Football Ratings Are Down

[Pakuni]

If MU players were to hold a similar protest and it can be shown that it is hurting ratings, attendance or revenue for the MU basketball product, what should the administration do about it?

Nothing.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

This thread is about TV ratings.  Their have been numerous stories posted that it is believed that this protest is hurting ratings.  They need to address this.

Is it? Are you really upset because the NFLs viewership is down? If the protests didn't happen but viewership was still down would you be posting this frantically about how the NFL had to do something?  What if the protests were happening and earrings actually went up? Would you be supporting the protests because it helped TV viewership?

Or are you using the ratings being down as an excuse to attack a movement that you are uncomfortable with and want to censor? I could be wrong but I have a suspicion that it's not actually about the ratings.

[mu03eng]

The national anthem at Blackhawk hockey games is pretty darn cool - particularly in the playoffs.  Also, there have been times in my life (post 9-11 | first gulf war) where I felt like it brought people together.

But I really don't understand the stink about players making a statement.  Those upset should look at the large majority of people in the crowd not paying attention or looking at their phones during the anthem. 

So I guess what i am saying is it seems people are actually less upset about the 'disrespect' and more upset about the 'statement' - which is interesting.

I think that can be true, but there are certainly some folks that are upset about the method of protest AND what they are protesting.

I have no way of knowing how prevalent this is among the "hate the protest" crowd but I can give you an example with real life people I know. These two people I know both served in the military during Vietnam and both experienced very negative outcomes interacting with the general public (one was spit on in the airport upon making it back state side and the other was publicly mocked on multiple occasions while in uniform and her command actually ordered that they no longer wear their uniforms off base).

When discussing the protests, they both made the point that they support the need to resolve the social justice issues in the country but they had very negative and visceral reactions to the anthem protest as it felt to them like a slippery slope back to that time when military, police, etc were reviled in this country.

Again, I don't know how big that constituency is but just another perspective.

[Tugg Speedman]

Nothing.

And if MU decided to use long time season ticket holder and big MU fan Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke as part of a "blue lives matter" demonstration which caused some of the players to boycott the game, you also think the administration should nothing to stop any of it?

What I'm getting at is you're in favor of it because it fits your political bias but if it goes against your political bias, you would be against it.

[GGGG]

And if MU decided to use long time season ticket holder and big MU fan Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke as part of a "blue lives matter" demonstration which caused some of the players to boycott the game, you also think the administration should nothing to stop any of it?

What I'm getting at is you're in favor of it because it fits your political bias but if it goes against your political bias, you would be against it.

Why would MU conduct a "blue lives matter" demonstration? 

[mu03eng]

Why would MU conduct a "blue lives matter" demonstration?

And for that matter, why does he think an individual player protesting is defacto MU protesting.

[Tugg Speedman]

Why would MU conduct a "blue lives matter" demonstration?

Why not? 

Why should any player conduct a black lives matter protest? 

[Pakuni]

And if MU decided to use long time season ticket holder and big MU fan Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke as part of a "blue lives matter" demonstration which caused some of the players to boycott the game, you also think the administration should nothing to stop any of it?

What I'm getting at is you're in favor of it because it fits your political bias but if it goes against your political bias, you would be against it.

So you're asking me whether the Marquette administration should do something to stop a make-believe Blue Lives Matters demonstration organized by the Marquette administration?
Uhhh ....

[reinko]

I will repeat myself  from earlier in this thread.  If these so called aggravated fans chose to boycott the Shield over Kap's protest, where the hell were they when over the years dozens of players beat up females and the elderly, drove drunk, in a few cases cases killed people, sexually assaulted women, and so on and so on.  Of course, this is a small small % of players, but so are the ones protesting. 

It says A LOT about those fans, and the priorities in life they hold so dear.   

[mu03eng]

Why not? 

Why should any player conduct a black lives matter protest?

So many things wrong here: A) an MU player kneeling for social justice is not a BLM protest unless they say it is B) a player is not speaking for the university as a whole in that instance any more than a student protesting on the corner of 16th and Wells in a Marquette t-shirt is C) What is the benefit to MU to silence an individual student and come off as oppressive?

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

I think that can be true, but there are certainly some folks that are upset about the method of protest AND what they are protesting.

When discussing the protests, they both made the point that they support the need to resolve the social justice issues in the country but they had very negative and visceral reactions to the anthem protest as it felt to them like a slippery slope back to that time when military, police, etc were reviled in this country.

Again, I don't know how big that constituency is but just another perspective.

I can respect that and agree there are all types on the spectrum of message versus method (and both). 

By the way on this broader topic (that i wont link for political reasons) there was a great piece on NPR this morning as part of their study of the interview tapes that were used as background for Studs Terkel's "Working".  It illustrated how much and how little has changed since the time you referenced specifically on the topics referenced in this thread.

If anyone is interested i am sure it is on the website.

