jump to last post 1-10 of 10 discussions (47 posts)

How does the NFL come back from the national anthem protests?

  1. Readmikenow profile image91
    Readmikenowposted 3 weeks ago

    https://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13721658.jpg
    A recent survey showed the favorability rating for the NFL has been cut in half.  I never thought I'd see the day with Pittsburgh Steeler fans would take videos of themselves burning their Steeler gear, which is not cheap. There was even a man who burned his season tickets.  How does the NFL get past this anger and hurt feelings?

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      I saw one CEO has pulled advertising as well.  They're going to be hit pretty hard, right where it will really hurt - their pocketbook.  Perhaps they can cut player salaries by 75% (still leaving far more than the average worker), but one wonders if the players would put their pocketbook into the fray and keep playing.  Maybe they wave their new contracts at the fans instead of insulting them to get attention.

    2. colorfulone profile image89
      colorfuloneposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      I heard President Trump saying that he has talked to some of the owners of NFL Teams, and that they are telling him that 'we have to do something'.  Trump volunteered that he thinks the owners are afraid of the players.  That has raised a few eyebrows, including mine. 

      Should be interesting to see what the players are willing lose over a farce.  Hands up, don't shoot, was based on a lie.  A farce!

  2. Readmikenow profile image91
    Readmikenowposted 3 weeks ago

    Well, wouldn't that be something?  NFL players kicking out their own cash to keep playing professional football. I believe the NFL is going to have to change in order to survive.

  3. abwilliams profile image84
    abwilliamsposted 3 weeks ago

    I don't know that they do come back from this. Football will go on, but it will take a lot for it to get back to where it once was, before being hijacked by Colin K. He was the hijacker and the NFL paid the ransom, showing where their true allegiance lies.

    1. PrettyPanther profile image80
      PrettyPantherposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      What do you mean "where their true allegiance lies"?

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

        The true allegiance of the NFL is in folding green paper.  Can there be any doubt of that?

  4. abwilliams profile image84
    abwilliamsposted 3 weeks ago

    Meaning....it is certainly not with the Fans. 
    This past Sunday, Sports Announcers were continually using the word "unity", speaking of the unity which was being shown by the NFL, which left me wondering, what does that mean, what are they saying?
    Are they saying the Players, Owners and Staff are uniting against us, the Fans?
    Uniting against those of us that have a big problem with the blatant disrespect which is continually being shown and so have utilized our 1st Amendment Right to speak out against it?
    Are they uniting in continuing this ugly display, whether the Fans like it or not, could say, are they giving us their middle finger?

    1. GA Anderson profile image83
      GA Andersonposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      Hi there abwilliams,

      Could the actions of some teams, (or was it just one?), of not taking the field until after the Anthem, or not penalizing the kneeling players  - the "unity" you are speculating on, be the actions of support for the player's Right to protest? That is my perception of these developments.

      I too see the NFL in a tough position. They are damned, (by the "outraged" fan base), if they
      don't make some statement or take some action concerning the kneeling protesters, and they are damned, (by everyone else), if they do take some kind of action.

      GA

      1. PrettyPanther profile image80
        PrettyPantherposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

        Yes, they are damned no matter what position they take.  So, they might as well choose the morally correct position.  Of course, I think one should, as much as one can given whatever the circumstances might be, take the morally correct position.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

          Is there anything morally correct, OR morally incorrect in disrespecting the flag?  In disrespecting a nation or it's people? 

          Worse, for the NFL, what is morally incorrect in allowing an employee to do that?  Now what is the moral position, after the first question is decided, and the unenviable position it puts the NFL and owners in?  Is it moral for a employer to require certain actions (as in their rule book) of employees?  Or must they all employees to do whatever they wish, regardless of what it is saying of the employer?

          I've never worked for an employer that would allow employees to make public statements, while on the job (or usually otherwise as well) that puts the employer in a bad light.  Never heard of one, either.  And never considered it part of morality, either - it's just an employers right.

          1. PrettyPanther profile image80
            PrettyPantherposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

            You think it's disrespect.  I don't.

            You think it puts the employer in a bad light.  Apparently they don't think so, or at least have chosen not to forbid it.

