The NFL and the National Anthem

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,048
To me. there's a common thread between this and JakeRae's post. NFL actions on both CTE and anthem protests have less to do with abstract policy and more how the NFL treats its employees (players) as less than human.

After thinking it through, I may be out too.
This is where I've found myself too.

Racism is one of the big buzzwords of the day, but the owners seem... worse than that. There are worse things than racism. They seem to deny the notion of inherent dignity entitled to all persons; concern with race might actually seem beneath them, though we obviously know some are racists too.

But racism at this point--Kaep's point--has been revealed to be simply one single facet of an organization whose divergence from my understanding of right and wrong and the very social contract this country is founded upon (and which has granted them the privilege of making billions through their anti-trump exemption). I mean, they don't respect humans.
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,432
His involvement transformed the debate. It didn't make it more difficult to discuss objectively.

Its difficult to parse the difference between "a racist policy" and "a policy that is geared to making sure racists don't stop watching."
I think his involvement did make it more difficult to discuss objectively for many people. It shouldn't but I find many normally rational people unable to discuss anything with regards to him.

If the policy is all about race then why isn't the NBA policy about race?
You admit that not all that are against kneeling are racist so obviously there is more to it. Do you believe the majority of people against kneeling for the anthem are racist?
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
I think his involvement did make it more difficult to discuss objectively for many people. It shouldn't but I find many normally rational people unable to discuss anything with regards to him.

If the policy is all about race then why isn't the NBA policy about race?
You admit that not all that are against kneeling are racist so obviously there is more to it. Do you believe the majority of people against kneeling for the anthem are racist?
Ask yourself: if the original kneeling player had been Eli Manning and the issue he was protesting had been the failure of this country to adequately support and care for veterans if there would have been this sort of reaction?
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,243
You admit that not all that are against kneeling are racist so obviously there is more to it. Do you believe the majority of people against kneeling for the anthem are racist?
The majority? I dont know. But I'm confident its a sizable enough block that the outrage machine would crumble if the racist vote were "not counted," as it were.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,048
I think his involvement did make it more difficult to discuss objectively for many people. It shouldn't but I find many normally rational people unable to discuss anything with regards to him.

If the policy is all about race then why isn't the NBA policy about race?
You admit that not all that are against kneeling are racist so obviously there is more to it. Do you believe the majority of people against kneeling for the anthem are racist?
It's not just the policy on paper. It's how, when, and why it was enacted.

Even the Supreme Court recognizes that speech is also action. This is an action. I don't believe it bears on free speech issues, but we can assess it as an action that they took and understand its meaning.

They didn't even consult the players. So this is a policy, enacted without consulting those whom it affects in their most fundamental sense of their self-expression and changes what they may and may not do, again, without consulting them, in response to certain players kneeling to NOT be forced to express something they didn't wish to. And we know that is the purpose. And it may make business sense, sure, but that's where our consumer votes come in, yeah? And why this discussion matters.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
To me. there's a common thread between this and JakeRae's post. NFL actions on both CTE and anthem protests have less to do with abstract policy and more how the NFL treats its employees (players) as less than human.

After thinking it through, I may be out too.
I believe that the NFL anthem rule is a racist policy. I have two reasons for that, the order of events that lead up to the anthem rule, and the disparate impact it has on minority players (in theory obviously as no games have taken place). I do not feel comfortable supporting the league with this rule in place. I haven't been happy with the league for a long time now but my love for the sport won out. It might be arbitrary that I am drawing the line in the sand over racism but for me this was the final straw. I am not delusional thinking that I could make a difference here but I am going to do everything in my extremely limited power to speak out. This is something worth speaking up about.

Edit grammar.
 
Last edited:

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
I believe that the NFL anthem rule is a racist policy. I have two reasons for that, the order of events that lead up to the anthem rule, and the disparate impact it has on minority players (in theory obviously as no games have taken place). I do not feel comfortable supporting the league with this rule in place. I haven't been happy with the league for a long time now but my love for the sport won out. It might be arbitrary that I am drawing the line in the sand over racism but for me this was the final straw. I am not delusional thinking that I could make a difference here but I am going to do everything in my extremely limited power to speak out. This is something worth speaking up about.

