Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Quote

The membership also strongly believes that:

1. All team and league personnel on the field shall stand and show respect for the flag and the Anthem.

2.The Game Operations Manual will be revised to remove the requirement that all players be on the field for the Anthem.

3. Personnel who choose not to stand for the Anthem may stay in the locker room or in a similar location off the field until after the Anthem has been performed.

4. A club will be fined by the League if its personnel are on the field and do not stand and show respect for the flag and the Anthem.

5. Each club may develop its own work rules, consistent with the above principles, regarding its personnel who do not stand and show respect for the flag and the Anthem.

6. The Commissioner will impose appropriate discipline on league personnel who do not stand and show respect for the flag and the Anthem.

That is the NFL's official policy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So idiotic. First, requiring standing for the anthem is the opposite of patriotic. Second, this again gives the mistaken impression that players were protesting the flag/anthem, when literally no one was doing that.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Tigertown Rats said:

So idiotic. First, requiring standing for the anthem is the opposite of patriotic. Second, this again gives the mistaken impression that players were protesting the flag/anthem, when literally no one was doing that.

I agree with you, and what I highlighted is the authoritarian view that many Americans have about standing for the National Anthem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would do away with the national anthem at games all together. I can see both sides. Someone working at McDonalds would be fired if they made political statements at their job. They also aren't forced to observe the anthem. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Motown Bombers said:

I would do away with the national anthem at games all together. I can see both sides. Someone working at McDonalds would be fired if they made political statements at their job. They also aren't forced to observe the anthem. 

Devils advocate.

The NFL guy isn’t forced to stand for the anthem either. He can stay in the locker room.

I am in the minority but I like the policy. It gives the players the option to stand or not stand. They can protest being by being in the locker room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, MAROTH4MVP said:

Devils advocate.

The NFL guy isn’t forced to stand for the anthem either. He can stay in the locker room.

I am in the minority but I like the policy. It gives the players the option to stand or not stand. They can protest being by being in the locker room.

Until a certain wing of this country (rhymes with light) demands that every player not out on the field be outed by the fake news media.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the nba has been requiring players to stand for years.  not an issue.

the nfl should have done it from the beginning before it could mushroom into the controversy its become.  regardless of what they may personally believe, the protests hurt them with a lot of their core customers and they felt they needed to do something about it.

the worst thing about this is that 1) we have to hear about it more now and 2) we have to hear about how this is thr end of american society as we know it.

its a business decision.  nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

Until a certain wing of this country (rhymes with light) demands that every player not out on the field be outed by the fake news media.

Please keep your political commentary in the political forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Biff Mayhem said:

Please keep your political commentary in the political forum.

I agree with this, but on this topic it seems almost impossible to discuss it without getting into politics. It’s a political policy. 

Might I suggest relocating the thread to the politic forum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My take: I don’t really care about the policy. The players are there as part of their job and their employer is free to set policy like this for people that are on the job. I would have preferred they ignored it officially, but I get it. 

I don’t think this is going to have the positive effect that they expect. This policy is not going to eliminate the politics behind it. I think they are opening the door to even more political statements in response. 

They appear to be catering to one segment of the fan base and alienating another. I think, on balance, they would have been better off allowing players to do what they want during the anthem. I guess we will see. But I don’t think this issue is going away any time soon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s interesting to me that they only require one objective action, which is to stand. Nothing about what to do with your hands. There is the vague “show respect” but that is combined with “stand.” It could be argued that showing respect is equivalent to not sitting or kneeling. 

Would it be a violation to stand with your fist raised. Both fists? What about with hands over your eyes. What if you gagged yourself as a showing of how your speech has been curtailed? Or what if you covered your mouth for the same reason. What if you cover your ears? I’m sure any attempt to make a political statement while standing would be penalized as an instance of not showing respect. But the players are going to do something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly don't see the big deal either way but of course I'm not a veteran or somebody that takes the National Anthem really serious(I'll stand for it but I won't yell at somebody if I see them sitting down or wearing a hat) so maybe if I did I'd care more about it.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RandyMarsh said:

I honestly don't see the big deal either way but of course I'm not a veteran or somebody that takes the National Anthem really serious(I'll stand for it but I won't yell at somebody if I see them sitting down or wearing a hat) so maybe if I did I'd care more about it.  