            Their choice.  Your choice to be all butthurt and boycott the NFL.

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

              Sorry, thought you wanted to discuss the morality of the NFL taking action.

              What I think is irrelevant; it's what the people paying the NFL think that's going to count.  And from what I see on social media it's running about 9 to 1 against.  That's likely to be very, very expensive very quickly. DirectTV has already offered refunds to purchasers of the season, for instance, and saw where one CEO that normally advertises there has cancelled it for the year.

              https://www.avclub.com/directv-offers-n … 1818828656

              Somebody besides me doesn't think much of it!  I really do think you're in a pretty small minority - those that ignore the insult or pretend it wasn't there aren't common.  At least no one's hurt yet - the flag burners and desecrators years ago weren't always so lucky - perhaps it shows we've grown a little more tolerant, even if there are still limits.

              1. PrettyPanther profile image80
                PrettyPantherposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

                Okay, morality.  My morality says that if a person has a grievance and wants to draw attention to that grievance in a manner that harms no one, inconveniences no one, and violates no law, then let them be.

                Simple, isn't it?

                As far as money, that's just money.  I'm sure the NFL owners are worrying about it and taking appropriate steps.  So far, I approve of the steps they have taken (that I am currently aware of), as I see them as morally correct. 

                I have to laugh at those who will stop watching football because of some peaceful kneeling.  Their morality deems a man's choice to kneel unacceptable, but hey, they'll watch grown men endure years of brain trauma, risking mental illness for money, and that's a-okay. 

                Like I said, we all have our choices, but they certainly say a lot about who we are, don't they?

                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

                  "Simple, isn't it?"

                  Maybe.  Does emotional harm count?  Does intentionally giving offense count as harm?  Does financial harm count?  Is blocking a street an "inconvenience"?  Or a store front?  Perhaps most important, does your morality apply to respondents to that attention getting act - are they allowed  to try and change objectionable actions of others via peaceful means - or do morals require they quietly slink away and leave the offenders alone?

                  Or maybe it's not so simple (morals seldom are, after all).

                  Is there a reason that you continue to term the act "kneeling" rather that what it was intended to be: "disrespecting the flag and country"?  A whitewash effort to spin it into something more innocuous that it was?

                  1. PrettyPanther profile image80
                    PrettyPantherposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

                    You have strayed so far from the intent of the act of kneeling that I see no point in continuing to discuss this with you.  I don't have any idea why you brought up other types of protests, as that is not the subject of this thread.  However, it does fit your typical debate style of inserting what isn't there into a discussion to make it easier for you to argue against.

                    I'm not interested in continuing to try to keep you on subject.

                2. GA Anderson profile image83
                  GA Andersonposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Prettypanther, it sure looks like you are missing at least part of the point. The issue for many, many, folks is about a lot more than just "peaceful kneeling."

                  I understand that you think those folks that view the action as disrespectful are wrong, but I am not sure you understand how closely held that perception of disrespect is for those folks. That you see it as a small thing doesn't mean it is one.

                  GA

                  1. PrettyPanther profile image80
                    PrettyPantherposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

                    Well, GA, I do understand that it is a very big deal to them. Apparently, it is a much bigger deal to them than the unnecessary deaths of black men at the hands of police. And, the inability of our justice system, so far,  to fix the problem. That is why I say that the issues we choose to ignore and the ones we choose to get all butthurt about are a reflection of who we are as people.

                    I'm not saying that the feelings of. those who see the action as disrespectful are invalid. But, let's take our fearless leader as an example. He could choose to address the issue of systemic injustice in a thoughtful and productive manner. He could also say he doesn't support the manner in which the protests are being done. Instead, he calls the protestors SOBs, and cynically uses his position to whip up his base, when the protestors are engaging in the quintessential American and Democratic act of peacefully protesting an injustice.

                    Do we really want to be a country where our president tells a private employer to fire people? Do we really think the act of kneeling during the anthem is worse than the injustice that prompted it?

                    Really?

        2. GA Anderson profile image83
          GA Andersonposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

          I bet we have different ideas about what the "morally correct" action should be PrettyPanther.