Edit grammar.
It’s very racist indeed. It’s a racist rule put together by racist owners (even Kraft) that voted for 45. They’re allowed to get away with it because there’s a racist in the White House right now who shouldn’t be there but is and he emboldens 60 million racists and ignorant people that voted for him.

I will be boycotting the NFL again this year. Until this racist rule is overturned and Kaepernick is signed there’s no need to watch. It’s easy once you get past week 3. Hell I caught up with past seasons of GOT instead of watching people beat the hell out of each other for the amusement of racist NFL owners like Kraft, Rooney, Mara, Jones etc...the only one who might not be racist is Davis.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,673
It’s very racist indeed. It’s a racist rule put together by racist owners (even Kraft) that voted for 45. They’re allowed to get away with it because there’s a racist in the White House right now who shouldn’t be there but is and he emboldens 60 million racists and ignorant people that voted for him.

I will be boycotting the NFL again this year. Until this racist rule is overturned and Kaepernick is signed there’s no need to watch. It’s easy once you get past week 3. Hell I caught up with past seasons of GOT instead of watching people beat the hell out of each other for the amusement of racist NFL owners like Kraft, Rooney, Mara, Jones etc...the only one who might not be racist is Davis.
Thanks for the update on your status.
 

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
The NFL is knee-jerk reacting to right-wing outrage that would simply not exist were the players white. They know this, and instead of standing up for the rights of their players, they are bowing down to racists. This really isn't a matter of opinion.



Yes, you are.



Kaepernick and others were quite clear about their intentions, and it was a Navy Seal that recommended kneeling. How else should they have gone about it? Get permission from Fox news and Breitbart?
No. Just because you want to make the situation binary doesn't meant that everyone's response must be either or. I haven't uttered a syllable or written one approving of the NFL's response. This is a freaking organization that has done everything it could to not take responsibility for what its game does to players including beloved white players of the past. Does anyone want to make the argument that the NFL only treats black players poorly? That's the binary position, isn't it? Kind of tough to argue for that one, though.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,048
No. Just because you want to make the situation binary doesn't meant that everyone's response must be either or. I haven't uttered a syllable or written one approving of the NFL's response. This is a freaking organization that has done everything it could to not take responsibility for what its game does to players including beloved white players of the past. Does anyone want to make the argument that the NFL only treats black players poorly? That's the binary position, isn't it? Kind of tough to argue for that one, though.
No, I don't think anyone wants to make that argument.

The argument here is if the NFL treats people poorly.

Nobody has to take that binary position--that's called "contrived dualism" and it's literally a formal logical fallacy.
 

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I find your desire to categorize those actions as "virtue signaling" to be an even more pronounced, obnoxious, and ill-considered version of virtue signaling. You're telling us you're "above" such protests and here's the real issue at hand, straight from the cranky white New Englander's mouth!

I mean, more to the point, I've been reading your posts here for over a decade. Let's say it doesn't exactly seem hard to annoy you and I'm struggling to understand why anyone should care that you're annoyed. That's the point of a protest.
You're right. It doesn't matter that I'm annoyed. And it's not hard to annoy me. So what.
But the goal of a protest is not just to get attention, it's also to make some kind of point. I thought they did a poor job of it though not as poor of a job as the fucking occupy wall street idiots.

And, yeah, it probably comes across as saying I'm above this though in my defense I'm only saying an argument was stupid.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,048
You're right. It doesn't matter that I'm annoyed. And it's not hard to annoy me. So what.
But the goal of a protest is not just to get attention, it's also to make some kind of point. I thought they did a poor job of it though not as poor of a job as the fucking occupy wall street idiots.

And, yeah, it probably comes across as saying I'm above this though in my defense I'm only saying an argument was stupid.
This has been one of the most effective protests in America in decades.

I am legitimately curious, though: Why do you say the argument was stupid? Or am I misunderstanding what you're saying the argument it?
 
Last edited:

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,478
Melrose, MA
That many of the of the same people that are heavily criticizing the NFL's policy are also applauding the NBA is intriguing to me.

