employees unless you are in the Packers Camp

 

    So you are with the things happening around the US

 

 

     

Fans are the employers. They hold the purchasing power. The NFL is the middle man. This has been proven. A portion of fans weren’t happy, NFL rating went down. Hence this.

 

Like I said, I will defend their right to do it but could not disagree more with how they chose to protest.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Yes they are 

 

  When you are told that you can’t do something it is wrong 

 

I agree with most of those wanting the players to be able to express their concerns using any platform available. But it isn't always allowable, even if you feel it is wrong.  We are a land of laws.  If a law isn't right, get it changed. Breaking it until then can still be met with repercussions. I'll point everyone to an article (American Bar), but take a quick quote from it.

 

{Private sector workers}

 

Oli­ver Wendell Holmes, Jr.: “A employee may have a constitutional right to talk politics, but he has no constitutional right to be employed.” In other words: to keep your job, you often can’t say what you like.

 

https://www.americanbar.org/publications/insights_on_law_andsociety/15/winter-2015/chill-around-the-water-cooler.html

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bshultz said:

 

Right, the NFL doesn't use police for security? They also don't take any taxpayer money to build stadiums? They weren't a tax exempt non profit for many years? If you're going to take all that taxpayer money, I'd say you have a moral obligation to advance the common good. So I ask again which is the bigger crime, kneeling or someone being killed?

You say they have an obligation? No. They will provide a service. Good or not is irrelevant. 

 

And you’ve completely warped the argument. Of course death is worse than kneeling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

I agree with most of those wanting the players to be able to express their concerns using any platform available. But it isn't always allowable, even if you feel it is wrong.  We are a land of laws.  If a law isn't right, get it changed. Breaking it until then can still be met with repercussions. I'll point everyone to an article (American Bar), but take a quick quote from it.

 

{Private sector workers}

 

Oli­ver Wendell Holmes, Jr.: “A employee may have a constitutional right to talk politics, but he has no constitutional right to be employed.” In other words: to keep your job, you often can’t say what you like.

 

https://www.americanbar.org/publications/insights_on_law_andsociety/15/winter-2015/chill-around-the-water-cooler.html

I agree but as Humans we have the obligation to speak up about what we perceive as wrong even if it is hard

 

    This is why Unions strike across the nation

   

        Unions and strikes are rarely political 

    

       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I agree but as Humans we have the obligation to speak up about what we perceive as wrong even if it is hard

 

    This is why Unions strike across the nation

   

        Unions and strikes are rarely political 

    

       

Um, almost all union strikes are political, they may not always be tied to government, but every strike is political 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Um, almost all union strikes are political, they may not always be tied to government, but every strike is political 

Nope

 

   My Grandfather never asked his fellow miners what their political views before organizing UMWA meetings

 

    They got together to speak up for perceived wrongs

 

     Unions(Associations) work to protect their members

   

 

   I am a proud Grandson of a UMWA member

   I am proud to live in Union Country( Princeton is the home to one of the oldest Labor Day Celebrations in the Country)

   I have strong personal ties to multiple Union Members of varying political views

 

   Unions often suggest to their members or back candidates that would support what they stand for(just like the NRA or AARP)

    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SteelCityColt said:

I don’t think people understand the term “political” judging from reading through this.

 

 

Changes the meaning of my College Degree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Changes the meaning of my College Degree

 

I mean that not all “politics” is limited to official political parties. E.g. when people suggested the DoD isn’t political.. of course it is. It’s an agency of government fighting for funding, it will involve itself in “politics” and need supporters among politicians. To be clear not suggesting anything wrong with that.

 

I think this country (UK) has an interesting balance of power in which I’d suggest our civil service exerts more control over the elected politicians than vice versa in certain matters.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

I mean that not all “politics” is limited to official political parties. E.g. when people suggested the DoD isn’t political.. of course it is. It’s an agency of government fighting for funding, it will involve itself in “politics” and need supporters among politicians. To be clear not suggesting anything wrong with that.

 

I think this country (UK) has an interesting balance of power in which I’d suggest our civil service exerts more control over the elected politicians than vice versa in certain matters.

Very true 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Nope

 

   My Grandfather never asked his fellow miners what their political views before organizing UMWA meetings

 

    They got together to speak up for perceived wrongs

 

     Unions(Associations) work to protect their members

   

 

   I am a proud Grandson of a UMWA member

   I am proud to live in Union Country( Princeton is the home to one of the oldest Labor Day Celebrations in the Country)

   I have strong personal ties to multiple Union Members of varying political views

 

   Unions often suggest to their members or back candidates that would support what they stand for(just like the NRA or AARP)

    

I don't think you understand what the term political means fully.