          My view would be that the morally correct action would be no action. The players have as much Right to protest as you or I do.

          However, my view is apparently complicated by an NFL rule dealing with on-field National Anthem behavior. By complicated I mean that if that "rule" information is right, then I would say that the NFL would also be morally correct in enforcing that rule - which would mean taking action against protesting, (this particular protest and actions we are discussing), players.

          GA

          1. PrettyPanther profile image80
            PrettyPantherposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

            The rule says players" should" stand, so I'm not certain the NFL could force a player to stand or punish a player for not standing.

      2. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

        Re: the player that stood at the tunnel mouth while the rest of the team stayed inside.  He later said he shouldn't have done that; that he threw the team under the bus.

        On must wonder just what went on in that locker room, or at home, after the game.  Just what did the other players say?  Did they support him in his display of respect or did the complain that he made them look bad?  What made him come to the decision that he mistreated his team mates - that he feels he did or comments/actions from those mates, coaches, etc.?

        1. GA Anderson profile image83
          GA Andersonposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

          Hi Wilderness, I hadn't heard that "tunnel" story. I don't know just what to think of that fellow. If he stood at the tunnel mouth during the anthem, was he doing it because he respects the flag?  If so, and he now feels he let his teammates down - then that is a pretty shallow respect. Or, if he was supporting the protest by not going on the field, then he is still half-assed, because he didn't have the courage to go all the way and kneel.

          GA

          1. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

            The team had decided to stay in the locker room.  He came just far enough out (end of the tunnel) to stand for the anthem, hand over heart with the flag in view.  He was supporting (if that's the right word) saluting the flag and paying respect.

            But I have to wonder just how much flak he took for making the team mates look bad by being the only one to stand and honor the flag.  None?  Or enough to cause to now make the statement he's sorry he did it?

            1. abwilliams profile image84
              abwilliamsposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

              Following Villanueva's stance, sales for his jersey went through the roof and then came the Statement of apology.
              Had to be the biggest case of buyer's remorse ever!

              1. wilderness profile image95
                wildernessposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

                I don't know - I understand peer pressure from high school.  And I can imagine what locker room response may have happened, or even on the practice field (is he now hit harder, jabbed after going down, etc. by angry team mates?).  Don't know, of course, that it happened but can certainly understand how it might have, and to the point that a "retraction" was necessary.

      3. abwilliams profile image84
        abwilliamsposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

        Hi GA, sorry just now back. Crazy day!
        Yes, of course....all while giving us the middle finger (just kidding)

        The NFL has put themselves in quite a pickle, because they did not deal with Mr. K. and nip this thing in the bud last year.
        Lucky for them though, we now have a Prez that doesn't mince words and now they can blame this entire fiasco on him!
        Colin who? wink

    2. PrettyPanther profile image80
      PrettyPantherposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      Many coaches and other NFL figures have explained what they mean by unity.  Do you not take them at their word?

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

        Who cares?  After the intentional slap and insult, who cares what they have to say?

  5. abwilliams profile image84
    abwilliamsposted 3 weeks ago

    I wouldn't be surprised if that's the case.
    It is a shame, the majority of the players just want to play football and they are caught up in this whether they like it or not. I do feel for those players!

  6. colorfulone profile image89
    colorfuloneposted 3 weeks ago

    Coach Fired for Kneeling After Games to Pray: ‘Why Don’t I Have the Same Rights as Kneeling-Protesters?’
    Read more at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/accesspoli … hTZ0Bos.99

    The corrupt 9th Circuit court ruled. 
    There's that double standard again!

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      Do you then see the exhibition of private religious ceremonies by performing the common practice of kneeling for prayer at a public school function as the same as the exhibition of disrespecting our flag at a private function on private land?

      I don't see any comparison at all except for the matter of kneeling, and one instance is accepted practice while the other violates common custom.

