Jump to content

NFL players tribute to 9/11


ridenlow71

Recommended Posts

First of all, I take issue with the idea that wearing red, white and blue gloves does anything to honor the dead. It seems like an attention-getting ploy to me. Honor the dead in a way that is actually meaningful.

Setting that aside, players like Briggs need to be fined for this stuff. Goodell can't be making any exceptions. What's to stop a player from wearing polka dot socks to honor his daughter who died from cancer (totally hypothetical) or a green facemask on his helmet to protest the deforestation of the rainforests (again, hypothetical). Goodell has to uphold the rules. Letting things go on a case-by-case basis would be a nightmare and it's not the proper way to govern issues like this. There are rules and you stick to them.

That's a lot different than 3 000 people dying in one day because of a deliberate attack.

You're darn right it's a lot different. If someone is really going to make an argument that they should be able to wear a green facemask for the environment because Lance Briggs wore red, white, and blue on September 11th, they deserve to be fined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

And players will already be "honoring" the victims, to the extent wearing special geegaws on a uniform actually does that.

This is absolutely about self-promotion. And let's not pretend that he's above such petty concerns, unless that website and Twitter account are somehow being run without his permission. Nothing wrong with self-promotion, until you grab the death of three thousand people in its service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And players will already be "honoring" the victims, to the extent wearing special geegaws on a uniform actually does that.

This is absolutely about self-promotion. And let's not pretend that he's above such petty concerns, unless that website and Twitter account are somehow being run without his permission. Nothing wrong with self-promotion, until you grab the death of three thousand people in its service.

And let's not pretend you have any idea what his intentions are because you don't. Again it not any different than wearing caps that honor the fire dept, wearing patches on your sleeve etc. It doesn't matter whether its a team or individual thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Reebok great job on these gloves and shoes..looks like I'm getting fined this week. Lol!" Briggs tweeted Thursday. "By far the best fine I will ever have to pay. Thanks"

It's not always about attention. Briggs isn't someone, besides asking for money, who seeks out attention. Let them fine them, the players know they'll be fine and it's obvious they don't care. This is a lot more than that. This was the biggest tragedy to strike American soil and impacted everybody in this country. For a time, it helped unite everyone in this country as well.

He should fine them because it's against the rules, but there should have been an exception maybe for this week.

In some ways it did, but I've also never seen one thing so exploited as 9-11. From politicians (obviously) to all sorts of people trying to use the newfound patriotism to sell products, to individuals on the street (and big-time athletic fields) running around with flags to show just how patriotic they are. Reebok is most definitely exploiting 9-11 with those gloves. Is Briggs? Debatable...I don't want to pretend to read his mind, but showing that you're the flag-wavingest guy out there can certainly be seen as attention-grabbing and self-promoting, even if there is no direct income to be made from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, I take issue with the idea that wearing red, white and blue gloves does anything to honor the dead. It seems like an attention-getting ploy to me. Honor the dead in a way that is actually meaningful.

Setting that aside, players like Briggs need to be fined for this stuff. Goodell can't be making any exceptions. What's to stop a player from wearing polka dot socks to honor his daughter who died from cancer (totally hypothetical) or a green facemask on his helmet to protest the deforestation of the rainforests (again, hypothetical). Goodell has to uphold the rules. Letting things go on a case-by-case basis would be a nightmare and it's not the proper way to govern issues like this. There are rules and you stick to them.

That's a lot different than 3 000 people dying in one day because of a deliberate attack.

You're darn right it's a lot different. If someone is really going to make an argument that they should be able to wear a green facemask for the environment because Lance Briggs wore red, white, and blue on September 11th, they deserve to be fined.

What if it's something to honor the veterans that have sacrificed (some the ultimate sacrifice). On the game closest to Veterans Day? Surely if we can accept it once on 9-11, then we can accept it just this once more for Veterans Day. And Pearl Harbor, a long time ago, but still a brutal attack on our soil (Dec 7, 1941), certainly we can make a third exception and let players individualize their patriotism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there's the slightest doubt that he's doing it for self-promotion, then it's not a worthy "tribute."

So you, or anyone else doubting gets to decide whats a worthy tribute? <_<

Maybe he does not get to, but someone else has to, or players would be allowed to make individualized tributes on their own. That someone is Goodell, I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there's the slightest doubt that he's doing it for self-promotion, then it's not a worthy "tribute."

So you, or anyone else doubting gets to decide whats a worthy tribute? <_<

Maybe he does not get to, but someone else has to, or players would be allowed to make individualized tributes on their own. That someone is Goodell, I guess.

I don't have any problem with him deciding whats a worthy tribute, but to fine or prevent an individual from making a tribute to 9/11, because he's afraid of a "slippery slope"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, I take issue with the idea that wearing red, white and blue gloves does anything to honor the dead. It seems like an attention-getting ploy to me. Honor the dead in a way that is actually meaningful.

Setting that aside, players like Briggs need to be fined for this stuff. Goodell can't be making any exceptions. What's to stop a player from wearing polka dot socks to honor his daughter who died from cancer (totally hypothetical) or a green facemask on his helmet to protest the deforestation of the rainforests (again, hypothetical). Goodell has to uphold the rules. Letting things go on a case-by-case basis would be a nightmare and it's not the proper way to govern issues like this. There are rules and you stick to them.

