NFL adopts new Anthem policy

[Myles]

6 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

He didn’t see it that way

Because he is a disrespectful man   That was a disrespectful move.  

My father in law is an 80 year old diabetic.   At his last birthday party, we were all respectful enough not to have tons of sugar-filled desserts that he could not eat.   It's pretty easy to be respectful of someone, especially for 1 day.

[Nadine]

Just now, csmopar said:

see my above post. He lost that job in December of the previous season and couldnt win it back, all due to performance, which had been suffering for quite some time.  What's next, an age discrimination law suit by TO when no one brings back a 40+ yr old WR?

It seems really important to you to discredit this man.  

[DougDew]

12 minutes ago, Cynjin said:

 

Why can't it be both?  

 

My larger argument about the protests has to do with what I perceive as the disrespect.  I did not know about the timeline until I saw it here.  It seems very coincidental that his protest occurs right after he was benched.  Could it be a coincidence?  Sure, but it is also plausible that he just got mad about getting benched and decided to essentially throw a figurative fit.

Yes.  I said that on page 3 of this thread I think.  I simply remember the kneel down the morning of being benched, and then comments throughout the day alluding to him being a baby....laughing at him.

 

After the interview where he talks about some greater cause, people were afraid to laugh at him......because that's how people react when you simply mention a greater cause. 

[csmopar]

1 minute ago, NFLfan said:

 

In your timeline, do you have when we learned of the protest or when the protest actually began? From what I have read, he started his protest well before the media publicized it. 

from what I gather, the media didn't catch it until a couple days AFTER he started but that the day he started was hours after officially being benched for the second time to Gabbert. 

[csmopar]

3 minutes ago, Nadine said:

It seems really important to you to discredit this man.  

Not at all. Actually, I'd like to do the opposite as I think this whole police profiling thing is a big deal on a personal level. Something I'd like to see fixed. I'm simply looking at ALL aspects/view points as best I can with the information that's out there. And if Kaepernick can be proven to have been sincere, this goes along way in my mind.

[Cynjin]

8 minutes ago, Nadine said:

How does it take focus away?  His protest was about police brutality, he's saying he wasn't hired because of the protest = Publicity for the protest

 

Because they won't be talking about the issue,  they will be talking about the act causing teams to not hire him.

[NFLfan]

1 minute ago, csmopar said:

from what I gather, the media didn't catch it until a couple days AFTER he started but that the day he started was hours after officially being benched for the second time to Gabbert. 

 

Can you provide dates? I understand that his protest started a while back but no one realized it. I will have to research it but I don't have the time at the moment. 

[Cynjin]

7 minutes ago, NFLfan said:

 

I don't have the time to check but I think he had that in mind a while back. I don't think the timeline changes that. 

 

That would be interesting to find out. 

[csmopar]

4 minutes ago, Nadine said:

It seems really important to you to discredit this man.  

to expand, I feel that for the most part, everyone has jumped onto one side or the other of this issue/story.  However, as in every single issue/case/story, there are 3 sides to every story.  His side, then their side and somewhere in the middle, lies the truth.  The truth is all that concerns me but you have to look and listen to all sides to stand a chance of finding it.  

 

Hopefully I stated that well enough to make sense.

[csmopar]

1 minute ago, NFLfan said:

 

Can you provide dates? I understand that his protest started a while back but no one realized it. I will have to research it but I don't have the time at the moment. 

The dates were in my post a couple pages back, August 26th is the date ESPN has as the benching and the first recorded protest.  If he'd done it before hand, no one noticed or recorded it. Let me know if you find something to the contrary please.

[NFLfan]

5 minutes ago, Cynjin said:

Because they won't be talking about the issue,  they will be talking about the act causing teams to not hire him.

 

But they are working on issues. There are now a lot of different initiatives taking place because NFL players are now more involved in the community since the whole protesting started. Many fans are not aware of it and are only aware of what the media puts out, which is fans are upset about kneeling and others are upset about Kaepernick not getting hired. There is a lot more happening but it is not sensationalistic and don't drive up ratings for the networks.

[dgambill]

47 minutes ago, Nadine said:

Colin Kaepernick was awarded Amnesty International's Ambassador of Conscience Award.

