Tired of the NFL's Uniform Policy.....

[NewColtsFan]

I just HATE the NFL's Uniform Policy.

 

It's just dumb, stupid and tired.     A silly rule instituted by Old White Men.      And I say that as a 58 year old white man.

 

The latest two examples.

 

Pittsburgh's Cameron Heyward is the son of former NFL running back Craig "Iron Head" Hayward who died of cancer.

 

So, on his two eye black patches he's got "Iron" on one and "Head" on the other.    He's honoring his late father.   And for that,  he's been fined nearly $6,000 for the first offense and more than $11,000 for the 2nd offense.     The fines escalate if you don't obey.

 

But, there's more.

 

And Pittsburgh's D'Angelo Willam's mother died of Breast Cancer at age 53.    You know,  the disease that the NFL honors for the entire month of October which is National Breast Cancer Awareness month.     So, Williams CALLS the NFL to ask permission to have some pink on his uniform all season long and not just for the month.     Yup.    He was told no.     Only October -- NO exceptions!     God, sometimes the NFL is so spectacularly stupid sometimes.     They just can't get out of their own way.

 

So,  since Williams can't wear some clothing that is pink to honor his late mother,   Williams has decided to die his hair pink for the rest of the season.      He thinks his hair is OK to do.      And, he's also putting his money where his mouth is......   he's paying for mammograms for 53 women to try and help save their lives.    Great kid.      Dumb NFL.  

[Surge89]

I just HATE the NFL's Uniform Policy.

 

It's just dumb, stupid and tired.     A silly rule instituted by Old White Men.      And I say that as a 58 year old white man.

 

The latest two examples.

 

Pittsburgh's Cameron Heyward is the son of former NFL running back Craig "Iron Head" Hayward who died of cancer.

 

So, on his two eye black patches he's got "Iron" on one and "Head" on the other.    He's honoring his late father.   And for that,  he's been fined nearly $6,000 for the first offense and more than $11,000 for the 2nd offense.     The fines escalate if you don't obey.

 

But, there's more.

 

And Pittsburgh's D'Angelo Willam's mother died of Breast Cancer at age 53.    You know,  the disease that the NFL honors for the entire month of October which is National Breast Cancer Awareness month.     So, Williams CALLS the NFL to ask permission to have some pink on his uniform all season long and not just for the month.     Yup.    He was told no.     Only October -- NO exceptions!     God, sometimes the NFL is so spectacularly stupid sometimes.     They just can't get out of their own way.

 

So,  since Williams can't wear some clothing that is pink to honor his late mother,   Williams has decided to die his hair pink for the rest of the season.      He thinks his hair is OK to do.      And, he's also putting his money where his mouth is......   he's paying for mammograms for 53 women to try and help save their lives.    Great kid.      Dumb NFL.  

 

Williams has done this for a while now. That's why I like him so much :-).  Want to know the kicker for Heyward?  There is a double standard.  Last year Devon Still had the exact same thing as Heyward and from what I know he wasn't fined.  That's gotta sting.  Regardless if its a daughter or a Dad there shouldn't be a double standard... of course there shouldn't be a rule in the first place, save for obscenities.

[Myles]

I like the hard stance the NFL has.

 

There is a reason for it.   If you allow some to break it, then you have to allow others to break it.   Where does it end?  

Can you wear a patch honoring your fallen friends that has a donation website?    Such as Ironheadfund.com.   If so, you have to investigate to see if it is a legit charity.  

Much easier and more efficient to hold strong. 

[BloodyChamp]

Every player would be wearing some something for a deceased person before long if this slid. There may be some sincere tributes out there but most of it would become another bandwagon.

[Myles]

Every player would be wearing some something for a deceased person before long if this slid. There may be some sincere tributes out there but most of it would become another bandwagon.

I agree.   It would be too tough to police.  