NBA policy is more restrictive but they've allowed their players to wear t-shirts protesting police behavior pre-game and talk about social issues in press conferences. Then again as was posted in this thread previously, the NFL also has had players wearing t-shirts and players have talked about social issues. Of course, the NFL has in general shown they care little about their employees.

Seems to me a lot of this based on feelings for Trump, Goodell and the NFL in general before this issue. This is another data point that shows what a poor job Goodell has done for the league. The NFL lacks leadership and has become reactionary. Was the vote unanimous? did some abstain? was there even a vote? They can't even get that straight never mind articulate a clear, concise and sincere message.
The difference is not in the specific actions the different leagues have or haven't taken. The difference is that NBA owners, to a great extent, recognize that the NBA is a partnership (of sorts) between owners and players. The NFL owners, such as Bob "You can't have the inmates running the prison" McNair, barely even pretend.

The NBA players know, and are perhaps in more of a position to demand, that when they engage on social issues, the league will have their back. By contrast, the NFL players have every reason to believe that when they engage on social issues, the league will be quick to throw them under the bus.

The upshot of that is that the NBA players and owners can have a good faith negotation about forms of protest, while the NFL owners and players cannot.

I don't agree that this is all about racism and this policy makes NFL owners and anyone that follows the league racist. Is the NBA racist? I think a person can agree with the protester even if they disagree with the form of protest./quote]The NFL's (and GOP's) racism has been their abject failure to even attempt to engage with the players on the issue. In fact, they didn't fail to engage, they chose to disregard Kaepernick's intentions and substitute their own characterization of his actions.

None of them give would have given 2 shits about kneeling during the anthem if it wasn't done to protest state vioelnce against black Americans, but their response is to characterize kneeling as some great outrage against the country, the government, veterans, etc.

If Kaepernick had done something completely different that nevertheless managed to capture public attention, the league and Trump's GOP would have gone just as batshit insane over it and charatcerized it in the exact same way.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
As a veteran I was really angry by the kneeling during the national anthem at first. I stopped watching the NFL but the more I read and tried to understand why Kap was kneeling I got it. It seems like the NFL is trying to injure itself much like baseball did in 94. We'll see how it turns out but I hope the players use this to be louder about social injustice.

I would like to add that not all Trump supporters are racist and that by labeling them (my wife voted for him) as racist you are generalizing and stereotyping in the same manner of the people you are so against.
I'm bringing this back up as an answer to the question some have presented as to whether opposition to kneeling is inherently racist. The answer is no. This post demonstrates why. It also demonstrates what happens when someone whose objections are in good faith engages with this issue.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
How Trump’s Pressure Influenced the NFL to Change Its Anthem Rules

(Note: Article is likely behind a paywall; Googling the title might allow you to access it.)

Depositions given by Mr. Jones and other owners indicate that Mr. Trump’s criticism pushed the league to shift its stance. League executives publicly repeated the NFL’s aim to stay out politics. But privately, they made political calculations in response to Mr. Trump’s repeated hammering of the issue....

“I was totally supportive of [the players] until Trump made his statement,” Stephen Ross, the Miami Dolphins’ owner and creator of programs advocating for social justice, said in his deposi-tion. Noting that owners’ conversa-tions with Mr. Trump were relayed during a league meeting, he said: “I thought he changed the dialogue.”
 

Bosoxen

Bounced back
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 29, 2005
10,186
But the goal of a protest is not just to get attention, it's also to make some kind of point. I thought they did a poor job of it though not as poor of a job as the fucking occupy wall street idiots.

And, yeah, it probably comes across as saying I'm above this though in my defense I'm only saying an argument was stupid.
What Kaepernick and Reid were doing was neither stupid nor poorly communicated. It was 100% clear to anyone paying attention what it was they were protesting and why. It became even more clear when Nate Boyer got involved and convinced Kaepernick to kneel instead of sit because that brought it more into the mainstream.