 

In general I hate 'feel good-ism' like staged patriot displays (i.e. national anthem singing et al). If you love your country go do something to improve one of the million things wrong with it. The nation is in a heII of lot more need of that right now than another vocal murder of a hard to sing tune about the War of 1812.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the moron who created this thread, I am tired of hearing about this. There were tied games in the 4th qtr and some idiot broadcaster is giving his opinion on political issues in the game. 

I just want to watch football. I get bombarded with politics 24/7, I don’t need it in sports. The political parties hatred of each other is literally ruining every aspect of life. I’m tired of it, both sides want to throw up so much smoke no one knows what is true and what is false. The anthem controversy is just another aspect of it.

ill just be a CFL fan or something. Go Ticats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I have a pretty decent grasp on what is true and what is false. 

For instance, I think the statement that there were broadcasters talking politics in the middle of the fourth quarter of a tie game is a false statement. 

But go TiCats all the same. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a little late to the party here, but this is just stupid. A complete failure of a policy in my humble opinion.  It reminds me of the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy for gays in the military from Clinton.  That was an attempt to please both sides, and instead if made both sides angry.  This will do the same thing.

The people who are kneeling during the Anthem are not doing it because they want to be disrespectful, they are doing it because they want to protest.  Telling them they don't have to stand if they don't want to, but then they can't be on the field will not address their desires.

The people who don't want to see people kneel during the Anthem want the players to all stand and show respect.  "Letting" the players not stand by just staying in the locker room will not make these people happy as they will still consider the people staying in the locker room as being disrespectful.

It's a total and absolute fail.  It's an attempted compromise but it solves nothing.

In my humble opinion, here's what the NFL should have done: 

  1. All players are required to be on the field and required to stand for the Anthem. 
  2. Players are allowed and encouraged to work with NFL films to produce PSA highlighting their concerns.  The NFL will donate the time and effort to making these PSA and will broadcast one PSA per game at their expense.
  3. Players are encouraged to take an active role in causes of social justice. The NFL will work with players and sponsor causes that aid those causes matching player monetary donations (with vetting that the organization is acceptable).
  4. The NFL will have a brief event during half time of "regular" games to honor and celebrate the efforts of an individual or a group from the the area near the NFL home teams city that is working to help the underprivileged and/or minorities.  The person/group being honored will be voted on by the home team players and will receive a $10K donation from the NFL. 

Now, this is just off the top of my head and I'm sure there are some issues in my suggestions that I haven't fully thought out, but the goal here is to address both sides of the issue without compromise.

One side thinks it's disrespectful to kneel during the Anthem. I'd readily debate that with anyone personally, but there are people who will always think that.  So just head off the problem and make the teams stand.  Problem solved.

The other side thinks that we need to draw attention to social inequity in our nation.  Steps 2, 3, and 4 above are all designed to give players an even bigger voice in this area and allow them to help others often with the NFL's backing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One side note: I understand that it's started to evolve into a "right to protest" topic where it isn't just about kneeling for social justice, but also kneel to support their right to protest because of the backlash from certain gov't individuals.

But I think it's within an employers right to ask their employees to do that.  As others have mentioned above the NBA has this policy.

I think if the NFL put this policy in place WHILE also putting in the other steps like I mentioned above it would show the players that the NFL does care about what they care about and wants to support them.  I think they'd be more willing to follow policy if they believe the NFL really was willing to back them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the problem here is that in general the understanding of an employer's right to control their employees is at least philosophically and theoretically derives from an idea that the employer has some right to judge what things affect an employees ability to perform their function. It's OK to tell a fight attendant he/she must be well-groomed because they interact at close quarters with the public etc. Sometimes it's pretty tenuous, the narrowness of the old dress codes at places like IBM and EDS were a little silly, but OTOH, they weren't considered very onerous by the 60's nerds. 

To me the issue is that a football game is public event which takes place in a public accommodation venue (often publicly funded!) at which many things other than a football game are taking place (think of all the outside marketing and advertising for instance). The playing of the anthem in particular has nothing to do with the game of football itself, a players opinion on the anthem has nothing at all to do with his performance as a football player, and the political fact it that as one party is trying to monopolize the position on patriotism, it has actually become somewhat a forced political statement. Now on the other hand, the player is in his uniform and 'on the clock' so to speak, but again, this goes back to the somewhat odd circumstances of a football game. Most us of do not do our jobs out in the public square - when we are on the clock we either in our employers or possibly a customers venue. 

So I just don't see this issue as simply as 'you have to do what your employer says on the job'. I think that is why, even if the law may be on the owner's side, the application here does not feel right to so many people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we're probably headed for a "RedRamage Thread" discussion here, but taking your example of the flight attendant...