 

1 hour ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Changes the meaning of my College Degree

 Political as defined by the dictionary encompasses more than just government... See the bold.
 

po·lit·i·cal

pəˈlidək(ə)l/

adjective

adjective: political

relating to the government or the public affairs of a country.

or

relating to the ideas or strategies of a particular party or group in politics.

or

interested in or active in politics.

or

motivated or caused by a person's beliefs or actions concerning politics.

or

relating to, affecting, or acting according to the interests of status or authority within an organization rather than matters of principle.

or

relating to the use of bureaucratic negotiations to find a solution to a problem 

 

1 hour ago, SteelCityColt said:

I don’t think people understand the term “political” judging from reading through this.

 

 

Exactly

1 hour ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

I mean that not all “politics” is limited to official political parties. E.g. when people suggested the DoD isn’t political.. of course it is. It’s an agency of government fighting for funding, it will involve itself in “politics” and need supporters among politicians. To be clear not suggesting anything wrong with that.

 

I think this country (UK) has an interesting balance of power in which I’d suggest our civil service exerts more control over the elected politicians than vice versa in certain matters.

Yep ^

Edited by ColtsBlueFL
removed this - "might wanna get a refund then."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, csmopar said:

I don't think you understand what the term political means fully.

 

might wanna get a refund then.  Political as defined by the dictionary encompasses more than just government... See the bold.
 

po·lit·i·cal

pəˈlidək(ə)l/

adjective

adjective: political

relating to the government or the public affairs of a country.

or

relating to the ideas or strategies of a particular party or group in politics.

or

interested in or active in politics.

or

motivated or caused by a person's beliefs or actions concerning politics.

or

relating to, affecting, or acting according to the interests of status or authority within an organization rather than matters of principle.

or

relating to the use of bureaucratic negotiations to find a solution to a problem 

 

Exactly

Yep ^

Striking because of working conditions and therefore safety is not political 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, PrincetonTiger said:

When did I say I had an issue with the compromise

 

      The first solution is for there to be more info to back up the “compromise”-A plan

      The next is to try and understand why the players protested in the first place

Sitting out a series is disruptive not and not a pregame protest

 

    There have been several instances where teams/players decided not to participate in an event for multiple reasons

 

 

    When Jackie R. was breaking the color barrier some of his Dodger Teammates refused to play in games if he was in the dugout and then asked for a trade

I'm glad you have no issue with the compromise.

The NFL has its flaws but they have nothing to do with police shootings or social injustice.  They cant solve that problem which I believe they certainly do understand.

The protest was costing the NFL money which means (if ratings go down) it was eventually costing the players money.

They created a compromise to end the issue...The players will complain but I predict they will go along with it

 

Players can still protest (although most don't) social injustice 365 days a year..Just not at 1 p.m. Sundays in the fall.

Its fair...…....that;s what the NFL is saying..and they're right

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Striking because of working conditions and therefore safety is not political 

sure it is.  It is striking to achieve the interests of an organization.  A union is an organization and striking for working conditions is an INTEREST to that ORGANIZATION. It's right there in the definition. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Striking because of working conditions and therefore safety is not political 

plus, those strikes often lead to government safety regulations such as OSHA, therefore, yes, striking for working conditions also became a government based POLITICAL issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I agree but as Humans we have the obligation to speak up about what we perceive as wrong even if it is hard

 

    This is why Unions strike across the nation

   

        Unions and strikes are rarely political 

    

       

:scratch:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I agree but as Humans we have the obligation to speak up about what we perceive as wrong even if it is hard

 

    This is why Unions strike across the nation

   

        Unions and strikes are rarely political 

    

    

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I agree but as Humans we have the obligation to speak up about what we perceive as wrong even if it is hard

 

    This is why Unions strike across the nation

   

        Unions and strikes are rarely political 

    

       

Technically as humans we have the obligation to ensure the propgation of our species. But even then...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nadine said:

My father always told me, there are only two emotions, fear and love.

If you are not acting with love, you are acting out of fear.

Came across this this morning and it reminded me of dad

 

 

Great stuff!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

 

 

Didn’t stop Unions from Striking

 

    I had a classmate whose parents were fired 

      That was a Government Union same way teachers and civil servants are not allowed to unionize in certain states

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, csmopar said:

relating to, affecting, or acting according to the interests of status or authority within an organization rather than matters of principle.

