2017 NFL Season: Then there were Two

[FiddySicks]

We've reached the Twilight Zone, everyone. Mark Davis is the voice or reason among a lot of darkness. 

 

‘I can no longer ask our team to not say anything’: Raiders owner Mark Davis changes course

Spoiler

 

Quote

“About a year ago, before our Tennessee game, I met with Derek Carr and Khalil Mack to ask their permission to have Tommie Smith light the torch for my father before the game in Mexico City,” Davis told Gutierrez. “I explained to them that I was asking their permission because I had previously told them that I would prefer that they not protest while in the Raiders uniform. And should they have something to say, once their uniform was off, I might go up there with them.

“Over the last year, though, the streets have gotten hot and there has been a lot of static in the air and recently, fuel has been added to the fire. I can no longer ask our team to not say something while they are in a Raider uniform. The only thing I can ask them to do is do it with class. Do it with pride. Not only do we have to tell people there is something wrong, we have to come up with answers. That’s the challenge in front of us as Americans and human beings.”

 

 

 

 

[JWhiz96]

1 hour ago, ozzyman314 said:

Bears over Steelers?

If you've followed the Steelers for over a decade this wouldn't surprise you one bit.

 

Derek Carr stinking up the joint right now. Something in the air at FedEx Field on Sunday nights I guess.

[Viola73]

29 minutes ago, JWhiz96 said:

If you've followed the Steelers for over a decade this wouldn't surprise you one bit.

Yeah, we've always had a problem with Da Bearz. I just don't understand it.

 

[mcj882000]

2 hours ago, goalieboy82 said:

i see this in Court soon:

A62-63 of the NFL League Rulebook. It states:
“The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem.
“During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition...
...It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.”

 

should might be the word that is judged.  

 

 

I've been staying quiet about this, but I will say one thing: this rule doesn't exist. Heck, "pages A62-63" don't even exist!

 

http://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2017-nfl-rulebook/

[Dynasty]

I was wondering why Miami was losing to New York today... but then I remembered who their current QB was.

[ninersdd]

Just pure domination by the Skins tonight. Who had the Raiders struggling to get 100 total yards?

[Crabcake]

7 hours ago, ninersdd said:

Just pure domination by the Skins tonight. Who had the Raiders struggling to get 100 total yards?

Certainly not my fantasy team

[Sport]

17 hours ago, ninersdd said:

Marcus Cooper is a real moron.

 

That'll be on the blooper reel for the rest of time. It seems like this happens at least once a season in college/NFL and I don't get it. If I'm a football coach I practice running the ball to the back of the endzone and placing it next to the goalpost so that sort of thing doesn't happen.

You try to be a hotdog and you end up costing your team four points. Thankfully the correct won in the end. 

[OnWis97]

I think there were three or so instances of players dropping the ball before the end zone in college last year.  I don't really understand what the point is...just celebrating as soon as possible?  Dropping the ball five-yards into the end zone seems to accomplish the same thing.

[OnWis97]

12 hours ago, B-Rich said:

The playing of the national anthem before games has been a part of sporting events for well over 100 years, and as Dustdevil and Brass notes is more "national" in nature, which doesn't and shouldn't mean "political"...

 

I think the smartest thing to do is change the order of events to the way it used to be--- have NFL teams enter the playing field AFTER the national anthem is played.  That's the way it is in LSU's Tiger Stadium. And that's why I think the Seahawks/Titans approach was the best. It eliminates the very visual opportunity for displays in a divisive issue that will hurt the league's bottom line.