 

This is the global human rights organization's biggest honor. The award, which “celebrates individuals and groups who speak out for justice,” include former South Africa president Nelson Mandela, Malala Yousafzai, the education activist from Pakistan who survived an assassination attempt by the Taliban, and rock group U2.

 

 

Here's his acceptance speech

 

 

Not to get too far into the weeds...but getting an Award from Amnesty International doesn't make someone or their cause a good thing. While it's easy to say what they supposedly stand for is a good thing looking on the surface...that organization has a lot of corruption and politically charged stances etc that not everyone agrees with. So an honor I'm sure to him may not be an honor in the eyes of others.

 

I'm happy the NFL took this stance. It allows those that don't want to stand for the flag to remain in the locker room and it allows the the teams to honor the flag. It's 2018....I don't know of anyone in the US that doesn't have the ability or platform through social media or the public square to voice their opinions and be heard. I completely understand the NFL wanting to control it's public message and image and that is fair of any business. The owners aren't infringing on player rights. While at work they are to do the work of the business and I don't see any owners trying to control what they say outside of work. I know it won't put an end to the media and ESPN and other outlets pushing their agendas down peoples throats but hopefully it will allow for a few more minutes of peace on Sundays during these games where people can watch and enjoy a sporting event without the FOX News/CNN commentary.

 

My feelings on Colin aren't exactly simple. His message has evolved over time and kind of changed and while nobody supports police brutality and we all want improvement for our poor and economically challenged fellow citizens some of his actions from wearing socks with "cops as pigs on them" to his t-shirt honoring Castro etc really make me question his integrity and knowledge on many of these issues. I can be supportive of honoring the hard working police officers who have perhaps the most difficult and dangerous job in the world and still support ending the shooting of unarmed individuals (which are primarily white but of black and any skin color). My personal feelings on why he started down the road he did and perhaps how he has evolved his message etc I can put aside from the man himself. The causes themselves can have good intentions even and some I may agree with even if I don't agree with the methods used to bring light and conversation to them. I wish the best for Colin as a person and recognize he is trying to do right in his mind even if I may disagree with some of the narratives he is using. Good luck to him. I don't feel sorry for him. He chose to go down this road and sacrifice his career which I think he could have had one. But this was his choice...and he had to choose his priority...since playing in the NFL wasn't his priority he is now a mouth piece for his many social causes. Nothing wrong with that...and nothing wrong with the NFL asking him to ask their workers to make their career their priority and leave the politics etc at the door when they step on the field. It's a mine field these topics and I can see why the NFL just wants to focus on their product on the field and stay out of political statements...where they will always have a losing side one way or another.

[csmopar]

1 minute ago, NFLfan said:

 

But they are working on issues. There are now a lot of different initiatives taking place because NFL players are now more involved in the community since the whole protesting started. Many fans are not aware of it and are only aware of what the media puts out, which is fans are upset about kneeling and others are upset about Kaepernick not getting hired. There is a lot more happening but it is not sensationalistic and don't drive up ratings for the nwtworks.

100% agree.  Out of likes for the day but exactly.

[PrincetonTiger]

11 minutes ago, Myles said:

Because he is a disrespectful man   That was a disrespectful move.  

My father in law is an 80 year old diabetic.   At his last birthday party, we were all respectful enough not to have tons of sugar-filled desserts that he could not eat.   It's pretty easy to be respectful of someone, especially for 1 day.

You felt it was but not him and that has nothing to do with personal belief

[NFLfan]

2 minutes ago, csmopar said:

The dates were in my post a couple pages back, August 26th is the date ESPN has as the benching and the first recorded protest.  If he'd done it before hand, no one noticed or recorded it. Let me know if you find something to the contrary please.

 

Ok. I will check on that later. 

 

So you are saying that the first protest took place in preseason?

[DougDew]

Folks, this is serious business.  Nobody really cares about stats or politics. That's just talk.

 

We all pay overpriced tickets, overpriced beer, parking, and many overpriced taxes in surrounding counties, all of which go to the NFL; who now sends out $90 mill of the money to organizations.

