I'd actually have to see how the contract is written before I could say they have some right to decide whatever they want in regards to the conduct of their employees. In today world, with right to work states, most of the power of employees has been diminished to the point they have zero say.
But where there are unions and contracts are concerned, it's not that cut and dry.
Agree again. But, the NFL players union is probably the weakest union in all of sports. You can see that in negotiations that have taken place over time (the fact they still don't have guaranteed contracts baffles me when just about every other sport does). I also take into consideration that the NFL is literally run by lawyers upon lawyers who have lawyers, I don't think they would have implemented this rule if they didn't think they didn't have the power too.
But that's just my opinion, I don't have any facts behind that, just observations.
So a combat vet (which you claim the players are disrespecting), also someone who has been a victim of police harassment( something you say is overblown in the black community) somehow understands the problem less than you do?
You understand how stupid you sound right now, right?
Please, tell me more about how I should feel about the players protesting. You and others have done such a phenomenal job trying to explain how disrespectful the protest is to our military.
All you have done since this issue dropped is change the narrative about what the players are protesting over. Despite he players making it clear what the issue is, you, Excl, and countless others have tried to change the narrative and make it about discrediting th country and the military.
Other than the banking industry, you’re the one who has routinely demonstrated that you have zero clue about much of anything.
The business have a right to make this rule, but it doesn’t change the fact that they only made the rule AFTER everything went down, legally suppressing free speech that makes guys like you have a hard on cause you succeeding in sticking it to minorities once again.
Your stupid ass president said they shouldn’t belong in the country.
And what was your response? Nothing.
Which actually says a lot.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
With extreme accuracy, unlike whatever nonsense you post.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
So a combat vet (which you claim the players are disrespecting),
I said I can understand how people feel that way. I never I said I did. Top to bottom, left to right.
Quote:
also someone who has been a victim of police harassment( something you say is overblown in the black community) somehow understands the problem less than you do?
Once again, please tell me where I ever said it was overblown - especially when I have posted threads of it.
Quote:
You understand how stupid you sound right now, right?
I believe you may want to recheck your replies above and get back to me on who is looking what, sir.
Quote:
All you have done since this issue dropped is change the narrative about what the players are protesting over. Despite he players making it clear what the issue is, you, Excl, and countless others have tried to change the narrative and make it about discrediting th country and the military.
Once again, you make false claims and falsehoods.
Quote:
Other than the banking industry, you’re the one who has routinely demonstrated that you have zero clue about much of anything.
If your replies are indicator of "having a clue" I am dang sure glad I don't have one then.
Quote:
The business have a right to make this rule, but it doesn’t change the fact that they only made the rule AFTER everything went down, legally suppressing free speech that makes guys like you have a hard on cause you succeeding in sticking it to minorities once again.
And this is why discussions get nowhere. Clem and I had some very good discussions yesterday on race and race relations. Your name came up as well, and here is once again the point that hurts ANY discussion. You automatically demonize anyone trying to even speak. Talk about suppressing free speech. Anyone that has a different opinion than you, instead of listening to that opinion all you do is try to demean and pull out the "race card". With you, I cannot disagree with a MAN I am disagreeing with a BLACK man, and that is some huge injustice to do so, because, well swish said so.
I have no doubt your a good dad, a good person morally, but in all honestly other than that, your a joke and not worth my time to even respond to anymore.
Lmao, it’s hilarious watching you and others constantly name dropping Clem when it comes to me.
Clem handles his convos his own way and I do my own thing.
But just look at your post, filled with nothing but nonsense.
Look at this entire thread and all the threads that came before it. Y’all truly are more upset st black players protesting for civil rights than you were nazis marching in our streets.
You been on here for a year now whining about the players protesting, yet trump just gave the racist dog whistle of “go back to Africa” and you still won’t say a word about it.
If I’m a joke, you’re an entire comedy special.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Well, from my pov, it all comes down to this: 'Blackness' is not a monolith.