[shakedownstreet]

i understand the compassion, but i fully support the nfl's stance. like others have stated, you let one or two slip then everyone will have some sort of uniform modification before long. either that, or they'd sue for the right to do so & likely win

 

the nfl must maintain a hard stance to prevent this. they have every right and resposibilty to protect their brand

[OffensivelyPC]

If you absolutely must support them or wear something from them, put it where it can't be seen (guys have been writing on the inside of gloves, armbands and on covered athletic tape, etc. for years).  Otherwise, use the interviews to get your story out there.  That's what they are there for.  Leave it to the media to talk it up all game long because they will.  But I don't really care whether or not a guy wears eyeblack for their father or pink uniforms.  Not saying I don't care about the causes, but if uniforms are off limits, then be smart about it and use the million other avenues you have available to raise awareness, support, or let others know your stories.  When someone's wearing pink, I don't get anything from that, it's just a reminder.  If they wore regular jerseys, you still see the adds all October long, so really, what difference does it make to see pink on a uniform?  What is more profound by seeing a name on eyeblack, than hearing the announcers talk about the story and/or see an interview in between plays or watching a guy cry after the game as he talks about how much the deceased will be missed?  (On a general note, I exclude TY Hiltons post-game interview after the birth of his baby, just show me pictures of the newborn, lol).

[BloodyChamp]

be smart about it and use the million other avenues you have available to raise awareness, support, or let others know your stories.

That brings me back to what I said about the bandwagon thing. If the NFL let this go, soon everybody would do it and 3/4 of the people would be doing it either just because everybody else is, or because if they didn't do it some bamdwaginer would say they don't care about dead people or cancer or some nonsense. It would become a politically correct thing to do. Those people won't use the other avenues for their causes because they have no cause other than staying in line with the wagon wheels.

[OffensivelyPC]

That brings me back to what I said about the bandwagon thing. If the NFL let this go, soon everybody would do it and 3/4 of the people would be doing it either just because everybody else is, or because if they didn't do it some bamdwaginer would say they don't care about dead people or cancer or some nonsense. It would become a politically correct thing to do. Those people won't use the other avenues for their causes because they have no cause other than staying in line with the wagon wheels.

Well, more importantly, some guy doing something with his equipment that turns out to be some disaster.  This was relatively harmless, but what if "Iron Head" meant something that was generally indefensible?  Like, could you imagine some player wore something that was a reference to their opinion over the recent string of incidents regarding white cop on black citizen violence?  You could reasonably have an opinion in support of one or the other in some cases, but you can't make a statement one way or the other without vehement opposition.

 

And when you do somethingl ike that to your uniform/equipment and there's a picture of the player with a Nike jersey, or Riddell helmet or whatever else have you, and its' all over the news like this is, sponsors get * off.  Right or wrong, the message of whatever that players doing can be associated with the modified equipment (or sometimes even if it's just in the same general picture).  As the beneficiary of sponsorship dollars, the NFL's best bet is to just eliminate as many possibilities as they can, and you end up with rules that prevent the alteration/modification of otherwise approved equipment in manners like this.

[Superman]

I'm sure they'll loosen this up soon. Maybe a designated area on the uniform where a small, approved personal message can go. But you can't just let everyone do whatever they want. There's propriety, there's sponsors, etc. It's easier to just ban it all than to make case by case concessions.

[Nadine]

I don't think they need personal messages on their uniform.  They are the NFL brand when they are on the field.

 

NFL should control that.

 

Players have other options and control all aspects of their own personal brand which the NFL does not control and does not seek to control.

 

It's about branding and it's fair the way it is.

 

Lot's of players have lots of causes......as do fans and owners. Whoever owns the brand makes the decision.

 

And it's not worth losing 6K over when you could just donate that to your cause.

 

My husband works for a store and they have all kinds of rules about how employees may use their branding and that is NOT AT ALL

 

They even state it in your employment papers.  if they catch a social media post of you with store logos, you are out!

[Myles]

I do like that most agree with me.   When I first posted, I was against 2 others.  

As I said, no one has the time to police each and every cause.

 

I also think it could get real bad if the NFL had to decide which causes are OK.

If a few players have "Black lives matter" patches to support victims of gun violence, are they going to refuse if a player wants to were a patch supporting cops?

 

No need to go down that slippery slope.

[OffensivelyPC]

I don't think they will. In a day and age where the NFL get scrutinized for anything from suspending a player for doing drugs or hitting women and the NFL is somehow the bad guy, I highly doubt you're going to get the NFL to approve messages. Because then people will find reasons to criticize the NFL for not approving messages that some people agree on and others don't and vice versa, approving messages that people disagree with. It will turns into a debate on what the NFL does and does not believe in, even if all they are really doing is allowing freedom of speech.