The problem from which you may be suffering, in which you're not alone, is the inadvertent and/or deliberate obfuscation of Kaepernick's central purpose. I know many, many people who are otherwise generally pretty well plugged in but swallowed whole the bullshit that the NFL players were protesting the flag. I've had many productive conversations with people during which I was able to set the record straight and give them a different perspective on the issue. It's not really difficult because the message was always crystal clear for anyone willing to listen. The problem, as ever, is that there are too many people unwilling to do so and now it's exacerbated by a president who gives people explicit permission to remain willfully obtuse.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,478
Melrose, MA
I know many, many people who are otherwise generally pretty well plugged in but swallowed whole the bullshit that the NFL players were protesting the flag.
Yes, this was exactly the problem. An explicit refusal to even acknowledge the purpose of the protest.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,048
What Kaepernick and Reid were doing was neither stupid nor poorly communicated. It was 100% clear to anyone paying attention what it was they were protesting and why. It became even more clear when Nate Boyer got involved and convinced Kaepernick to kneel instead of sit because that brought it more into the mainstream.

The problem from which you may be suffering, in which you're not alone, is the inadvertent and/or deliberate obfuscation of Kaepernick's central purpose. I know many, many people who are otherwise generally pretty well plugged in but swallowed whole the bullshit that the NFL players were protesting the flag. I've had many productive conversations with people during which I was able to set the record straight and give them a different perspective on the issue. It's not really difficult because the message was always crystal clear for anyone willing to listen. The problem, as ever, is that there are too many people unwilling to do so and now it's exacerbated by a president who gives people explicit permission to remain willfully obtuse.
You know, at this point, the whole phenomenon is to me waaaaaaaaay more significant and instructive than it even mattering what the point of the "protest"--which, again, was an abstention of speech--was meant to be.

We have watched a huge portion of this country, including the White House itself, throw a hissy fit because a black man didn't want to stand when he was told for a reason he didn't agree with.

What. The. Fuck.
 

EL Jeffe

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2006
1,314
Honest question, and perhaps this is more appropriately posed in V&N, but is the NFL any more racist than corporate America? It's always hard comparing the sports world to other professions, but I was struck by that question reading through some of the above responses. Labor isn't exactly treated in a progressive way in America in general.

Is some ways, I'd argue that the 2018 NFL is less racist than corporate America. The best players play, regardless of race (you know, outside of Kaepernick and Reid). There doesn't seem to be a pay disparity between different races, or at least anywhere near the levels we see outside of the NFL. In other ways, the NFL is exactly as racist as corporate America. People of color are badly underrepresented at executive levels of management in both realms (in the NFL, this includes ownership, GM, head coaching roles, etc.). And then of course, the NFL is more racist than corporate America in some ways. The anthem policy is vile. "Inmates running the asylum." It's pretty rare to hear that talk out in the open in corporate America, not that some CEOs haven't expressed those same sentiments privately.

I don't begrudge anyone for quitting on the NFL. I'm not there yet; in fact, I just renewed my Sunday Ticket account. I often feel like the world is on fire and lately the NFL has been part of the problem. But is it a symptom or a root? I can see arguments for both.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
"Corporate America " consists of thousands and thousands of companies that range all over the place in terms of racism, etc.

You can't compare the NFL teams to a huge group like that which cannot be labeled as "racist" or "not racist."
 

Bosoxen

Bounced back
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 29, 2005
10,186
We have watched a huge portion of this country, including the White House itself, throw a hissy fit because a black man didn't want to stand when he was told for a reason he didn't agree with.
It's even worse than that. Since they don't like it/agree with it, they are taking an act which under any other circumstances would be a sign of reverence or submission and assigning it a meaning of disrespect because...reasons. Twice in the past week I've seen white men not take off their caps during the anthem but not a single person said a peep to them. But a black man takes a knee and all of a sudden we need to call in the Marines? I'll give the benefit of the doubt and concede that maybe this isn't racially motivated for some but I sure as fuck hear a whole lot of quacking.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,770
Pittsburgh, PA
Honest question, and perhaps this is more appropriately posed in V&N, but is the NFL any more racist than corporate America? It's always hard comparing the sports world to other professions, but I was struck by that question reading through some of the above responses. Labor isn't exactly treated in a progressive way in America in general.