In other words, there is no one single way of thinking for people of color. There are as many divergent and unique pov's as there are Black people. Example: Swish likes techno music. I'd rather have root canal without anesthesia than listen to that mess
It's possible that folks like Foster are diluting CK's message, but I'm more of the line of thought that each must decide for himself where his line is drawn. I think CK's message would have more teeth if every player of color, but 100% participation isn't necessary for the message/protest to get out.
I can only speak for myself, but based upon how I was raised, I'd probably be standing during the anthem. At the same time, if a reporter stuck a microphone in my face and asked my opinion, I'd probably say:
"I'm 100% behind my team mates' 1A rights. Anything that calls attention to this social problem, anything that starts a dialogue and leads us in the right direction is a good thing. I'll stand for the anthem, but I'll also sit and talk about this with anyone who will listen. We need a variety of approaches and a multiplicity of ideas for solving this problem, and I'm all-in to find a solution."
I'm with you: Kaepernick has certainly represented himself with a set of brass ones. Dude has all my respect.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I get plenty of outside. I also have a workshop. But you have to remember that I make a living with my PC, for me it's not just a toy but more a tool. I bet you are pretty good with the tools you use in your line of work... I'm pretty good with computers. And spend way too much time on them sometimes.
I get plenty of outside. I also have a workshop. But you have to remember that I make a living with my PC, for me it's not just a toy but more a tool. I bet you are pretty good with the tools you use in your line of work... I'm pretty good with computers. And spend way too much time on them sometimes.
I was just busting chops. Hey man, all the time in front of the pc means business is good
I get plenty of outside. I also have a workshop. But you have to remember that I make a living with my PC, for me it's not just a toy but more a tool. I bet you are pretty good with the tools you use in your line of work... I'm pretty good with computers. And spend way too much time on them sometimes.
I was just busting chops. Hey man, all the time in front of the pc means business is good
do you work for yourself or a company?
Myself. Business could definitely be better though, but I'm doing alright.
What i want t know is other than kneeling on sundays ... what else is he doing ... is he giving of his time? .. is he going to schools with cops? .. is he setting up or attending events trying to bring the cops and the black community together? ...
Show me the guys doing that stuff ... i’d still disagree with them kneeling but at least i could RESPECT THEM and it would show me they actually cared more about their cause ...
Come on man, you blabber on about Trump in threads that have nothing to do with Trump.
Such as this one.
It's like he torments your mind so much that it's literally the only thing that can come out of your mouth.
It would be nice to see some other facet of your personality once in a while. Because you seem to be a cool dude.
Just too much Trump-diarrhea-of-the-mouth.
What are you talking about? Did you forget that Trump politicized this issue by tweeting a bunch of hate at the NFL and ranting about it at his rallies? The owners were fully supporting players before that.
So 32 owners, all of whom are more wealthy than Trump, caved because he angry-tweeted about them? I'm not buying it. The season ended, they saw their ratings and revenue falling and they panicked...
This NFL rule reminds me of HB2 (the NC bathroom bill).. there was a bit of a stir up about bathroom safety, it was going away and most people had forgotten about it.. then the state legislature, almost out of nowhere, passes this legislation that blows up in their face.. I believe it was Devil who said, "That was a solution looking for a problem" or something like that..
That's what this was, the kneeling had become quite a non-story lately, very few players were doing it any more, tv wasn't making a big deal out of it and nobody really paid much attention to it.. then the NFL passes this rule, out of nowhere, and it's blowing up in their faces.. they were trying to fix a problem that didn't really exist any more.
The season ended, they saw their ratings and revenue falling and they panicked...
Their revenue increased by $4 billion dollars (from $10 billion to $14 billion) and their ratings dropped 1.7% from the previous year (a 9.7% drop compared to the previous seasons 8% drop).