The fact that it's been part of games for so long does not in and of itself make it apolitical.  It's like the pledge of allegiance at schools.  Even back in my day (the 1980s for elementary school) some foreign born kids would leave the room for it.  I'm sure it was acknowledged by the school as their right to do so, but of course, it did not bode well for how those kids were treated. I personally find "pledging allegiance to a flag" a bit strange and unsettling.  And in America you don't have to do that.  The social pressure alone (in the stands, on the field, etc.) makes it political.  If you don't stand you are less American...it's a myopic view and if you don't hold it, you best pretend you do.  Hell, you could even get kicked out (this was God Bless America).  It's one of the most unique things about America: it's greatness is that you don't have to think it's great.  And even if you do, you don't have to show it the way everyone else does.  But in a sense you do...there's no way this is not political. Not to mention the other ways the leagues (particularly the NFL) drapes so much of what they do in the flag.  I personally think we'd be better off if we spent less time basking in how we're #1 and more time considering the views of folks that say "it is great but it needs to be better."  But we're too, uh, too something for that (insecure?  I don't know).  

 

As for when it's done...I'd rather it not be done for the reasons above and for one of your reasons (bold).  But since I know it's not going away, I suppose this is a better solution.  Of course that does not work in some sports (e.g., starting pitchers need to be in the bullpen).  And if the players are not there, then its basically for the fans...who historically accept it as something to sit through.  

 

100 years ago it was being played at MLB games?  I'm surprised no black players ever took a knee. Oh wait, they weren't there.  If someone had taken a knee for that cause, they'd probably have fired the SOB.  But today we'd recognize him as being on the right side of history.

This will add nothing to the conversation but I became curious as to whether the anthem was performed before games in the Negro Leagues. I'm at work so I'm not being thorough, though this link claims that the Star Spangled Banner became the anthem in 1931:  http://coe.k-state.edu/annex/nlbemuseum/history/timeline8.html.

[OnWis97]

13 hours ago, BlackBolt3 said:

...use government funded stadiums, have government funded police working games, teams visiting the White House...

Apples and oranges.  First, a lot of fans are upset that these players are bringing politics into sports.  They wouldn't do it if the sports did not play the song.  

 

Politics is not government...not in this way, anyway.  I don't think we should be publicly funding stadiums, but that's a far different issue and really has nothing to do with what these players are doing.  I agree with you to a point on the White House issue.  Whether teams or players go is a political statement in itself.  We note the people that skipped out on the visit and assume a political affiliation.  If we really, really want to keep sports and politics separate, the whole tradition should probably be scrapped.  I don't feel the need to do that, but it's going to be a very interesting four (probably eight) years with this guy.  It's not about left/right but about the nature of the things he says.  No teams backed out on Bush or Obama (right?).  Some players did, but now we're looking at full teams disinterested in going.  

[leopard88]

4 minutes ago, OnWis97 said:

This will add nothing to the conversation but I became curious as to whether the anthem was performed before games in the Negro Leagues. I'm at work so I'm not being thorough, though this link claims that the Star Spangled Banner became the anthem in 1931:  http://coe.k-state.edu/annex/nlbemuseum/history/timeline8.html.

 

That link is correct.  

 

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/the-star-spangled-banner-becomes-official

[BlueSky]

About the anthem protests, my issue is that NFL players are in effect employees of their teams and what they're doing is inappropriate in the workplace. Of course they have the right to protest - but on their own time.

Is what they're doing any different from a pizza delivery guy trying to persuade you who to vote for or a barista pushing her religion on you? This isn't about freedom of speech; people are held accountable all the time for doing things that don't reflect their employers' values. Don't get me wrong - I don't support Trump's comments either in content or tone. Just saying that players are asserting their free speech rights as if they're at a protest march on their day off and that's not the case.

BTW, I haven't followed Peter King for years because he's one who can't help injecting his politics into his column on occasion. More recently, I also stopped following Christine Negroni, a superb aviation writer with the same problem. As a football fan, not reading King is definitely my loss, but it grates on me when people use their position to push their ideology and I finally just had enough of it.
 

[rams80]

1 hour ago, BlueSky said:

About the anthem protests, my issue is that NFL players are in effect employees of their teams and what they're doing is inappropriate in the workplace. Of course they have the right to protest - but on their own time.
 