Is some ways, I'd argue that the 2018 NFL is less racist than corporate America. The best players play, regardless of race (you know, outside of Kaepernick and Reid). There doesn't seem to be a pay disparity between different races, or at least anywhere near the levels we see outside of the NFL. In other ways, the NFL is exactly as racist as corporate America. People of color are badly underrepresented at executive levels of management in both realms (in the NFL, this includes ownership, GM, head coaching roles, etc.). And then of course, the NFL is more racist than corporate America in some ways. The anthem policy is vile. "Inmates running the asylum." It's pretty rare to hear that talk out in the open in corporate America, not that some CEOs haven't expressed those same sentiments privately.
I've seen several different sides of "corporate america" (which of course defies full description but does have some commonalities if you'll accept stereotyping), from within 3 different fortune-100 companies as well as in management consulting. I have seen extremely progressive views of labor from the perspective of management (say what you will about silicon valley, they pretty much pioneered giving meaningful equity to non-executives), and extremely regressive ones (I was an outsourcing-advisory consultant, initially for a highly unethical boutique, and then for Deloitte). So recognizing that we're all just blind people fumbling around trying to describe the elephant from our limited experience, I'll still say this: I have not seen witness to anything as obviously racist, or even pandering to the lowest common denominator, as what the NFL has wrought just in the last few years.

If you're looking for an example of "casual discrimination" in corporate america, your best widespread example is probably the steadily increasing credentialism in hiring, which locks in those from privileged backgrounds with ever-more-reliable access to better jobs and advancement, at the expense of those who can't afford or access the best education or internships or whatever (and who are disproportionately minorities). And just about every large company has taken several tactics to try and avoid or combat those effects too, of varying seriousness or scale. There are plenty of examples of a single-minded seeking of profits resulting in amoral action, but I'm not sure we can generalize about (say) squeezing politicians for tax breaks or dumping negative externalities and call it racist in its effects, nevermind its intents.

Fortune 500 CEOs aren't saints, but they generally got to where they are by dint of having a high EQ, an ability to sell an aspirational vision, and the fortitude to make tough decisions (not to mention have credit accede to them and blame to others, though part of that is just charisma). Some are more comforted by being surrounded by people who look and think like them, to be sure, but a great many more recognize the larger signaling value of promoting diversity and being perceived as valuing equity and fairness.

Meanwhile in the NFL, "the best players play", but that statement is far more true with the Patriots than with other organizations. Some players get more rope than others, get hired to be journeyman backups preferentially. Most QBs are white because they can afford the elite QB skills camps, and the families who can do so tend to be white, and of course most of the best colleges to play football are in the south, so there are a confluence of factors there.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,827
Needham, MA
Is some ways, I'd argue that the 2018 NFL is less racist than corporate America. The best players play, regardless of race (you know, outside of Kaepernick and Reid). There doesn't seem to be a pay disparity between different races, or at least anywhere near the levels we see outside of the NFL. In other ways, the NFL is exactly as racist as corporate America. People of color are badly underrepresented at executive levels of management in both realms (in the NFL, this includes ownership, GM, head coaching roles, etc.). And then of course, the NFL is more racist than corporate America in some ways. The anthem policy is vile. "Inmates running the asylum." It's pretty rare to hear that talk out in the open in corporate America, not that some CEOs haven't expressed those same sentiments privately.
I think this misses the mark by quite a bit. The reasons why people of color are underrepresented in upper levels of management has more to do with institutional racism and its effects on society (such as the poverty rate and incarceration rate of people of color compared to white people). I'm sure there are some organizations you can point to as being racist, but there are many others who have long acknowledged the competitive advantage that diverse perspectives can bring, and are trying to figure out the answer. Promoting people into jobs they may not be ready for to try to force diversity is not typically the right answer. Ultimately it is about broadening the talent pool coming into your organization, efforts like that can take years to bear fruit.

The NFL may be (close to) a meritocracy on the field, but that's because it is a bottom line league and the owners (for the most part) want to win. And ultimately that is what this is all about. The owners (and a lot of the fans) like to watch black guys play sports because a lot of them are really, really good and it makes it more likely that their team will win. But the players are thought of more like the "help" in some ways, and are tolerated only so long as they are useful.
 
