Buffalo

NFL 2017 changes?

Recommended Posts

WSU151    2,398
1 hour ago, C-Squared said:

 

Sheer ridiculousness is the military spending $50 million in taxpayer money to indoctrinate sports with their agenda.

 

What agenda would that be?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gothamite    5,869
1 hour ago, WSU151 said:

What agenda would that be?  

 

To increase public support, and therefore funding, for the armed forces.  

 

That is, after all, the whole point of an advertising campaign. Which is what that was. 

 

Your response seems to imply that you don't think they had an agenda. Or at least that seems a reasonable inference. But don't you think the Pentagon had a very specific goal in mind when it paid the NFL to stage those military-tribute events? 

 

 

Edited by Gothamite
Clarifying my inference

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WSU151    2,398
9 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

To increase public support, and therefore funding, for the armed forces.  

 

That is, after all, the whole point of an advertising campaign. Which is what that was. 

 

You don't think the Pentagon had a goal in mind when it paid the NFL to stage those events? 

 

True, good points. However, until now, every time I saw some sports event sponsored by the military, I saw it as attention to help recruiting efforts more than a "make sure your congressman votes yes on the funding bill" ad.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gothamite    5,869

I don't doubt that they would like to increase enlistments, but in the end that's what mercenaries are for.  And they don't even have to pay health care for them.

 

These staged events are really about keeping the insane amount of money flowing to the Pentagon.  Everything else is secondary to that one overriding goal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C-Squared    797
3 hours ago, WSU151 said:

 

But the patch isn't military themed (no matter how many dozens of times you try to tell us).  That's a narrative that sounds cool but with few underlying facts.  

 

What is the obvious nod to the military?  Stars?  Srsly?  If it was obviously military themed, shouldn't there be chevrons or eagles or oak leaves or bars or camo (for the full season)?  Why didn't they go with a name tape that said "CAPTAIN"? 

 

 

Captain patches debuted the same year the military started paying the NFL to be patriotic... and they look like this:

 

mto_wtNbUesIAFN8mG5_KLQ.jpg

 

That their simplistic, yet striking faux-military rank patch motif doesn't resemble your hyporbolized, Affliction-meets-politician fever dream doesn't nullify the glaring correlation between sponsor and content... though the name plates, bars, and camo you mentioned do appear on coaches playing tax-funded dressup on the sidelines each November:

 

2e1e497c1bbd074565d31bf5bf626c27.jpg

 

I'm not pretending to have all the answers - I'm thinking out loud through these posts - but my theory seems to make the most sense so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WSU151    2,398
47 minutes ago, C-Squared said:

 

Captain patches debuted the same year the military started paying the NFL to be patriotic... and they look like this:

 

mto_wtNbUesIAFN8mG5_KLQ.jpg

 

That their simplistic, yet striking faux-military motif doesn't resemble your Affliction-meets-politician fever dream doesn't nullify the glaring correlation between sponsor and content..

 

Correlation does not equal causation.  And that patch still has no military connection. The non-five star version further proves it's a basic, non military patch.  Nothing in the military looks like this.

2012-Topps-Football-NFL-Captain-Patch-To 

 

 

Wouldn't it be block or stenciled if it was obviously military?  It'd be absolutely stupid to have a captain/general faux patch, even if it was part of your assumed-without-facts "wink-wink" conspiracy. 

 

47 minutes ago, C-Squared said:

 

though the name plates, bars, and camo you mentioned do appear on coaches playing tax-funded dressup on the sidelines each November:

 

2e1e497c1bbd074565d31bf5bf626c27.jpg

 

 

You mean the Salute to Service merchandise is military themed?  No :censored:?  Thanks for pointing out the military garb coincided with the military's advertising campaign.  Maybe we should get you a Captain patch with "Obvious" underneath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dont care    1,442
37 minutes ago, WSU151 said:

 

Correlation does not equal causation.  And that patch still has no military connection. The non-five star version further proves it's a basic, non military patch.  Nothing in the military looks like this.