 

Its important to know the timeline, if Kaep was lying and who created a message to foster sympathy for something that may also be based on lies.

 

The goal is to not discredit Kaep.  The goal should be to determine if he is the public sympathetic figurehead for a fraud scheme.

 

Class-Action maybe?

[PrincetonTiger]

Helpful Hint from TigerTown

  be very careful attacking a person 

[Myles]

5 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

You felt it was but not him and that has nothing to do with personal belief

Yes, he did not feel the need to be respectful to the 100's of war veterans in attendance.    That shapes my view of his character.   Not a good character guy.  

[csmopar]

5 minutes ago, NFLfan said:

 

Ok. I will check on that later. 

 

So you are saying that the first protest took place in preseason?

yes. according to ESPN's article on the timeline dated 3 September, 2017.

[csmopar]

6 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Helpful Hint from TigerTown

  be very careful attacking a person 

is that directed at me in some way?

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, Myles said:

Yes, he did not feel the need to be respectful to the 100's of war veterans in attendance.    That shapes my view of his character.   Not a good character guy.  

That is your opinion not anywhere near a fact 

[Nadine]

15 minutes ago, csmopar said:

to expand, I feel that for the most part, everyone has jumped onto one side or the other of this issue/story.  However, as in every single issue/case/story, there are 3 sides to every story.  His side, then their side and somewhere in the middle, lies the truth.  The truth is all that concerns me but you have to look and listen to all sides to stand a chance of finding it.  

 

Hopefully I stated that well enough to make sense.

I know it makes sense to you.

 

[PrincetonTiger]

Just now, csmopar said:

is that directed at me in some way?

No it was a general statement about putting down a person based on one event

 

 

[The Fish]

Kaepernick shouldn't shocked that he got rolled from the NFL though. Guys who annoy teams have that happen to them. It happened to Tim Tebow for reasons rooted in the side vs. side fight. Teams don't have the means to keep the focus on football when that stuff get's interjected in to a locker room too deep. I happen to think it was temper tantrum that morphed into a protest as a method of saving face. I could be wrong, but I've got a pair of "pig socks" that say it's not all in good faith anyway.

 

Secondly. The NBA dealt with this 20 years ago and no one cares anymore. The bottom line is that the NFL has decided that it's in their economic interest and by extension it's players to try and put these protests back in the box and it's glaringly obvious that's true. They lost 8% viewership last season alone. I have my doubts that this "Rule" helps as much as they're hoping, but time will tell.

 

 

[PrincetonTiger]

5 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Kaepernick shouldn't shocked that he got rolled from the NFL though. Guys who annoy teams have that happen to them. It happened to Tim Tebow for reasons rooted in the side vs. side fight. Teams don't have the means to keep the focus on football when that stuff get's interjected in to a locker room too deep. I happen to think it was temper tantrum that morphed into a protest as a method of saving face. I could be wrong, but I've got a pair of "pig socks" that say it's not all in good faith anyway.

 

Secondly. The NBA dealt with this 20 years ago and no one cares anymore. The bottom line is that the NFL has decided that it's in their economic interest and by extension it's players to try and put these protests back in the box and it's glaringly obvious that's true. They lost 8% viewership last season alone. I have my doubts that this "Rule" helps as much as they're hoping, but time will tell.

 

 

Your second point is why I have real issues with the NFL

 

 

  I am not adventurous enough to have wild socks

[NFLfan]

I have written too much for the day. Happy Memorial Day Weekend, everyone. Continue the discussion.

 

Remember those who died for us to have these conversations.

 

"There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured with what is right in America."

– William J. Clinton

 

(This is not meant as a political statement although it can be viewed as such. Take it for the message itself.)

[csmopar]

1 minute ago, NFLfan said:

I have written too much for the day. Happy Memorial Day Weekend, everyone. Continue the discussion.

 

Remember those who died for us to have these conversations.

 

"There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured with what is right in America."

– William J. Clinton

 

(This is not meant as a political statement although it can be viewed as such. Take it for the message itself.)

Have a good and safe weekend bud. 

 

And I agree with that message. 