[Superman]

I don't think they will. In a day and age where the NFL get scrutinized for anything from suspending a player for doing drugs or hitting women and the NFL is somehow the bad guy, I highly doubt you're going to get the NFL to approve messages. Because then people will find reasons to criticize the NFL for not approving messages that some people agree on and others don't and vice versa, approving messages that people disagree with. It will turns into a debate on what the NFL does and does not believe in, even if all they are really doing is allowing freedom of speech.

 

I say they might because they made some sort of concession with Heyward and reduced his fine. They also made an exception for Devon Still last season, and I don't think they fined Reggie for wearing orange gloves in the Packers game in 2012. 

[shakedownstreet]

peyton should have worn the unitas shoes & paid the fine

 

especially because his "still carrying sour grapes" family was so vehemently against it

[BloodyChamp]

Well, more importantly, some guy doing something with his equipment that turns out to be some disaster. This was relatively harmless, but what if "Iron Head" meant something that was generally indefensible? Like, could you imagine some player wore something that was a reference to their opinion over the recent string of incidents regarding white cop on black citizen violence? You could reasonably have an opinion in support of one or the other in some cases, but you can't make a statement one way or the other without vehement opposition.

And when you do somethingl ike that to your uniform/equipment and there's a picture of the player with a Nike jersey, or Riddell helmet or whatever else have you, and its' all over the news like this is, sponsors get * off. Right or wrong, the message of whatever that players doing can be associated with the modified equipment (or sometimes even if it's just in the same general picture). As the beneficiary of sponsorship dollars, the NFL's best bet is to just eliminate as many possibilities as they can, and you end up with rules that prevent the alteration/modification of otherwise approved equipment in manners like this.

I didn't even think of that...ugh...and I could see that snowballing through players trying to 1 up each other in the "yeah I said it" department.

[OffensivelyPC]

I say they might because they made some sort of concession with Heyward and reduced his fine. They also made an exception for Devon Still last season, and I don't think they fined Reggie for wearing orange gloves in the Packers game in 2012.

Well, they might, I guess. But the trend isn't going in the right direction if Heyward (reduced fine, sure, he still got fined on the condition he stopped doing it) and Williams are any indication.

[Bubbz]

I just HATE the NFL's Uniform Policy.

 

It's just dumb, stupid and tired.     A silly rule instituted by Old White Men.      And I say that as a 58 year old white man.

 

The latest two examples.

 

Pittsburgh's Cameron Heyward is the son of former NFL running back Craig "Iron Head" Hayward who died of cancer.

 

So, on his two eye black patches he's got "Iron" on one and "Head" on the other.    He's honoring his late father.   And for that,  he's been fined nearly $6,000 for the first offense and more than $11,000 for the 2nd offense.     The fines escalate if you don't obey.

 

But, there's more.

 

And Pittsburgh's D'Angelo Willam's mother died of Breast Cancer at age 53.    You know,  the disease that the NFL honors for the entire month of October which is National Breast Cancer Awareness month.     So, Williams CALLS the NFL to ask permission to have some pink on his uniform all season long and not just for the month.     Yup.    He was told no.     Only October -- NO exceptions!     God, sometimes the NFL is so spectacularly stupid sometimes.     They just can't get out of their own way.

 

So,  since Williams can't wear some clothing that is pink to honor his late mother,   Williams has decided to die his hair pink for the rest of the season.      He thinks his hair is OK to do.      And, he's also putting his money where his mouth is......   he's paying for mammograms for 53 women to try and help save their lives.    Great kid.      Dumb NFL.  

Every work place has a dress code. Its really not that deep. Once they start letting things slide itll never end. They get paid millions of dollars. If they dont like it they can go work at McDonalds. Theyll get over it. 

[NewColtsFan]

Every work place has a dress code. Its really not that deep. Once they start letting things slide itll never end. They get paid millions of dollars. If they dont like it they can go work at McDonalds. Theyll get over it. 

 

Once again,  we see the same thing completely differently.  

 

Not a surprise.

