NFL Bans Kneeling During National Anthem

[MUBurrow]

If they believe it is the smart tactic that's all they need to believe, whether it is or isn't, doesn't matter to them.

Agree.

Much more often than not, however, they are going to be right in their money conclusions based on history.

Disagree.

My guess is they paid considerable sums of money to study which way to go

Disagree.

[D'Lo Brown]

What is the combined wealth of the owners and those running the NFL?  Probably not a Trillion, but it is way up there.  Those people bleed money, know more about money than 99.99% of the people out there.  If they believe it is the smart tactic that's all they need to believe, whether it is or isn't, doesn't matter to them.  Much more often than not, however, they are going to be right in their money conclusions based on history.

They had to weigh people leaving and not engaging vs the piss off factor of their actions. They would not have done that in a vacuum, they never do.  My guess is they paid considerable sums of money to study which way to go and the best bang for their buck decision was to make this announcement, do it before the Summer, let people simmer about it for a few weeks, get back to football in September and move along.  What baffles me is why they don't get with their tv partners and tell them not to broadcast the national anthem.  Don't provide the imagery that fueled this on both sides.  They have left themselves open to that because if 20 Packers stay in the tunnel, or 35 Jaguars, it will be noticed.

Okay, but that doesn't mean that is all any of them care about. That is where you are taking a bit of a leap. This issue, even just from the owner's perspective, is about balancing many factors - the military's investment in the NFL, civil rights, appeasing the chief executive, money, fear of change, groupthink/diffusion of responsibility, etc. Probably plenty of other factors. Trying to limit the whole thing into one bucket certainly simplifies the talking points for the chief executive's morning show but I think there were many conflicts for the individual owners. And I think there were plenty of owners that didn't see the money as priority 1. There's a reason the rule changes shifted as the discussion went along, and some of the owners still abstained.

[MU82]

i believe you got this one backwards 82.  they would never have acted to change the policy unle$$ there wa$ a rea$on.  i believe the owners and the nfl have their ears to the ground a lot closer to the issues than you and i

  if you think they did this to be a rabble rouser, keep thinking

The reason was Spanky Dennison. Period.

Great column by Yahoo's Dan Wetzel, who is as good a columnist as there is out there. Totally nails it as a win-win for Spanky and a lose-lose for the NFL.

https://sports.yahoo.com/altering-anthem-policy-nfl-made-bigger-pinata-president-trump-smack-023721814.html

This policy, if left as it is, will make the NFL rue the day they did it.

[Sheriff]

I hate smoking and everything associated with it, but I invest in tobacco stocks.

Surprising that, as a Scoop champion of morality and social justice, you would choose to profit from an industry that causes 1 in 5 deaths each year in the US, with an annual economic burden of $170B on health care. 

[StillAWarrior]

Surprising that, as a Scoop champion of morality and social justice, you would choose to profit from an industry that kills 1 in 5 persons each year in the US, with an annual economic burden of $170B on health care.

Smoking kills 65 million people each year in the US?

Looking into it, I think the stat you're going for is that 1 in 5 deaths each year is related to smoking (i.e., roughly 500,000 of 2.5 million deaths).  Obviously, this is what you were trying to say...I just didn't understand you.

[Sheriff]

Sorry, 1 in every 5 deaths annually in the US, or 480,000, attributable to cigarette smoking.  According to the CDC.

[WarriorDad]

Agree.

Disagree.

Disagree.

Do you have evidence to suggest they didn't do any research on this?  Or evidence to show they have not been successful in many business endeavors in their professional lives, other than just saying you disagree?

[MU82]

Surprising that, as a Scoop champion of morality and social justice, you would choose to profit from an industry that causes 1 in 5 deaths each year in the US, with an annual economic burden of $170B on health care.

As an investor, my job is to help my family reach our financial goals by any reasonable legal means.

I do have friends who won't invest in tobacco stocks, and I respect their decision. But where does it end? Gun stocks? Defense contractors? Fatty foods? Sugar drinks? Major polluters? Companies that use cheap and/or youth labor? Drug companies? I invest in all of 'em ... and so does every S&P 500 Index fund.

If we didn't, there would be nothing left to invest in.