For a larger comparison, NFL ratings dropped 9.7%, NCAA football dropped 18.6%, MLB dropped 15.4%, NBA down 8%.
An emotionally-volatile reactionary with the power to alter collective bargaining and arbitration agreements is a pretty big deal, especially considering the league is a monopoly.
I think the day they flew Mike Pence to the Colts game so he could pretend to be horrified by the political incorrectness of it all was an indicator that this was going to be used as a wedge issue to rile up FOX News grandpas and Breitbart cranks.
Quote:
This NFL rule reminds me of HB2 (the NC bathroom bill).. there was a bit of a stir up about bathroom safety, it was going away and most people had forgotten about it.. then the state legislature, almost out of nowhere, passes this legislation that blows up in their face.. I believe it was Devil who said, "That was a solution looking for a problem" or something like that..
That's what this was, the kneeling had become quite a non-story lately, very few players were doing it any more, tv wasn't making a big deal out of it and nobody really paid much attention to it.. then the NFL passes this rule, out of nowhere, and it's blowing up in their faces.. they were trying to fix a problem that didn't really exist any more.
I have learned a lot as this has unfolded. I am believer in the first amendment, protesting, and those who are passionate in their causes, but I am going to try to tackle this one from a strict business and economic perspective.
"The players were moved to the field during the national anthem because it was seen as a marketing strategy to make the athletes look more patriotic."
From the brief research I have done, players were not present for the anthem until 2009. Whether the players were brought out for the anthem because the DoD paid the NFL or not, I buy that this was done for marketing purposes - to increase revenues and popularity. Patriotism (different from politics) is generally a strong platform that is unilaterally accepted.
Of course, this backfired on the NFL when CK drew the line in the sand. Instead of a unified marketing position, the NFL now had fans on polar opposite ends of the spectrum, which makes sense when you think about how strong of an opinion everyone seems to have on every subject. This kind of environment is not good for business as you inevitably will alienate half of your consumer base no matter what you do.
The NFL, aware of this, stood there shell shocked, confused on what the “correct” PR was, which in turn gave the CK movement life and momentum. Acting quickly to change the policy to get back to neutral ground, whether by putting the players back in the locker room or issuing a mandate that all players must stand, was the NFL's best option (in my opinion) from a business perspective. There would be backlash, absolutely, but it would have been on a smaller scale. Instead, the issue turned political (with help from both sides) and into a free speech issue (erroneously in my opinion – see below), and escalated to the point that the NFL couldn't touch it with a ten foot pole.
Since players receive 48.5% of revenues, both parties have a vested interest in eliminating a polarized audience. Which leads to the argument of “why didn’t the NFL consult with the NFLPA?” Probably because they didn’t have to. Doesn’t mean it’s right, but at the end of the day, the owners run the show.
NFL ratings have decreased, and there are probably multiple reasons for that, but the NFL owners, having tired of being between a rock and a hard place, finally took their stand to curb any unforeseen future issues. It will be interesting to see if the NFLPA can prove this violates the CBA. Without reading the CBA personally, and based solely on the fact that the game day procedure was altered to have players on the field for the anthem in 2009 without amending the CBA in place, I would wager the NFL can probably get away with amending game day procedure once again.
The NBA, as most people are probably well aware of by now, hasn’t received the same sort of coverage on the anthem because it was collectively bargained that players would stand for the anthem. People who support the protesters seem to understand and accept that the players agreed to these terms and don’t criticize them for not supporting the movement on the court.
At this point in time, I view this recent decision by the owners as a workplace rule. As others have pointed out, free speech guarantees you rights against the government, not a private employer. A private employer can restrict your rights, and I think most of us probably have some sort of restriction(s) in place against us. Again, whether that violates the CBA or not remains to be seen.
TL:DR – Owners acted too slowly and let it snowball into something bigger than it otherwise could have been. Free speech at work can be legally limited. We probably won’t have football for a year when the current CBA expires and no agreement can be reached in time.
