White Linen Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 10 minutes ago, K-9 said: I’m not necessarily doubting your info, but are there any hard studies on the negative economic impact of the player protests on NFL bottom lines? I doubt there was little if any at all. Sure, there are the spattering of fans burning NFL merchandise on YouTube along with some social media declarations of fans vowing never to watch a game again, but are they enough to offset the billions of dollars in revenue already guaranteed to the league? It would hav to be a grass roots movement in the millions to start having an impact. I just don’t see it. Yeah, I don't know and I didn't do enough research to see if hard numbers had been studied. I think the loss of viewership was real though and it appears attendance was down. There had to have been some financial effect. As you mention, did it necessarily rise to the level of significantly effecting the billionaire owners? Probably not but it may have effected retailers and folks that own parking places, etc. Folks like that. I think it got to the level of at least - this isn't good and could potentially be a problem for real. Kim is an owner and she feels like it's a conversation that needs to be had - so I guess there's that too.
Batman1876 Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 Just now, dwight in philly said: ok.. i am thinking maybe lemon chicken.. (use a bit of the zest , its worth it ) . roasted potatos, maybe a side salad, and a green leafy vegatable. I’m a vegetarian but you know best.
Meazy26 Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 2 hours ago, uticaclub said: Most the players don't even know what the are "protesting" You must be in the “shut up and dribble” camp...
dwight in philly Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 Just now, Batman1876 said: I’m a vegetarian but you know best. ok..; veggie burger , baked french fries.yogurt shake , and a granola bar for dessert 4 minutes ago, Meazy26 said: You must be in the “shut up and dribble” camp... ok einstein
LA Grant Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 Just now, White Linen said: I'm not trying to pretend to know you're thoughts outside of what you post - I just went off you posting "All that should matter to the company is "is the work is getting done?" So if the football games are still being played, if the athletes are still performing on the field, my personal belief is that should be all that matters. IMO." I just responded saying that's not all that matters - then you agreed. I don't know why you said that's all that matters - when there's more that matters. In the line quoted, I'm speaking about my opinion (IMO), about what should be, not what "is." You brought up the perspective of the business, right? Because you'd be right, there's more to the product that matters, in their opinion. If it's a confusion of semantics, I'll clarify. In my opinion, the company should only be concerned with the product. The game is the product. The players themselves are not the product. The players playing the game is the product. From the NFL's perspective, the product includes the players, including players standing for the anthem. In my opinion, that definition is wrong. An analogy: If a barista wears a "Blue Lives Matter" shirt, and then some customers decide to protest and stop going to the coffee shop, obviously the owners of the coffee shop will want to do whatever they can to get the customers back. But, in my opinion, if the barista is still performing their responsibilities & delivering the product, then that loss of revenue is not the fault of the employee — even if those lost customers are blaming the employee. From the perspective of the coffee shop, any profit-driven company will always be "customer is always right." In my opinion, the customer is not always right. The employee is sometimes right. I don't like to see employees punished if they haven't done anything to prevent/hurt the product, just because of customers disagreeing with the individual employee on a non-product related issue. The NFL may view the players are the product, that they own them outside of when they're playing the game, that they can & should regulate their behavior outside of the game. I strongly disagree with that view.
Rocky Landing Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 1 hour ago, dwight in philly said: Seriously?? Yes, seriously. We all make a statement when we stand for the National Anthem. Does that not fit your narrative?
K-9 Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 3 minutes ago, White Linen said: Yeah, I don't know and I didn't do enough research to see if hard numbers had been studied. I think the loss of viewership was real though and it appears attendance was down. There had to have been some financial effect. As you mention, did it necessarily rise to the level of significantly effecting the billionaire owners? Probably not but it may have effected retailers and folks that own parking places, etc. Folks like that. I think it got to the level of at least - this isn't good and could potentially be a problem for real. Kim is an owner and she feels like it's a conversation that needs to be had - so I guess there's that too. I agree. Anything that tarnishes the brand is a negative impact on the business. I'm just saying it's not always necessarily a financial impact and perhaps KP was alluding to that kind of damage? Good point about ratings, too .While the league won't lose any of the money already guaranteed under the current deal, it will be interesting to see if the networks and other media outlets leverage any ratings decline in the next negotiations. Personally, I think the biggest impact on ratings is the sheer staleness of the product to consumers. I know it is for me, anyway. "Oh look, the Patriots*** are in the Super Bowl again."
BillsFan2313 Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 23 minutes ago, dwight in philly said: ? well thought out! I was tolerating this thread until Mr. Question Mark joined in. I don't think I can see another ? for the day.
dwight in philly Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 6 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said: Yes, seriously. We all make a statement when we stand for the National Anthem. Does that not fit your narrative? are you kidding? standing for the national anthem is a political statement? unless you are are in academia, you really have no excuse to say something like that 3 minutes ago, BillsFan2313 said: I was tolerating this thread until Mr. Question Mark joined in. I don't think I can see another ? for the day. ok ok ok . im sorry!
Lurker Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 2 hours ago, uticaclub said: Most the players don't even know what the are "protesting" Neither do most folks bitching at the players...
dwight in philly Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 4 minutes ago, Lurker said: Neither do most folks bitching at the players... i beg to differ. people "bitching" at the players , as one says, is not "bitching" its about people not giving a sh-t what they think.. its a football game, not a CNN town hall.