Last edited:

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,048
I've seen several different sides of "corporate america" (which of course defies full description but does have some commonalities if you'll accept stereotyping), from within 3 different fortune-100 companies as well as in management consulting. I have seen extremely progressive views of labor from the perspective of management (say what you will about silicon valley, they pretty much pioneered giving meaningful equity to non-executives), and extremely regressive ones (I was an outsourcing-advisory consultant, initially for a highly unethical boutique, and then for Deloitte). So recognizing that we're all just blind people fumbling around trying to describe the elephant from our limited experience, I'll still say this: I have not seen witness to anything as obviously racist, or even pandering to the lowest common denominator, as what the NFL has wrought just in the last few years.

If you're looking for an example of "casual discrimination" in corporate america, your best widespread example is probably the steadily increasing credentialism in hiring, which locks in those from privileged backgrounds with ever-more-reliable access to better jobs and advancement, at the expense of those who can't afford or access the best education or internships or whatever (and who are disproportionately minorities). And just about every large company has taken several tactics to try and avoid or combat those effects too, of varying seriousness or scale. There are plenty of examples of a single-minded seeking of profits resulting in amoral action, but I'm not sure we can generalize about (say) squeezing politicians for tax breaks or dumping negative externalities and call it racist in its effects, nevermind its intents.

Fortune 500 CEOs aren't saints, but they generally got to where they are by dint of having a high EQ, an ability to sell an aspirational vision, and the fortitude to make tough decisions (not to mention have credit accede to them and blame to others, though part of that is just charisma). Some are more comforted by being surrounded by people who look and think like them, to be sure, but a great many more recognize the larger signaling value of promoting diversity and being perceived as valuing equity and fairness.

Meanwhile in the NFL, "the best players play", but that statement is far more true with the Patriots than with other organizations. Some players get more rope than others, get hired to be journeyman backups preferentially. Most QBs are white because they can afford the elite QB skills camps, and the families who can do so tend to be white, and of course most of the best colleges to play football are in the south, so there are a confluence of factors there.
I think this scans. Corporations may have structural reasons to tend towards amorality, which leads to the commission of immoral acts.

The NFL at this point is immoral. Almost strangely so for corporations, in fact.

One nit-pick, though: Isn't "outsourcing-advisory consultant" kinda redundant? :p
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
I’d love it if Goodell supporting 45 was finally the reason he’s forced to resign. I mean I doubt it but let’s get a forward thinking progressive person in the commissioners role.
 

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
What Kaepernick and Reid were doing was neither stupid nor poorly communicated. It was 100% clear to anyone paying attention what it was they were protesting and why. It became even more clear when Nate Boyer got involved and convinced Kaepernick to kneel instead of sit because that brought it more into the mainstream.

The problem from which you may be suffering, in which you're not alone, is the inadvertent and/or deliberate obfuscation of Kaepernick's central purpose. I know many, many people who are otherwise generally pretty well plugged in but swallowed whole the bullshit that the NFL players were protesting the flag. I've had many productive conversations with people during which I was able to set the record straight and give them a different perspective on the issue. It's not really difficult because the message was always crystal clear for anyone willing to listen. The problem, as ever, is that there are too many people unwilling to do so and now it's exacerbated by a president who gives people explicit permission to remain willfully obtuse.
I think the problem is that originally the inference most of the public drew was that it was in sympathy with BLM but then you had people associated with BLM making insane and pretty repugnant statements applauding the killing of cops. So the focus wisely shifted but in a much too ambiguous way. To the point where you had announcers, broadcasting a sport where almost everyone participating is a sort of physical freak, telling us that the players were protesting "inequality" no more modifier, not economic inequality or inequality in the provision of education in minority communities or any of dozens of possibilities, just "inequality". A harkening back to marches on Selma and DC protesting "race". You can't have it both ways with regard to the general public. If you want to say they're stupid and lazy then you know it's incumbent upon you to do a great job of hammering your point home, clearly. Feeling good about yourself while not moving the public needle isn't a win.
 