That's a lot different than 3 000 people dying in one day because of a deliberate attack.

You're darn right it's a lot different. If someone is really going to make an argument that they should be able to wear a green facemask for the environment because Lance Briggs wore red, white, and blue on September 11th, they deserve to be fined.

What if it's something to honor the veterans that have sacrificed (some the ultimate sacrifice). On the game closest to Veterans Day? Surely if we can accept it once on 9-11, then we can accept it just this once more for Veterans Day. And Pearl Harbor, a long time ago, but still a brutal attack on our soil (Dec 7, 1941), certainly we can make a third exception and let players individualize their patriotism.

If they were to do it 3 times a year, an NFL version of the MLB's Stars and Stripes collection wouldn't be a half-bad idea (or at least something similar).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there's the slightest doubt that he's doing it for self-promotion, then it's not a worthy "tribute."

So you, or anyone else doubting gets to decide whats a worthy tribute? <_<

Maybe he does not get to, but someone else has to, or players would be allowed to make individualized tributes on their own. That someone is Goodell, I guess.

I don't have any problem with him deciding whats a worthy tribute, but to fine or prevent an individual from making a tribute to 9/11, because he's afraid of a "slippery slope"?

Then you've decided by saying "it's OK for him to decide, as long as he decides THIS one's OK." I find this ironic given the above: "So you, or anyone else doubting gets to decide whats a worthy tribute? <_<"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there's the slightest doubt that he's doing it for self-promotion, then it's not a worthy "tribute."

So you, or anyone else doubting gets to decide whats a worthy tribute? <_<

Maybe he does not get to, but someone else has to, or players would be allowed to make individualized tributes on their own. That someone is Goodell, I guess.

I don't have any problem with him deciding whats a worthy tribute, but to fine or prevent an individual from making a tribute to 9/11, because he's afraid of a "slippery slope"?

Seriously? When you're on the clock, and in company uniform, you are not an individual. You are an employee, and any company with any type of dress code has the authority to tell you what to do. I get that sports is different than the real world, but in matters like this, it's not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there's the slightest doubt that he's doing it for self-promotion, then it's not a worthy "tribute."

So you, or anyone else doubting gets to decide whats a worthy tribute? <_<

Maybe he does not get to, but someone else has to, or players would be allowed to make individualized tributes on their own. That someone is Goodell, I guess.

I don't have any problem with him deciding whats a worthy tribute, but to fine or prevent an individual from making a tribute to 9/11, because he's afraid of a "slippery slope"?

Seriously? When you're on the clock, and in company uniform, you are not an individual. You are an employee, and any company with any type of dress code has the authority to tell you what to do. I get that sports is different than the real world, but in matters like this, it's not.

Seriously? I wasn't arguing whether he has the authority, or should have that authority to say what can be worn or not be worn. My contention is whether fining someone in this case is really necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't it be?

Do rules go out the window if they're tied to a big enough event? Is this a question of numbers? And if so, would you allow athletes to add red ribbons to their own personal uniforms without penalty? AIDS has taken a hundred times more lives than the terrorists did on that day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there's the slightest doubt that he's doing it for self-promotion, then it's not a worthy "tribute."

So you, or anyone else doubting gets to decide whats a worthy tribute? <_<

Maybe he does not get to, but someone else has to, or players would be allowed to make individualized tributes on their own. That someone is Goodell, I guess.

I don't have any problem with him deciding whats a worthy tribute, but to fine or prevent an individual from making a tribute to 9/11, because he's afraid of a "slippery slope"?

Seriously? When you're on the clock, and in company uniform, you are not an individual. You are an employee, and any company with any type of dress code has the authority to tell you what to do. I get that sports is different than the real world, but in matters like this, it's not.

Seriously? I wasn't arguing whether he has the authority, or should have that authority to say what can be worn or not be worn. My contention is whether fining someone in this case is really necessary.

In my opinion yes, because you can't be subjective when it comes to this stuff. The "slippery slope" argument is perfectly valid. Maybe I'd have less of an issue with it if there wasn't a Reebok logo on everything involved, because it's so clearly just a stunt to get people to look at the gaudy gloves / shoes and see a corporate logo. Briggs is just a tool in all of this. The arguments that wearing star-spangled gloves don't really pay tribute or help anyone are also perfectly valid. How exactly does a glove help the families? There are flags flying all over the place, having one on his hands doesn't make anyone more patriotic (or jingoistic). It just looks silly, and if honestly a little disgraceful that companies are capitalizing on sympathetic feelings by churning out this crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see some players start wearing all black uniforms to honor everyone who has been lost to death, the greatest killer of them all. Screw Goodell.

Come on, people. What is it about 9/11 that somehow makes it the exception to the rule? There are an infinite number of things worth honoring. It's not like the NFL is in any way denying 9/11 happened or failing to honor the victims in countless other ways. I really wish Goodell would have stuck to the rules on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.