 

That is the definition of "political".  

 

One can say that this new Anthem policy was created for political reasons. We all may disagree on what is the "principle" but instituting this new policy is clearly a political move to appease those who are angry about the kneeling. I am not saying it is wrong -- just pointing out that it is "political". 

 

(I know you did not say it wasn't. I am just commenting.)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, csmopar said:

sure it is.  It is striking to achieve the interests of an organization.  A union is an organization and striking for working conditions is an INTEREST to that ORGANIZATION. It's right there in the definition. 

I do not need to be told anything so stop

 

 

    I would be very wary to “attack” someone or something you Don’t know

 

 

     Just this morning you attacked Me, Unions(my family),my alma mater(my family)

        I am fine without it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

I'm glad you have no issue with the compromise.

The NFL has its flaws but they have nothing to do with police shootings or social injustice.  They cant solve that problem which I believe they certainly do understand.

The protest was costing the NFL money which means (if ratings go down) it was eventually costing the players money.

They created a compromise to end the issue...The players will complain but I predict they will go along with it

 

Players can still protest (although most don't) social injustice 365 days a year..Just not at 1 p.m. Sundays in the fall.

Its fair...…....that;s what the NFL is saying..and they're right

JMO

   Although the compromise is a step in the right direction it will not solve anything 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Didn’t stop Unions from Striking

 

    I had a classmate whose parents were fired 

      That was a Government Union same way teachers and civil servants are not allowed to unionize in certain states

 

8 minutes ago, NFLfan said:

 

That is the definition of "political".  

 

One can say that this new Anthem policy was created for political reasons. We may disagree on what is the "principle" but instituting this new policy is clearly a political move to appease those who are angry about the kneeling. I am not saying it is wrong -- just pointing out that it is "political". 

 

(I know you did not say it wasn't. I am just commenting.)

Oh I completely agree its a political move on behalf of the NFL. There is no denying it.

6 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I do not need to be told anything so stop

 

 

    I would be very wary to “attack” someone or something you Donita know

 

 

     Just this morning you attacked Me, Unions(my family),my alma mater(my family)

        I am fine without it

I have not attacked you at all. I merely pointed out the inaccuracies in your statements.  And yes, I do know a lot on this topic. I was the union rep for Dorel when I worked there. I have a Minor from Indiana University in Political Science and Criminal Justice, a third minor not awarded because I could only have two by school policy in American History but all requirements were met, and as well as an MBA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, csmopar said:

 

Oh I completely agree its a political move on behalf of the NFL. There is no denying it.

I have not attacked you at all. I merely pointed out the inaccuracies in your statements.  And yes, I do know a lot on this topic. I was the union rep for Dorel when I worked there. I have a Minor from Indiana University in Political Science, and as well as an MBA. 

They aren’t inaccurate since they are my beliefs

    I think you told me to get a refund on my degree(personal attack).  And you do know me or my life

     

   I was always told and tell my “kids” if you don’t have anything nice to say bite your lip

 

   I have different views on life whether  right or wrong and I only modify them when my parents or superiors(teachers) tell me to do so 

 

  Friendly Reminder from TigerTown    

     Trying to get me to change my views is a waste of time which could often be used to do something productive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Didn’t stop Unions from Striking

 

    I had a classmate whose parents were fired 

      That was a Government Union same way teachers and civil servants are not allowed to unionize in certain states

 

At some point, everything is political. Even the NFL implementing this Anthem policy trying to preserve their profits. Those teams found in violation will be fined by the NFL, not the offenders.  Players do not have to go to the locker room, they can continue to kneel as before. Teams, once fined, can then fine offenders if they desire, or not.  The NFLPA can try to defend, but NFL will trot out (at the minimum) the Conduct Detrimental to the League, and disrupting the public confidence; which is stated and agreed upon at the top of every NFL contract delivered to every player.

 

Point is, no matter the cause, there may well be consequences one must weigh before acting.  If one decides to participate in a strike with 10,999 other ATC's, then there is a chance all 11,000 people could all lose their jobs - permanently. And they did. Reagan fired and replaced them all and it had changed the power balance of labor. And the interesting fact is, PATCO actually supported the Reagan candidacy.

 

I do not know what will happen from here, who will kneel, who will not , who will stay in the locker room, what teams found in violation will do, all of it. I just know the unfortunate thing that distresses me is that the message has been completely lost in this mess, and it looks just like yet another confrontation of power instead.  :grumpy2:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.