PC Drunken Friar

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 12, 2003
14,542
South Boston
I think the problem is that originally the inference most of the public drew was that it was in sympathy with BLM but then you had people associated with BLM making insane and pretty repugnant statements applauding the killing of cops. So the focus wisely shifted but in a much too ambiguous way. To the point where you had announcers, broadcasting a sport where almost everyone participating is a sort of physical freak, telling us that the players were protesting "inequality" no more modifier, not economic inequality or inequality in the provision of education in minority communities or any of dozens of possibilities, just "inequality". A harkening back to marches on Selma and DC protesting "race". You can't have it both ways with regard to the general public. If you want to say they're stupid and lazy then you know it's incumbent upon you to do a great job of hammering your point home, clearly. Feeling good about yourself while not moving the public needle isn't a win.
Please cite any influential member of BLM that applauded killing cops.

That is what is wrong with the whole situation. Our President is such a racist piece of shit and people follow his (and Russia's) every post and tweet. BLM never advocated for any of that. But people like you believe they did. So you have Giuliani calling BLM "inherently racist" and police chiefs and mayor's calling them terrorists. It's the exact reason the BLM movement started... Because we are a racist as fuck nation and can't stand to see dark skinned men and women demand equality.
 

JohntheBaptist

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
11,399
Yoknapatawpha County
I think the problem is that originally the inference most of the public drew was that it was in sympathy with BLM but then you had people associated with BLM making insane and pretty repugnant statements applauding the killing of cops. So the focus wisely shifted but in a much too ambiguous way. To the point where you had announcers, broadcasting a sport where almost everyone participating is a sort of physical freak, telling us that the players were protesting "inequality" no more modifier, not economic inequality or inequality in the provision of education in minority communities or any of dozens of possibilities, just "inequality". A harkening back to marches on Selma and DC protesting "race". You can't have it both ways with regard to the general public. If you want to say they're stupid and lazy then you know it's incumbent upon you to do a great job of hammering your point home, clearly. Feeling good about yourself while not moving the public needle isn't a win.
This is incredibly confusing so I have no idea what you're saying one sentence to the next, and in general here, but if you're saying they failed because no one knows what they're protesting--and your proof is that some network TV guys won't characterize their statement in anything other than bland euphemism--that's obvious bullshit. You know exactly what they're protesting. I can tell from your posts. Everyone I've met that has a real issue with the kneeling knows what they're protesting, but constantly wants to tell me about all the people who have a problem with it who *don't* know what is being said.

And that's without getting into the goal-post move from your issue with the substance of their argument and the NFL's policy being a good enough reason to abandon football to something about their efficacy branding the message and that makes the argument "stupid." Kaepernick was and has been incredibly clear, and the response from those like yourself was and has been to lie ("they're protesting the flag") and feign confusion as a means of dismissing it. Your description of the events in your first few sentences is laughable.

Who says the public needle hasn't moved? People were talking about it. The NFL is trying to get people to stop talking about it.

Also--

To the point where you had announcers, broadcasting a sport where almost everyone participating is a sort of physical freak, telling us that the players were protesting "inequality" no more modifier, not economic inequality or inequality in the provision of education in minority communities or any of dozens of possibilities, just "inequality". A harkening back to marches on Selma and DC protesting "race".
The fuck does this all even mean?
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
I was thinking about the moving the needle component of this. A lot of the social issues that have changed over time, and some quickly, were relevant to/ benefited all the different groups and sub-groups in America. Gay marriage, cannabis use, gambling, and to a lesser degree abortion (different can of worms) etc, impacted white people just as directly as it did other groups of people.
Many forms of racially-based affirmative action however are still highly unpopular. Now you can make other arguments against it, I get it, but this is still an issue that doesn't directly benefit white people. That's why I am not sure the needle gets moved here. The NFL viewer is more Republican on average - I think it is fair to say that means more white on average. We know the poll results based on race for who supports the anthem rule. Based on that, and as others have noted, they are appeasing the base. Maybe encouraging the base? The base benefits from the ban, and at the least are not impacted by it. The President, popular with the NFL base, is also supporting it so the NFL has cover there and someone who will eagerly provide it. Because of these factors I'm pessimistic that things change here soon.
 