[southwest1]

I just HATE the NFL's Uniform Policy.

 

It's just dumb, stupid and tired.     A silly rule instituted by Old White Men.      And I say that as a 58 year old white man.

 

The latest two examples.

 

Pittsburgh's Cameron Heyward is the son of former NFL running back Craig "Iron Head" Hayward who died of cancer.

 

So, on his two eye black patches he's got "Iron" on one and "Head" on the other.    He's honoring his late father.   And for that,  he's been fined nearly $6,000 for the first offense and more than $11,000 for the 2nd offense.     The fines escalate if you don't obey.

 

But, there's more.

 

And Pittsburgh's D'Angelo Willam's mother died of Breast Cancer at age 53.    You know,  the disease that the NFL honors for the entire month of October which is National Breast Cancer Awareness month.     So, Williams CALLS the NFL to ask permission to have some pink on his uniform all season long and not just for the month.     Yup.    He was told no.     Only October -- NO exceptions!     God, sometimes the NFL is so spectacularly stupid sometimes.     They just can't get out of their own way.

 

So,  since Williams can't wear some clothing that is pink to honor his late mother,   Williams has decided to die his hair pink for the rest of the season.      He thinks his hair is OK to do.      And, he's also putting his money where his mouth is......   he's paying for mammograms for 53 women to try and help save their lives.    Great kid.      Dumb NFL.  

I admire your passion on this issue NCF. I truly do, but like others have suggested there are other ways using their natl. platforms as a mouthpiece for what drives them & you'd open the flood gates of expression if the NFL started granting exceptions based on who passed away, how long ago, & their significance to the player overall.

 

Bubbz gave a good example when he mentioned a workplace dress code because you can't treat your owner, the person who signs your check or the league with an advertising empire that can make a player more money in endorsements like everyday is casual friday to do whatever you want. 

[Myles]

Once again,  we see the same thing completely differently.  

 

Not a surprise.

The difference is that he is right on this issue.

[NewColtsFan]

The difference is that he is right on this issue.

 

Well....    we're all entitled to our own opinion.     You agree with Bubbz.

 

I disagree.

[Myles]

Bubbz, Southwest, Bloodychamp, offensivlypc, Nadine, Superman and Shakedownstreet.

 

It just opens a can of worms that the NFL is correct in leaving closed.

 

I also agreed with them not letting Peyton wear the black shoes to honor Unites.  

What makes an ex player able to be honored with a change in uniform?   Who decides?   Who then explains to the players and the media why this person was and that person wasn't? 

Can you only honor former "great" players?   This can just spiral down too much to even open it up.   If anything I think they should get tighter on infractions like this.   A fine that would equate to $20 for most people isn't anything.

[OffensivelyPC]

I didn't even think of that...ugh...and I could see that snowballing through players trying to 1 up each other in the "yeah I said it" department.

Well, I personally don't have a problem with that.  It might be something that people roll their eyes at, but it's better to do it to fit in than to not do anything at all I suppose.  But then again, I'm not sure how much that helps whatever the cause might be.  But if I am being as honest as possible, if it gets people to donate to charities or follow suit for the better of lesser privileged people, I'm all for it no matter if it makes my eyes roll into the back of my head.

[OffensivelyPC]

Bubbz, Southwest, Bloodychamp, offensivlypc, Nadine, Superman and Shakedownstreet.

 

It just opens a can of worms that the NFL is correct in leaving closed.

 

I also agreed with them not letting Peyton wear the black shoes to honor Unites.  

What makes an ex player able to be honored with a change in uniform?   Who decides?   Who then explains to the players and the media why this person was and that person wasn't? 

Can you only honor former "great" players?   This can just spiral down too much to even open it up.   If anything I think they should get tighter on infractions like this.   A fine that would equate to $20 for most people isn't anything.

Well, if we're all being honest, what's really being hurt?  Nothing.  In the end, we're talking about someone who wears different color shoes or eye patches with Iron Head on it.  Most of the time, this stuff will be harmless.  But it only takes that one time for it to be the perfect storm and get blown completely out of proportion.  It's then when sponsors are involved, the NFL's image (what's left in tact anyway), and all because the player made some unilateral expression of something.  As you said, better to close it all off in the first place, which is, quite frankly, a sad thing to have to say.  