      1. PrettyPanther profile image80
        PrettyPantherposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

        You are right. It is a completely different issue. If you want Christian prayer on the field following a high school football game, then you better be prepared to accept Buddhist prayer, Muslim prayer, Jewish prayer, Satanic prayer, and any other religious prayer. Somehow, I doubt that's really what most Christians want.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

          LOL  When the Idaho legislature was subjected to a Buddhist (as I recall) prayer at the beginning of the day a bunch of them walked out.  "Only Christian prayers allowed here!" was the clear message.  And I recall an incident when a Pagan mom took a case of spell books to school to hand out because "All faiths are welcome to provide religious literature to students that want it" only to have the policy promptly changed (as in overnight) and the policy rescinded.  She was pretty upset that her child brought home a bible from a box of them at the front door of the school, but Christians were suddenly just as concerned when a different faith supplied their children with literature.

  7. abwilliams profile image84
    abwilliamsposted 3 weeks ago

    It is about consistency PP!
    Don't jump on the bandwagon, when an agitator like Colin K. takes his moment, say he has every Right to do so and those of us that speak out on how he is going about it...by dissing America, don't have the Right to do so. All while honing in on Coach Kennedy, taking it even further, seeing to it that he is fired, because 'his moment' is a subtle God moment.
    There is a double standard, Liberals are driving it and the rest of us aren't just going to shut up and sit down!

    1. PrettyPanther profile image80
      PrettyPantherposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      Consistency? Have you heard of separation of church and state?

  8. abwilliams profile image84
    abwilliamsposted 3 weeks ago

    Do you even know what that means, The separation between church and state?
    The Founders put that in, so that we'd never have a National Church, as was the case in England, with the Church of England. We have the freedom to go to the church of our choosing, not one chosen for us, along with our many other Feedoms...Thank you Founding Fathers.
    Of course, the wording has been hijacked by liberal Progressives, as all of our History often is, they revise it into something else.

    1. PrettyPanther profile image80
      PrettyPantherposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      Liberal progressives? You mean the Supreme Court?

      We are a nation of laws. Are you suggesting Christians should be exempt from the law?

      Edited to add:  In case you didn't know, the NFL is a private enterprise. Schools are not.

      1. abwilliams profile image84
        abwilliamsposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

        Well we can thank Liberal Progressives for Roe v Wade, but that's another subject for another day and no I wasn't talking about the Supreme Court.
        Not exempt, just don't agree that one takes a knee gets fired, while another takes a knee, gets a pass.

        1. abwilliams profile image84
          abwilliamsposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

          As for your add, again,  misrepresentation as to what was meant by separation of Church/State has morphed into something false.

          1. PrettyPanther profile image80
            PrettyPantherposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

            I didn't realize you were a constitutional scholar.

            Do you realize that if Christian prayer is allowed to be demonstrated after a football game, then any other type of prayer would also be allowed?  That includes Satanic prayer. If you allow one in a governmental entity, then you must allow them  all. Are you okay with that?

            And, to be clear,  your comparison of the two acts is not valid because different rules apply to public versus private entities.

  9. abwilliams profile image84
    abwilliamsposted 3 weeks ago

    Actually even before I was active in the Tea Party, I held a couple of Rallies way back when George W was running. I contacted my Congressman and received dozens and dozens of pocket constitutions. Before I started handing them out, I did an in-depth study, just in case anyone had any questions for me. I still hand them out to this day, but no I've never claimed to be a scholar.

    I guess we just don't know to whom an individual is praying to, when he/she takes a knee and it's done in total silence, do we?

    1. colorfulone profile image89
      colorfuloneposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      That would be private speech I believe.

  10. Onusonus profile image88
    Onusonusposted 2 weeks ago

    Question;
    If taking a knee is free speech, how come this guy had to apologize for standing?
    https://content.newsinc.com/jpg/2035/33029700/64128075.jpg?t=1506365340

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

      Something gives me the strong impression that he took more flak from his team mates than they did from Trump.

      1. Onusonus profile image88
        Onusonusposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

        I'd be willing to bet that he got even more flack from his boss. In fact I think he would have faced a fine if he didn't apologize, just like when they get fined for wearing 911 shoes, or express solidarity with law enforcement.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

          Something like that; the price of expressing respect for his country suddenly got too high.

          Don't know that's what happened, but I'd bet money on it anyway.  And I'm not much of a gambler.

 
working