As for being "champion of morality and social justice," well, I certainly would never claim such a thing. I do strongly support the notion of treating others how one would like to be treated himself/herself, of compassion, of fair play and of inclusivity (among other things). Except for the fact that I'm a freakin' atheist, I think Jesus probably would think, "Hey, this dude mostly follows what I teach." And given what I know about Jesus, he probably would shrug off the atheist thing, too!

[WarriorDad]

The reason was Spanky Dennison. Period.

Great column by Yahoo's Dan Wetzel, who is as good a columnist as there is out there. Totally nails it as a win-win for Spanky and a lose-lose for the NFL.

https://sports.yahoo.com/altering-anthem-policy-nfl-made-bigger-pinata-president-trump-smack-023721814.html

This policy, if left as it is, will make the NFL rue the day they did it.

If the NFL went the other way, the orange idiot in the WH would still make it a pinata. To suggest otherwise is crazy. 

He won't be in that office for long, the stewards of the game (the commissioner and owner) have to keep this going long after he is gone, and to suggest they did this to appease him is ludicrous. 

The NBA does not allow kneeling during the anthem, it is part of their CBA.  A NBA player tried it back in 1996, David Stern suspended him and fined him.  That was the end of it.   https://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/14/sports/pro-basketball-abdul-rauf-vows-not-to-back-down-from-nba.html     As much as I think some NBA players would like to also take a knee, they know they can't and the CBA has actually helped them, or they would get orangeman's wrath as well.   It appears the NFL, without the CBA behind it is attempting to do the same and will likely codify it next time around.   The NBA's inability to protest or whatever hasn't ruined that league and this won't ruin the NFL, either.  Nor are they doing it to please that idiot. They are doing it for money.  They lost a lot of money, that's why they are doing it.

[pbiflyer]

Without googling it, does anyone here know how long the players have been standing at attention for the national anthem?

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

The NBA does permit protests, just not those of the kneeling variety.

The reason the NFL continues to bungle this is because they are being reactive instead of proactive.  Instead of working towards a cohesive goal, they are in damage control mode.

[MU82]

If the NFL went the other way, the orange idiot in the WH would still make it a pinata. To suggest otherwise is crazy. 

He won't be in that office for long, the stewards of the game (the commissioner and owner) have to keep this going long after he is gone, and to suggest they did this to appease him is ludicrous. 

The NBA does not allow kneeling during the anthem, it is part of their CBA.  A NBA player tried it back in 1996, David Stern suspended him and fined him.  That was the end of it.   https://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/14/sports/pro-basketball-abdul-rauf-vows-not-to-back-down-from-nba.html     As much as I think some NBA players would like to also take a knee, they know they can't and the CBA has actually helped them, or they would get orangeman's wrath as well.   It appears the NFL, without the CBA behind it is attempting to do the same and will likely codify it next time around.   The NBA's inability to protest or whatever hasn't ruined that league and this won't ruin the NFL, either.  Nor are they doing it to please that idiot. They are doing it for money.  They lost a lot of money, that's why they are doing it.

We disagree. What else is new?

[Jables1604]

A lot of great, well-reasoned and articulate posts on this topic.

Let me throw a wrench in the discussion...

Kneeling during the anthem as a sign of protest is now a penalty.

What are you thoughts about players kneeling after scoring? What if the player announces before a game that he is going to kneel after a score not in prayer but in protest?

Is it not a penalty because it doesn't happen during the anthem.

If the answer is "yes", isn't that a private employer selectively choosing when to limit an employees First Amendment rights?

Curious as to how you guys feel about this distinction.

[tower912]

The Tebow corrollary

[Billy Hoyle]

The Tebow corrollary

Tebow was a hero for his praying, Husain Abdullah of KC got penalized.

[brewcity77]

Without googling it, does anyone here know how long the players have been standing at attention for the national anthem?

Without googling, I'd guess less than 20 years. Certainly no more than 30. I know it was a move made because of advertising dollars from the US Armed Services. Recruiting numbers were down so they tried to make the most popular sport in the country a recruiting tool.

[MU82]

Outstanding takedown of NFL (and Spanky) by Steve Kerr.

https://www.si.com/nba/2018/05/24/steve-kerr-nfl-national-anthem-policy-idiotic

[jesmu84]

If the NFL went the other way, the orange idiot in the WH would still make it a pinata. To suggest otherwise is crazy. 

He won't be in that office for long, the stewards of the game (the commissioner and owner) have to keep this going long after he is gone, and to suggest they did this to appease him is ludicrous. 