2012-Topps-Football-NFL-Captain-Patch-To 

 

 

Wouldn't it be block or stenciled if it was obviously military?  It'd be absolutely stupid to have a captain/general faux patch, even if it was part of your assumed-without-facts "wink-wink" conspiracy. 

 

 

You mean the Salute to Service merchandise is military themed?  No :censored:?  Thanks for pointing out the military garb coincided with the military's advertising campaign.  Maybe we should get you a Captain patch with "Obvious" underneath.

Also considering they paid the individual teams (not even half of them) and not the league this guys "theory" doesn't have a leg to stand on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C-Squared    797
55 minutes ago, WSU151 said:

 

Correlation does not equal causation.  And that patch still has no military connection.  It'd be abosolutely stupid to have a captain/general faux patch.  Your delusional idea that you keep repeating is hilarious.  One day it'll be true. One day, man.  

 

You mean the Salute-to-Service merchandise is military themed?  No :censored:?  You're on top of your game today.  Thanks for pointing out that the military garb coincided with the military's advertising campaign.  

 

I bolded our common ground. Yes, it is stupid... and ugly... and, frankly, heavy-handed... though, in my opinion, the same can be said for this entire propaganda ad campaign.

 

I included the Salute to Service gear as an aside to your hyperbole, which implied my theory is false because the captain patch isn't exploding with cartoonish American design cliches... the relevance (and irony) being that many of the cliches you sarcastically listed are actually present in the potentially adjacent campaign.

 

Curb the emotion. I'm not mad atcha, brother. If you have a different theory on the patch, I am fully open to it. However... a patch littered with star regalia that gets more decorated the longer the player serves as a leader - no military influence whatsoever? And it coincidentally appeared right when the NFL was painted camo? I don't think you are giving my theory the credit it deserves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WSU151    2,398
1 minute ago, C-Squared said:

 

The NFL's dubious promise to military charities (via merchandise sales) is a different situation than the military paying teams for acknowledgement (which I think was the crux of don't care's post).

 

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/15611052/nfl-returning-723000-taxpayers-paid-military-tributes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gothamite    5,869

If Under Armour can give UCLA stripes to UCLA, why can't Nike do the same for the Colts and Jets?

 

IMG_4043.thumb.JPG.27228cf4f7ff6d5fbc747486736002ed.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
H11K    298
40 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

If Under Armour can give UCLA stripes to UCLA, why can't Nike do the same for the Colts and Jets?

 

IMG_4043.thumb.JPG.27228cf4f7ff6d5fbc747486736002ed.JPG

Because UA is making all the right moves right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4_tattoos    376
6 hours ago, Gothamite said:

If Under Armour can give UCLA stripes to UCLA, why can't Nike do the same for the Colts and Jets?

Perhaps the Nike, the Jets and Colts just don't give a damn about that *shrugs*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ice_Cap    7,586
Just now, 4_tattoos said:

Perhaps the Nike, the Jets and Colts just don't give a damn about that *shrugs*

I'm sure the teams are complacent in all of this. 

That being said? Nike can't shut up about their own brilliance. So not being able or willing to replicate one of the oldest and most wide-spread football design elements has to count against them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BringBackTheVet    4,171
7 hours ago, Gothamite said:

If Under Armour can give UCLA stripes to UCLA, why can't Nike do the same for the Colts and Jets?

 

IMG_4043.thumb.JPG.27228cf4f7ff6d5fbc747486736002ed.JPG

 

Is that photo taken from a game?  That doesn't look like an on-field jersey.  The sleeves look a little bit loose and tucked up under the shoulder pads like late 90s style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WavePunter    668
7 hours ago, Gothamite said:

If Under Armour can give UCLA stripes to UCLA, why can't Nike do the same for the Colts and Jets?

 

IMG_4043.thumb.JPG.27228cf4f7ff6d5fbc747486736002ed.JPG

Because Nike gonna Nike..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WSU151    2,398
3 hours ago, beast3 said:

Do the Panthers have the same UCLA style stripe?

 

Cam-Newton-Kevin-C.-Cox-Getty-Images.jpg

 

 

Not the same.  Panthers have their own style.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now