It's even worse than that. Since they don't like it/agree with it, they are taking an act which under any other circumstances would be a sign of reverence or submission and assigning it a meaning of disrespect because...reasons. Twice in the past week I've seen white men not take off their caps during the anthem but not a single person said a peep to them. But a black man takes a knee and all of a sudden we need to call in the Marines? I'll give the benefit of the doubt and concede that maybe this isn't racially motivated for some but I sure as fuck hear a whole lot of quacking.
I wonder what would happen if protesting players this season chose to stand during the anthem but keep their helmets on. A quick Google image search suggests that nearly all of the kneeling players last year had their helmets off, apart from most of the Cowboys who knelt as a team along with Jerry Jones and Jason Garrett et al. (as shown below). That might be an interesting way to comply with the letter of the new policy while staying true to their goals, with the side effect of noting the sort of hypocrisy you've noted here - it's strange the things we choose to care about regarding our displays of patriotic piety.

 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,048
I wonder what would happen if protesting players this season chose to stand during the anthem but keep their helmets on. A quick Google image search suggests that nearly all of the kneeling players last year had their helmets off, apart from most of the Cowboys who knelt as a team along with Jerry Jones and Jason Garrett et al. (as shown below). That might be an interesting way to comply with the letter of the new policy while staying true to their goals, with the side effect of noting the sort of hypocrisy you've noted here - it's strange the things we choose to care about regarding our displays of patriotic piety.

I think this is a critical point to note here. As @ConigliarosPotential points to our attention, this was one owner--not an owner known to be particularly... whatever--in an attempt to deal with the issue.

We should remember that the the league is less than a year from trying to co-opt the gesture altogether as one of their attempts at addressing "the problem." And now they say it should be banned?

This is how we detect bullshit. :)
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
11,619
I think this is a critical point to note here. As @ConigliarosPotential points to our attention, this was one owner--not an owner known to be particularly... whatever--in an attempt to deal with the issue.

We should remember that the the league is less than a year from trying to co-opt the gesture altogether as one of their attempts at addressing "the problem." And now they say it should be banned?

This is how we detect bullshit. :)
Didn’t Jones only do it that one week and then say that his team would now stand? Or something like that? My memory is fuzzy.

And to say this doesn’t have a clear cut goal.. you’d have to not have listened to a single interview or read an article.
 

EricFeczko

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 26, 2014
4,823
I think this is a critical point to note here. As @ConigliarosPotential points to our attention, this was one owner--not an owner known to be particularly... whatever--in an attempt to deal with the issue.

We should remember that the the league is less than a year from trying to co-opt the gesture altogether as one of their attempts at addressing "the problem." And now they say it should be banned?

This is how we detect bullshit. :)
It's right in line with the fact that, if a player kneels, the team itself gets fined. Apologies if this has been mentioned before. Take it with a pound of salt, given the source.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/20848575/rules-national-anthem-differ-sports-leagues
Discipline is complicated. The league will fine the team of any player who protests, but each team can develop its own internal policy for disciplining players. Some owners, including the New York Jets' Christopher Johnson, do not plan to punish players who protest. So it will be possible for a player to protest without incurring individual discipline.
  1. All team and league personnel on the field shall stand and show respect for the flag and the anthem.

  2. The Game Operations Manual will be revised to remove the requirement that all players be on the field for the anthem.

  3. Personnel who choose not to stand for the anthem may stay in the locker room or in a similar location off the field until after the anthem has been performed.

  4. A club will be fined by the league if its personnel are on the field and do not stand and show respect for the flag and the anthem.

  5. Each club may develop its own work rules, consistent with the above principles, regarding its personnel who do not stand and show respect for the flag and the anthem.

  6. The commissioner will impose appropriate discipline on league personnel who do not stand and show respect for the flag and the anthem.
 

EricFeczko

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 26, 2014
4,823
I wonder what would happen if protesting players this season chose to stand during the anthem but keep their helmets on. A quick Google image search suggests that nearly all of the kneeling players last year had their helmets off, apart from most of the Cowboys who knelt as a team along with Jerry Jones and Jason Garrett et al. (as shown below). That might be an interesting way to comply with the letter of the new policy while staying true to their goals, with the side effect of noting the sort of hypocrisy you've noted here - it's strange the things we choose to care about regarding our displays of patriotic piety.

They should do handstands during the anthem. Too bad squatting is against the new rules, that would be awesome.