The NBA does not allow kneeling during the anthem, it is part of their CBA.  A NBA player tried it back in 1996, David Stern suspended him and fined him.  That was the end of it.   https://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/14/sports/pro-basketball-abdul-rauf-vows-not-to-back-down-from-nba.html     As much as I think some NBA players would like to also take a knee, they know they can't and the CBA has actually helped them, or they would get orangeman's wrath as well.   It appears the NFL, without the CBA behind it is attempting to do the same and will likely codify it next time around.   The NBA's inability to protest or whatever hasn't ruined that league and this won't ruin the NFL, either.  Nor are they doing it to please that idiot. They are doing it for money.  They lost a lot of money, that's why they are doing it.

Not true. The NBA absolutely has the ability to protest. They wear warm-ups with messages on them, among other things.

[MU82]

Not true. The NBA absolutely has the ability to protest. They wear warm-ups with messages on them, among other things.

The Clippers protested loudly, publicly and pointedly ... and they affected real change.

[Jockey]

If the answer is "yes", isn't that a private employer selectively choosing when to limit an employees First Amendment rights?

This is a sticky issue and not nearly as simplistic as the comments that employers should be able to make rules about what players do during work hours.

Most NFL stadiums were fully or partially funded by taxpayer money. That means the government paid for them and in many cases, still owns them. That makes them part of the public forum and owners cannot decree speech rules on a public location.

Then there is the point that these rules really have nothing to do with the location (stadium) as they are only being applied to a select tiny, tiny percentage of people at the location, So this may be a discriminatory rule because owners are picking and choosing who it applies to and who it doesn't.

Nevertheless, owners will proceed and there will eventually be a lawsuit. The players will win in court..

[Pakuni]

Civil rights groups protesting outside NFL offices:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/05/26/civil-rights-activists-protest-outside-league-office-on-friday/

NY Congressman going full on Godwin over Jets' position on protests:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/05/26/new-york-congressman-blasts-the-jets-over-anthem-stance/

Yep, these owners sure know what they're doing.

[naginiF]

NY Congressman going full on Godwin over Jets' position on protests:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/05/26/new-york-congressman-blasts-the-jets-over-anthem-stance/

But wasn't the Nazi salute a forced showing of nationalism just like forcing people to stand for the anthem is forced nationalism?

Obviously there are much different meanings to the to gestures  but supporting one version by deriding another is comical - not to mention the other obvious reasons it's tone deaf.

[MU82]

Civil rights groups protesting outside NFL offices:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/05/26/civil-rights-activists-protest-outside-league-office-on-friday/

NY Congressman going full on Godwin over Jets' position on protests:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/05/26/new-york-congressman-blasts-the-jets-over-anthem-stance/

Yep, these owners sure know what they're doing.

Most people know that King is a total whack-job. Nazi salutes? Really. What a douche.

But he does keep getting elected.

The NFL really stepped deep in it this time.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Civil rights groups protesting outside NFL offices:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/05/26/civil-rights-activists-protest-outside-league-office-on-friday/

NY Congressman going full on Godwin over Jets' position on protests:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/05/26/new-york-congressman-blasts-the-jets-over-anthem-stance/

Yep, these owners sure know what they're doing.

As usual, the dip$hits have their analogy exactly reversed.  This is more the case:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/german-football-club-banned-failing-give-nazi-salute/

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

This is a sticky issue and not nearly as simplistic as the comments that employers should be able to make rules about what players do during work hours.

Most NFL stadiums were fully or partially funded by taxpayer money. That means the government paid for them and in many cases, still owns them. That makes them part of the public forum and owners cannot decree speech rules on a public location.

Then there is the point that these rules really have nothing to do with the location (stadium) as they are only being applied to a select tiny, tiny percentage of people at the location, So this may be a discriminatory rule because owners are picking and choosing who it applies to and who it doesn't.

Nevertheless, owners will proceed and there will eventually be a lawsuit. The players will win in court..

I'm pretty sure all of this is incorrect. Private employers have the right to limit the speech of their employees regardless of the forum. If they couldn't then employees couldn't be fired when they post dumb bigoted sh*t on social media. Again, not a lawyer so I could be wrong.

I don't think there's any free speech issue here. Its more a question of what is right or wrong.