 

Show me where in their contracts it says they are required to stand for the national anthem.

[Sport]

The NFL playing the song before every game is a political statement in and of itself so that right there is not "stick to sports!" and that makes it a freedom of speech issue. One can disagree with the reasons they're doing it (I don't, I happen to see their point a lot of people are choosing to ignore or straight up deny), but regardless of the reasoning it's still pretty simple to me - This is the United States of America and in America we don't require mandatory participation in patriotism. Period. No true, free American should ever want for such a thing. If you think it's disrespectful to kneel for the national anthem then you don't have to kneel for the national anthem. Nobody is stopping you from showing your support of your country, you shouldn't stop others from peacefully expressing dissent. 

 

- signed, a patriotic American. 

[BlueSky]

8 minutes ago, rams80 said:

 

Show me where in their contracts it says they are required to stand for the national anthem.

 

I don't know if it does or doesn't. I'm sure it does say their conduct cannot reflect poorly on the organization (or some such). You show me where this is different from the examples I cited. Some of these same players would be the first ones trying to get a Domino's driver fired if he/she showed up at their door in a Vote Trump t-shirt. How is it different?

 

Same thing for the political speeches masquerading as acceptances at the Oscars. 

 

The reason they're protesting, and whether I agree with it personally, are irrelevant. 

[leopard88]

1 hour ago, BlueSky said:

About the anthem protests, my issue is that NFL players are in effect employees of their teams and what they're doing is inappropriate in the workplace. Of course they have the right to protest - but on their own time.

 

They can also protest on company time if they're employer says it is acceptable.  The pizza guy and the barista probably haven't received explicit support from their employers.  The NFL players have.

[rams80]

7 minutes ago, BlueSky said:

 

I don't know if it does or doesn't. I'm sure it does say their conduct cannot reflect poorly on the organization (or some such). You show me where this is different from the examples I cited. Some of these same players would be the first ones trying to get a Domino's driver fired if he/she showed up at their door in a Vote Trump t-shirt. How is it different?

 

The players would be just as wrong for trying to get the minimum-wage doofus who doesn't quite understand their own class interests fired.  Especially when there are remedies available in the form of "just don't tip them."  The players wouldn't make a big deal, though, because they'd likely face contractual sanction for trying to poison themselves with ing Dominos.

[BlueSky]

14 minutes ago, leopard88 said:

 

They can also protest on company time if they're employer says it is acceptable.  The pizza guy and the barista probably haven't received explicit support from their employers.  The NFL players have.

 

Fair point, but that's why I said "...my issue is that...". I watch to see them play football, not learn what they think is wrong with the world. Same for any other performer. I cited the examples of a couple of writers whose material I no longer read because they can't resist trying to impose their beliefs on others through their work. Ironic, because they're both liberals and that's a common complaint from that camp about conservatives. 

 

Permission or not, the time to advocate for personal causes is on personal time. 

[IceCap]

9 minutes ago, BlueSky said:

...trying to impose their beliefs on others through their work.

Who's trying to impose anything on you? Players kneeling for the anthem is both sanctioned by their employers (team and league) and it's them expressing their opinion. They're not insisting you share it. They're merly taking advantage of their platform to make a statement. 

As is their right as both American citizens and as employees who have the consent of their employers. 

If you find it uncomfortable? Sorry. Protests are meant to be inconvenient in one way or another.

 

"I don't mind them protesting, just not right here/now" is a dangerous step towards "free speech zones" employed by the People's Republic of China. Where people protesting the government can only do so out of the public eye.   

 

9 minutes ago, BlueSky said:

Ironic, because they're both liberals and that's a common complaint from that camp about conservatives. 

Except, and this is important, no one is imposing anything on you. At most they're making you aware of an issue. Not forcing you to adopt their position on it.

 

 If merely being reminded that people with different beliefs exist in this world is troubling?

Well I do believe that's an attitude conservatives blast liberals for all the time. Maybe you just want NFL football to be your safe space?