I have learned a lot as this has unfolded. I am believer in the first amendment, protesting, and those who are passionate in their causes, but I am going to try to tackle this one from a strict business and economic perspective.
"The players were moved to the field during the national anthem because it was seen as a marketing strategy to make the athletes look more patriotic."
From the brief research I have done, players were not present for the anthem until 2009. Whether the players were brought out for the anthem because the DoD paid the NFL or not, I buy that this was done for marketing purposes - to increase revenues and popularity. Patriotism (different from politics) is generally a strong platform that is unilaterally accepted.
Of course, this backfired on the NFL when CK drew the line in the sand. Instead of a unified marketing position, the NFL now had fans on polar opposite ends of the spectrum, which makes sense when you think about how strong of an opinion everyone seems to have on every subject. This kind of environment is not good for business as you inevitably will alienate half of your consumer base no matter what you do.
The NFL, aware of this, stood there shell shocked, confused on what the “correct” PR was, which in turn gave the CK movement life and momentum. Acting quickly to change the policy to get back to neutral ground, whether by putting the players back in the locker room or issuing a mandate that all players must stand, was the NFL's best option (in my opinion) from a business perspective. There would be backlash, absolutely, but it would have been on a smaller scale. Instead, the issue turned political (with help from both sides) and into a free speech issue (erroneously in my opinion – see below), and escalated to the point that the NFL couldn't touch it with a ten foot pole.
Since players receive 48.5% of revenues, both parties have a vested interest in eliminating a polarized audience. Which leads to the argument of “why didn’t the NFL consult with the NFLPA?” Probably because they didn’t have to. Doesn’t mean it’s right, but at the end of the day, the owners run the show.
NFL ratings have decreased, and there are probably multiple reasons for that, but the NFL owners, having tired of being between a rock and a hard place, finally took their stand to curb any unforeseen future issues. It will be interesting to see if the NFLPA can prove this violates the CBA. Without reading the CBA personally, and based solely on the fact that the game day procedure was altered to have players on the field for the anthem in 2009 without amending the CBA in place, I would wager the NFL can probably get away with amending game day procedure once again.
The NBA, as most people are probably well aware of by now, hasn’t received the same sort of coverage on the anthem because it was collectively bargained that players would stand for the anthem. People who support the protesters seem to understand and accept that the players agreed to these terms and don’t criticize them for not supporting the movement on the court.
At this point in time, I view this recent decision by the owners as a workplace rule. As others have pointed out, free speech guarantees you rights against the government, not a private employer. A private employer can restrict your rights, and I think most of us probably have some sort of restriction(s) in place against us. Again, whether that violates the CBA or not remains to be seen.
TL:DR – Owners acted too slowly and let it snowball into something bigger than it otherwise could have been. Free speech at work can be legally limited. We probably won’t have football for a year when the current CBA expires and no agreement can be reached in time.
I was expecting this post to be garbage.
Quite the contrary.
By far the best post on this subject I've read. And there's been hundreds.
Thanks Rocky. Thanks Clem. As I said in another post, I'm a long time reader, so I appreciate that feedback. It sounds like all those years of pent-up posts manifested into something good.
what a disgusting, despicable human being Trump is. i am absolutely appalled and ashamed that he is president.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
it's been a recurring theme with Trump when he talks about the nfl players.
from stating that they should leave the country, to kick them out, and now this speech coming after the nfl made the new policy. he's always talking about history and such and "respect"
also, i didn't want to create a new thread on this.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
i dont think so. but im consistently on an island with my thoughts anyway so its nothing new.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Not surprisingly, White Americans support the policy, while Black Americans do not. Here’s a breakdown of support/opposition as it relates to ethnicity:
The irony of America telling black people, what they can, and cannot do.
Love you Estados Unidos, land of the free
So as that pertains to this thread only black players can not kneel during the National Anthem all other race players are OK to kneel during the National Anthem?
...