[Myles]

Well, if we're all being honest, what's really being hurt?  Nothing.  In the end, we're talking about someone who wears different color shoes or eye patches with Iron Head on it.  Most of the time, this stuff will be harmless.  But it only takes that one time for it to be the perfect storm and get blown completely out of proportion.  It's then when sponsors are involved, the NFL's image (what's left in tact anyway), and all because the player made some unilateral expression of something.  As you said, better to close it all off in the first place, which is, quite frankly, a sad thing to have to say.  

It is sad, but it is also reality.  

Certainly if they allowed people to wear a little patch if they wanted to honor someone or draw attention to a cause, it would end up causing trouble.

Someone may wear a patch to honor Aaron Hernandez or Rae Carruth.   If it was allowed when  Vick was jailed, there would be some wearing patches honoring him.   He had many NFL players supporting him.   Would the NFL then have to allow patches saying "Support Vick".  

 

To go with a current debate, what if some players wanted to draw attention to the cause of more gun control.    They would also need to allow the pro gun supporters to draw attention to their own cause.  

[OffensivelyPC]

It is sad, but it is also reality.  

Certainly if they allowed people to wear a little patch if they wanted to honor someone or draw attention to a cause, it would end up causing trouble.

Someone may wear a patch to honor Aaron Hernandez or Rae Carruth.   If it was allowed when  Vick was jailed, there would be some wearing patches honoring him.   He had many NFL players supporting him.   Would the NFL then have to allow patches saying "Support Vick".  

 

To go with a current debate, what if some players wanted to draw attention to the cause of more gun control.    They would also need to allow the pro gun supporters to draw attention to their own cause.  

Yup, and in the end, what goes on during the field is a game.  But I suppose this is the conflict you invite when you encourage your players to reach out and be active in their communities.  Because what these players do off the field makes the game much bigger than the sport itself.  There's obviously going to be a line somewhere and the NFL I think has the right position on the matter.  Of course, and while Superman didn't point it out explicitly, it is implicit in the post - and that is, the NFL has allowed it before.  So if they're going to fine these guys or reject the ability to do it, they need to keep consistent with it.  

 

Honestly, I wonder if there's been previous demonstrations that has gotten the NFL to change its stance and reject it outright for everyone.  The one that comes to mind is when St. Louis players came out of the tunnel with their hands raised to protest the Michael Brown shooting.  The NFL didn't fine them for it but the reaction to it was met with extreme reactions on both sides.  Then there was all the DV issues last year and I wonder if the NFL/owners/committees had some conversations that basically resulted in taking a hard line starting in the 2015 season.  I could be off my hinges, I don't know, but like I said, they've allowed it at times in the past seasons, and they haven't at least in these two most recent events.  

[Myles]

Yup, and in the end, what goes on during the field is a game.  But I suppose this is the conflict you invite when you encourage your players to reach out and be active in their communities.  Because what these players do off the field makes the game much bigger than the sport itself.  There's obviously going to be a line somewhere and the NFL I think has the right position on the matter.  Of course, and while Superman didn't point it out explicitly, it is implicit in the post - and that is, the NFL has allowed it before.  So if they're going to fine these guys or reject the ability to do it, they need to keep consistent with it.  

 

Honestly, I wonder if there's been previous demonstrations that has gotten the NFL to change its stance and reject it outright for everyone.  The one that comes to mind is when St. Louis players came out of the tunnel with their hands raised to protest the Michael Brown shooting.  The NFL didn't fine them for it but the reaction to it was met with extreme reactions on both sides.  Then there was all the DV issues last year and I wonder if the NFL/owners/committees had some conversations that basically resulted in taking a hard line starting in the 2015 season.  I could be off my hinges, I don't know, but like I said, they've allowed it at times in the past seasons, and they haven't at least in these two most recent events.  

You may be on to something.  

I agree consistency is what is needed.   The way I see it is:   The only way to be consistent is to have a rule against any and all unapproved uniform changes.  

[BOTT]

Damned old white guys

[Myles]

Damned old white guys

Those old white guys sure do get a lot of blame for ruining the sport that is the most popular in the country.

Those "s!