[csmopar]

17 minutes ago, Myles said:

Yes, he did not feel the need to be respectful to the 100's of war veterans in attendance.    That shapes my view of his character.   Not a good character guy.  

Eh I don't think I'm willing to say that just yet.  We've all had the moments of poor decision making. Which is why im looking at the timeline so much 

[Narcosys]

59 minutes ago, csmopar said:

from what I gather, the media didn't catch it until a couple days AFTER he started but that the day he started was hours after officially being benched for the second time to Gabbert. 

He started by sitting on the bench, because he was told that's what he was getting.

[csmopar]

3 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

He started by sitting on the bench, because he was told that's what he was getting.

Ok not sure if serious but if so, wouldn't that pretty much confirm it was a protest that started because he was benched?

[bluebombers87]

1 hour ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

No it was presented as statstic, if it was clear I wouldn’t have felt the need to check it now would I?

 

No bias-prism at all, again clarifying your position, although it’s illuminating that’s how you think.

 

Just because it’s a low percentage doesn’t take away from the issue. Are you saying it’s ok for people to commit in effect murder (if the fatality proves to be unjustified) because hey “it’s less than 1%”. So if I meet 200 people in my life and kill one I’m okay... because it’s less than 1%.  This is even before we’ve got into the topic of there being higher incidences with certain demographics. 

 

Honestly America, if you don’t think you have an issue with guns, gun crime and sadly in some cases people who are meant to use guns to “protect” then you need a reality check. 

I know this was said a ways back but I’d be careful about generalizing too much.  I’d hate to have to get into the weeds about how wrong this sentiment is, but if I must, I’ll happily do so.

[Buck Showalter]

1 hour ago, Myles said:

Because he is a disrespectful man   That was a disrespectful move.  

My father in law is an 80 year old diabetic.   At his last birthday party, we were all respectful enough not to have tons of sugar-filled desserts that he could not eat.   It's pretty easy to be respectful of someone, especially for 1 day.

Not sure about this analogy. Does someone's specific health concerns equal someone elses subjective idea of what is respectful and what is not. Why does disagreeing/making a statement have to mean disrespect? 

 

That is the point I do not understand about the outarage about the kneeling and this entire ordeal.

 

It is not like players are doing a signature TD or sack dance during the anthem, they are in fact still "observing" the anthem they are just "breaking the tradition" of standing by kneeling to voice an opinion about what should be a very legitimate concern.

 

I fail to see how that equals disrespect. 

 

[Nadine]

40 minutes ago, DougDew said:

And what many don't get is....is that rational thought won't change the opinion.  You can make a rational argument, and they won't care.

 

Resistance has no logic, its just resentment.  They can't get any money if they reveal the resent, so they mask it with words, causes, and phony stats,....which change too frequently to be legitimate.

serious stereotyping and demeaning of anyone not buying into what you are selling.  Ease up

[Myles]

54 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

That is your opinion not anywhere near a fact 

All this is based on opinion.   It's his opinion that police are pigs.   Not a fact.  

Him protesting the national anthem during a ceremony to honor veterans (who many are in attendance) being disrespectful is more true than all police being pigs.  

 

Anyway, those are the things which put me against the guy.    Add to it that he let his girlfriend call the owner of the Ravens a cruel slave owner.   That alone should squash his collusion suit.

[bluebombers87]

3 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

Not sure about this analogy. Does someone's specific health concerns equal someone elses subjective idea of what is respectful and what is not. Why does disagreeing/making a statement have to mean disrespect? 

 

That is the point I do not understand about the outarage about the kneeling and this entire ordeal.

 

It is not like players are doing a signature TD or sack dance during the anthem, they are in fact still "observing" the anthem they are just "breaking the tradition" of standing by kneeling to voice an opinion about what should be a very legitimate concern.

 

I fail to see how that equals disrespect. 

 

It’s an analogy that makes sense from a certain angle.

 

Allow me to try and help you out:

I go to a funeral of your loved one, I am solemn, I look appropriately sad. But I’m wearing a stained NASCAR shirt, ratty cotton shorts, a crocs.  I’m still being respectful, but breaking with the tradition of appropriate attire.