[GGGG]

Marquette has had players not face the flag during the national anthem previously. The University and its coach were cool with it.

http://m.beloitdailynews.com/mobile/sports/goose-had-his-own-issues-with-the-national-anthem/article_fdcb4374-7a8f-11e6-a38f-17c395be9823.html

[Tugg Speedman]

So many things wrong here: A) an MU player kneeling for social justice is not a BLM protest unless they say it is B) a player is not speaking for the university as a whole in that instance any more than a student protesting on the corner of 16th and Wells in a Marquette t-shirt is C) What is the benefit to MU to silence an individual student and come off as oppressive?

So as long as it is a non-descript social justice protest that one can interpret anyway they want, you're ok with it?  LargeLy because it is a meaningless protest.

What if a MU player wants to protest the painting over of the Assata Shukar muriel?  Ok with that too.

Point is when you open the door to this, Sultan is not correct that it dies out by itself, it grows and grows until it offends your political views.  Only then is it shut down. 

In the meantime the product being used for the protest, be it the NFL or MUBB, will be tarnished by it.

See the graphic above, the protest is unpopular.  It offends NFL fans.  It makes the NFL product worse.

[GGGG]

I'm actually quite positive that if the NFL clamped down on it, it would only grow. Maybe even see game boycotts by players. 100% worse for the NFL.

[bma77]

I will repeat myself  from earlier in this thread.  If these so called aggravated fans chose to boycott the Shield over Kap's protest, where the hell were they when over the years dozens of players beat up females and the elderly, drove drunk, in a few cases cases killed people, sexually assaulted women, and so on and so on.  Of course, this is a small small % of players, but so are the ones protesting. 

It says A LOT about those fans, and the priorities in life they hold so dear.

It is an either or situation?  If Ray Rice hits a woman, the justice system and the league take care of it.  He doesn't play for the Saints or Falcons, teams I follow.  Only a guess, but that may be part of the thinking.   The protests aren't limited to Kap, but are happening with players on a number of teams.  Only a guess again, but for some fans the national anthem and respect of country is on a different plane. 

What we should not deny is that fans are turning off games because of this, even if we think what Kap is doing is ok.  Say 75% of that poll is wrong, it still means 11% of fans are turning the NFL off.  Those are big numbers. 

[GGGG]

I will note that I am glad to see you back bma...if that is indeed you.

[mu03eng]

So as long as it is a non-descript social justice protest that one can interpret anyway they want, you're ok with it?  LargeLy because it is a meaningless protest.

What if a MU player wants to protest the painting over of the Assata Shukar muriel?  Ok with that too.

Point is when you open the door to this, Sultan is not correct that it dies out by itself, it grows and grows until it offends your political views.  Only then is it shut down. 

In the meantime the product being used for the protest, be it the NFL or MUBB, will be tarnished by it.

See the graphic above, the protest is unpopular.  It offends NFL fans.  It makes the NFL product worse.

If a Marquette player wants to protest, regardless of what it is, I'm fine with them doing that. I may have issue with what they are protesting but that's between me and the player so to speak....university is not involved at all as far as I'm concerned.

And by the way, nothing offends my political views because they are just views. If I let my political views be offended by others views that's means I'm dogmatic which is really the root of the majority of the conflict on this earth.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

And if MU decided to use long time season ticket holder and big MU fan Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke as part of a "blue lives matter" demonstration which caused some of the players to boycott the game, you also think the administration should nothing to stop any of it?

What I'm getting at is you're in favor of it because it fits your political bias but if it goes against your political bias, you would be against it.

Why not? 

Why should any player conduct a black lives matter protest? 

There's the difference. It is different when an individual player or players decide on their own to make a political statement and when a university or organization decides to make a political statement. When a player makes a statement, the university can choose not to act thereby not taking one side or the other. They are not encouraging it but they are not actively stopping it, a neutral stance. When an organization or university makes the statement, they are clearly taking one side.

So a better a question would be, what if a student athlete wanted to do a protest/demonstration for blue lives matter (that was the same level of "disruptiveness" as kneeling during the national anthem), and people were upset would should the university do? I would say the same thing, absolutely nothing.

What I'm getting at is you're in favor of it because it fits your political bias but if it goes against your political bias, you would be against it.

No. I welcome acts of civil disobedience from both sides. But you keep failing to make proper comparisons. You keep using examples where entire private organizations such as Starbucks or Marquette (theoretically) have made political statements. You need to compare it with instances where individuals have made political statements.

You are correct that I personally would be more receptive to a Black Lives Matter protest by Marquette than I would be to a Blue Lives Matter demonstration. I would be disappointed  that Marquette would decide to do that and think it was colossally stupid given the current climate in Milwaukee (it could also be considered stupid to do Black Lives Matter protest given the climate) but I wouldn't try to censor it. Marquette is a private organization and has a right to make whatever statement it chooses to and I as an individual am free to feel whatever way I want about it. But again, that's not what were talking about here. We are talking about individuals making political statements.