Lurker Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 2 hours ago, RussellDopeland said: Remember - this wasn't necessarily an "issue" until Cheeto Jesus chimed in, claiming the protests unpatriotic and effrontery to our troops (this coming from the 5-time draft deferment recipient- President Bone Spurs). Can't we just let this go and focus on football....please? Actually, it wasn't much of an issue until he called them SOBs. That lit the fuse and the massive increase in player solidarity. Absent Trump's name-calling, there's no mass protest, no dilly dilly by the MAGA-noids, no hit on team revenue...
ALF Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 2 hours ago, YoloinOhio said: I wonder how she feels about Mr. Rosen What is Rosen's view , I love the Pegulas
White Linen Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 (edited) 23 minutes ago, LA Grant said: In the line quoted, I'm speaking about my opinion (IMO), about what should be, not what "is." You brought up the perspective of the business, right? Because you'd be right, there's more to the product that matters, in their opinion. If it's a confusion of semantics, I'll clarify. In my opinion, the company should only be concerned with the product. The game is the product. The players themselves are not the product. The players playing the game is the product. From the NFL's perspective, the product includes the players, including players standing for the anthem. In my opinion, that definition is wrong. An analogy: If a barista wears a "Blue Lives Matter" shirt, and then some customers decide to protest and stop going to the coffee shop, obviously the owners of the coffee shop will want to do whatever they can to get the customers back. But, in my opinion, if the barista is still performing their responsibilities & delivering the product, then that loss of revenue is not the fault of the employee — even if those lost customers are blaming the employee. From the perspective of the coffee shop, any profit-driven company will always be "customer is always right." In my opinion, the customer is not always right. The employee is sometimes right. I don't like to see employees punished if they haven't done anything to prevent/hurt the product, just because of customers disagreeing with the individual employee on a non-product related issue. The NFL may view the players are the product, that they own them outside of when they're playing the game, that they can & should regulate their behavior outside of the game. I strongly disagree with that view. You sound extremely sincere but I just can't get there with you. You can't think a business could survive operating like that? I mean, I get that you wish it could be, but you'd have no customers. Let's say that Barista doesn't welcome the guests and wasn't friendly and they lost customers - you'd be ok with keeping that person employed so long as they make a mean cup of joe and you'd expect the customers to either get over it or don't? Edited February 23, 2018 by White Linen
dwight in philly Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Lurker said: Actually, it wasn't much of an issue until he called them SOBs. That lit the fuse and the massive increase in player solidarity. Absent Trump's name-calling, there's no mass protest, no dilly dilly by the MAGA-noids, no hit on team revenue... seriously?? Edited February 23, 2018 by dwight in philly
YoloinOhio Posted February 23, 2018 Author Posted February 23, 2018 4 minutes ago, ALF said: What is Rosen's view , I love the Pegulas He has been very vocal about his political views. I tend to think she wouldn’t see this as detrimental but who knows.
Rocky Landing Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 (edited) 17 minutes ago, dwight in philly said: are you kidding? standing for the national anthem is a political statement? unless you are are in academia, you really have no excuse to say something like that You added the word "political." But, of course standing for the National Anthem is a statement. Otherwise, what's the point? And, why would anyone care when someone didn't? If kneeling is a statement, then so is standing. Unless, of course, we, or the players are forced to stand. Then, it becomes meaningless. Also, if posters on this board needed excuses to voice their opinions, you'd better have a whole lot of them! Edited February 23, 2018 by Rocky Landing
Lurker Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 (edited) 12 minutes ago, dwight in philly said: seriously?? https://www.sltrib.com/sports/2017/09/25/presidents-criticisms-spark-more-protests-at-nfl-games/ http://nationalpost.com/sports/football/nfl/dont-talk-about-mom-nfl-players-angry-over-trumps-insult http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000849517/article/nfl-nflpa-respond-to-president-trumps-anthem-comments Edited February 23, 2018 by Lurker
BillsFan2313 Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 19 minutes ago, dwight in philly said: are you kidding? standing for the national anthem is a political statement? unless you are are in academia, you really have no excuse to say something like that ok ok ok . im sorry! That's OK, let me know if you have any questions.
LA Grant Posted February 23, 2018 Posted February 23, 2018 2 minutes ago, White Linen said: You sound extremely sincere but I just can't get there with you. You can't think a business could survive operating like that? I mean, I get that you wish it could be, but you'd have no customers. Let's say that Barista doesn't welcome the guestsand wasn't friendly - you'd be ok with keeping that person employed so long as they make a mean cup of joe? You wouldn't have no customers, you just wouldn't have those customers. Similarly, the NFL is fine without the fans upset by the protests. If the product is good, then you will have a business. If the barista is aggressive to customers while preparing or delivering the product, that's one thing; they're obstructing the product, and then should be disciplined or fired. Kneeling during the protests does not fit 'aggressive to customers,' imo. That would be, like, players on the sidelines saying to camera "Hey all the fans are stupid and we hate you." Like Sammy's thing with the little jobs IG post. That's more of a fit than the kneeling, which is more like 'customers don't like barista's face/shirt/social media/whatever they're doing besides making & handing them coffee' — in which case, those customers can go somewhere else. Ideally.
Recommended Posts