[DougDew]

2 hours ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Statistically random.., sure. Actually random, no. Someone chose to pull that trigger, and as people charged with protecting their fellow citizens they better be able to justify it. 

 

That is the issue, end... of. Stop trying to hide it behind you Stalinsque interpretation of “statistics” 

 

 

What?  Of course there is always an action that creates the stat.  Yeah, someone chose to pull the trigger in an inappropriate way.  That will happen very few times, and a court of law will sort out the facts. 

 

What does "drawing attention" to the issue do for it?...bring investigations that don't already happen, bring a court case that doesn't already happen?  

 

Attention is already drawn to it....by process that's already set up to do it.  "Drawing attention" sounds like a Fake Excuse for a protest to shakedown the NFL.

 

The root of the cause, according to the resistors...despite police internal investigations....and court rulings.....is that police are shooting urban people at a rate higher than a rate you would get with just random human error. 

 

Talk about making assumptions.   They are convinced its happening despite the evidence and the facts not supporting it. 

[PrincetonTiger]

3 minutes ago, Myles said:

All this is based on opinion.   It's his opinion that police are pigs.   Not a fact.  

Him protesting the national anthem during a ceremony to honor veterans (who many are in attendance) being disrespectful is more true than all police being pigs.  

 

Anyway, those are the things which put me against the guy.    Add to it that he let his girlfriend call the owner of the Ravens a cruel slave owner.   That alone should squash his collusion suit.

Not to him or many others

[Myles]

11 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

Not sure about this analogy. Does someone's specific health concerns equal someone elses subjective idea of what is respectful and what is not. Why does disagreeing/making a statement have to mean disrespect? 

 

That is the point I do not understand about the outarage about the kneeling and this entire ordeal.

 

It is not like players are doing a signature TD or sack dance during the anthem, they are in fact still "observing" the anthem they are just "breaking the tradition" of standing by kneeling to voice an opinion about what should be a very legitimate concern.

 

I fail to see how that equals disrespect. 

 

My guess is that is was looked at differently by this guy.

[dgambill]

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Folks, this is serious business.  Nobody really cares about stats or politics. That's just talk.

 

We all pay overpriced tickets, overpriced beer, parking, and many overpriced taxes in surrounding counties, all of which go to the NFL; who now sends out $90 mill of the money to organizations.

 

Its important to know the timeline, if Kaep was lying who created a message to foster sympathy for something that may also be based on lies.

 

The goal is to not discredit Kaep.  The goal should be to determine if he is the public sympathetic figurehead for a fraud scheme.

 

Class-action maybe?

Overpriced is subjective. It's overpriced to you but someone else is perfectly willing to pay for it. The whole tax stuff is a whole ball of wax unto itself for sure. A lot of my tax money goes to causes I 100% don't support. Govt funds planned parenthood and I've got no choice in that. It isn't fair and I wish it would change but it happens. The NFL wastes tons of money on tons of things...this may or may not have a positive impact on those same communities that are being taxed to support the NFL in their community. I do think the organizations receiving money from this charity work should be monitored obviously...but it changes nothing. The 90 million is a small slice of the operating costs (and fully deductible tax write off for the NFL) so I doubt its affecting your cost of parking etc....and considering most parking costs are from private parking garages etc I would say just the ticket and beer prices should worry you. Fact is you don't have to pay anything to the NFL if you watch it on free tv. Am I mistaken part of the 90 million is coming from the players association? So actually the NFL isn't paying for this whole thing. The players association which gets dues from the players is putting money into this charity too. I guess I don't understand the problem. Why is giving money to social programs a bad thing?

[Buck Showalter]

25 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

It’s an analogy that makes sense from a certain angle.

 

Allow me to try and help you out:

I go to a funeral of your loved one, I am solemn, I look appropriately sad. But I’m wearing a stained NASCAR shirt, ratty cotton shorts, a crocs.  I’m still being respectful, but breaking with the tradition of appropriate attire.

Lol... 

Seriously would not bother me... Intentions mean more to me then outer appearances & if "that person" in your analogy was close to "my loved one" in your analogy, I probably would not be surprised...

 

I do not believe for an instance that kneeling players want to offend. I believe there is a difference between wanting your voice to be heard & offending...