[Tugg Speedman]

If a Marquette player wants to protest, regardless of what it is, I'm fine with them doing that. I may have issue with what they are protesting but that's between me and the player so to speak....university is not involved at all as far as I'm concerned.

And by the way, nothing offends my political views because they are just views. If I let my political views be offended by others views that's means I'm dogmatic which is really the root of the majority of the conflict on this earth.

But the MU students of the gender and sexual equality resource center where doing that with the mural and it sparked outage, painting over it and a firing.

And if the MU students of the basketball team want to do the same, that's ok?

Some protests are ok, others are not.

[Tugg Speedman]

There's the difference. It is different when an individual player or players decide on their own to make a political statement and when a university or organization decides to make a political statement. When a player makes a statement, the university can choose not to act thereby not taking one side or the other. They are not encouraging it but they are not actively stopping it, a neutral stance. When an organization or university makes the statement, they are clearly taking one side.

So a better a question would be, what if a student athlete wanted to do a protest/demonstration for blue lives matter (that was the same level of "disruptiveness" as kneeling during the national anthem), and people were upset would should the university do? I would say the same thing, absolutely nothing.

No. I welcome acts of civil disobedience from both sides. But you keep failing to make proper comparisons. You keep using examples where entire private organizations such as Starbucks or Marquette (theoretically) have made political statements. You need to compare it with instances where individuals have made political statements.

You are correct that I personally would be more receptive to a Black Lives Matter protest by Marquette than I would be to a Blue Lives Matter demonstration. I would be disappointed  that Marquette would decide to do that and think it was colossally stupid given the current climate in Milwaukee (it could also be considered stupid to do Black Lives Matter protest given the climate) but I wouldn't try to censor it. Marquette is a private organization and has a right to make whatever statement it chooses to and I as an individual am free to feel whatever way I want about it. But again, that's not what were talking about here. We are talking about individuals making political statements.

Good post

The individuals making the protest are using the NFL, the basketball team, or whatever to promote their protest.  As such they risk devaluing the NFL, the basketball team.  What is the reposnsible of the owners or administration to protect that franchise?

You're saying nothing.  So everyone can use or abuse it as they see fit.

What is the limit?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Point is when you open the door to this, Sultan is not correct that it dies out by itself, it grows and grows until it offends your political views.  Only then is it shut down.

No. Protests end all kinds of ways. Most die out after people stop paying attention. The more angry people get without meeting the players' "demands", the more the protesters are encouraged to do it. You could try to "shut it down" by firing, suspending, benching players (the fascist approach), but then you run the risk of making the protesters martyrs and you could inspire the protest to new levels. This is especially true in this situation given how adversarial the relationship between the players and the NFL currently is.

Given that the protester's "demands" are likely impossible to be met, the easiest way to end the protest would be to stop giving a sh*t. They aren't harming anyone, they aren't stopping football from happening, they aren't keeping anyone else from standing during the national anthem, they are really harmless. If you just ignore them the media will eventually stop paying attention and the protest will fade. Some might keep doing it for personal reasons but no one will know because no one will give a sh*t.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Good post

The individuals making the protest are using the NFL, the basketball team, or whatever to promote their protest.  As such they risk devaluing the NFL, the basketball team.  What is the reposnsible of the owners or administration to protect that franchise?

You're saying nothing.  So everyone can use or abuse it as they see fit.

What is the limit?

They do have a responsibility. That's why squashing the protest is a terrible idea. Makes martyrs out of the protesters and further antagonizes the already rocky relationship between the NFL and the players. You know what people hate more than kneeling during the national anthem? Censorship. Yes the NFL has the right to censor if they so choose, but that won't keep their players from revolting and fans from criticizing.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

But the MU students of the gender and sexual equality resource center where doing that with the mural and it sparked outage, painting over it and a firing.

And if the MU students of the basketball team want to do the same, that's ok?

Some protests are ok, others are not.

If the mural was painted over doesn't that mean the protest was a success? I'm honestly not familiar with the situation, who was fired over that mural?

[mu03eng]

But the MU students of the gender and sexual equality resource center where doing that with the mural and it sparked outage, painting over it and a firing.

And if the MU students of the basketball team want to do the same, that's ok?

Some protests are ok, others are not.

If the players want to paint the court that's something different than a visual, temporary protest. Additionally, I wasn't worked up over the mural thing so I can't speak it the outrage.

At the end of the day, any outrage I have over a protest is directed at who or how they are doing it and little to nothing to do with where they are or how other organizations get pulled in "against their will"

[Pakuni]

Some protests are ok, others are not.

Yes. Obviously.
How is this even a question?

As I noted earlier, MU has a detailed written policy for demonstrations. I see nothing in that policy that would prevent, or even discourage, a player from taking a knee during the anthem.