Does proper grooming really effect their ability to do their job?  Well, it's gonna depend on your definition of what the job is.  If the job is directing customers to their seats, giving safety info, handing out food/drinks, and checking the cabin... well... you really DON'T need to be properly groomed to do that, do you?  A person could easily do all those things in dirty pants, a ripped shirt, and uncombed hair.

But the attendants job is more than just doing those tasks.  They also serve as the front line for customer contact with the company, and as such should present a good image to make the customers more willing to interact with them in the current flight, as well as future flights.  An attendant can do the job better, with better results for the company, if they are well groomed.

I think the same can be said with the NFL.  Yes, the players job is to play football, but... that's really not the whole story.  The job is about entertaining the fans.  Does flipping off the fans effect a players ability to play football?  No, but it surely effects the entertainment value of the team and so a team will certainly tell a player NOT to do it.

We don't know if the ratings decline if the NFL is related to the protests or not... I tend to think it probably is having a small impact, but not the only reason that rating may be going down.  But I also think it's well within the owners purview to say that they feel standing up for the anthem will provide a better entertainment experience for their fans and therefore mandate it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, RedRamage said:

Well, we're probably headed for a "RedRamage Thread" discussion here, but taking your example of the flight attendant...

Does proper grooming really effect their ability to do their job? 

This a basically an adjudicatable issue under the  law or collective bargaining*. At one time the Airlines got away with saying FA had to be young nubile females,  and that was accepted. Eventually we got to the wisdom that there was no justifiable link between a FA's job and her(and now his) age or gender. OTOH, there is very clear reason a FA still wears a uniform, it is reasonable and practical to be able to know who there are. So there is a basic idea that there is a standard of reasoning that has to get you from  A -> B in a pretty direct fashion before you demand to regulate what you accept in an employee. A football player's job is to entertain *by playing the game*. By any practical description of a football game, the players are not responsible for the entertainment provided by any of the other goings on in the stadium.

*this should be the players' stronger case anyway. Employers are in general not allowed to make unilateral employment condition changes to employees covered by collective bargaining agreements. It would appear that at minimum, the NFLPA has not bargained for favorable enough terms on this or it wouldn't even be an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gehringer_2 said:

A football players job is to entertain *by playing the game*. By any pratical description of a football game players are not responsible for the entertainment provided by any of the other goings on in the stadium.

Is it really just that though?  I think these days if goes beyond just playing the game.  I mean you have mandatory press conferences... you have appearances... you have things like the charity Softball game the Lions just did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NFL can do what it wants to best market its product. For some reason, they think this policy is net positive for their league. I don’t think they came to that decision lightly. That said, I think they are wrong. I think this policy is only going to cause even more negative press, and likely within a subset of fans that are more willing to move on from the NFL. 

I bet if you polled the NFL fan base, a majority hate the players kneeling during the anthem. But I also think these same fans are incapable of walking away from the NFL. 

It’s true that one of the biggest sources of business is maintaining your current customers. But that’s more appropriate when the customers have an alternative to go to. An NFL super fan has nothing else to turn to. 

As soon as this became a hot button issue, they were screwed. I think they should have ignored it officially. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to agree on just about everything there Shelton.  About the only spot I might disagree is that the majority 'hate' players kneeling.

I feel 'hate' it too strong a word.  I think there is definitely a subset that hates it, but I think there are more who just don't like it.  I'm firmly in that category.  I'd prefer they don't kneel during the anthem, but I understand why they are doing it and as long as it's not NFL policy, I think they have every right to protest in that manner if they so choose.

The problem with the new policy, I fear, is that it does, to an extent, official sanction protesting by not going on field.  I gotta think that every player who doesn't go on the field will get asked why he wasn't there, and now he's not just kneeling to protest, he's getting a mic put in his face asking him to expound on the reason.  The policy actually increases the amount of screen time players will get to talk about their pet causes.

Right now, the topic of social injustice, is a legit topic.  Even if you don't think it's a problem, or if you think it's a problem, but not a big one, I believe most people can understand that it's perceived as a real problem and one worth at least talking about.

But it just takes some moron to protest Beyonce getting an award instead of Taylor Swift and everything goes out the window because the NFL policy ALLOWS players to protest in that manner. (Yes, I know that's not what the NFL is trying to do with this policy, but this will be what the media says.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      96,669
    • Total Posts
      2,973,736
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×
×
  • Create New...