NYC politician wants Bills+Giants to adopt Jets Anthem policy

[Doc Brown]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Why don’t they just do away with the National Anthem in sports? We used to do an invocation before the Hornets games (think OKC still does). It was kind of weird too. There was some concern that if we did away with it the religious people would be mad. I think that we took one phone call after that was upset about it. I’d imagine that if teams and leagues did away with the anthem it would have the same impact. 

 

Additionally, I have a suggestion to replace it. The Celtics used to do this thing that they called “a hero among us.” They would recognize a member of the community that was doing something extraordinary. There was a small video package and then they’d welcome that person. They’d always get a standing O. It may be someone that dedicated their life to working with special needs kids or someone that ran 500 miles to raise money for ALS  or a solidier that saved 11 guys in battle or whatever. The point being what’s the purpose of playing the anthem? Tradition? At least with my suggestion you’d be able to recognize people doing great things and hopefully inspire others to act in a similar manner. There are people on both sides of the anthem issue. If you pull the anthem out you don’t alienate a segment of the fan base. 

It's a good thought, but eliminating the anthem will just make a portion of fans who are offended by players kneeling will boycott the NFL until the anthem is reinstated.  A chance for a simple fix on this issue was lost when the president decided to pour gasoline on the fire.

[Lfod]

I find myself in a grey area. I do understand that this world has problems and if people want to combat those problems, I won't stand in the way. I just won't be dragged into a fight that isn't mine. You won't find me being a part of the division or taking sides.  I believe strongly in freedom, but I call it free will. 

 

I think the issue is that both sides want to be respected and both sides are disrespectful to each other. Therefore I see no innocent people in the fight and I don't see the honor in either cause. After all this time no common ground was agreed upon. It's as simple as yes I can agree a group of people have been wronged, but in you sending that message you wronged another group of people. 

 

That is why my prediction is that the solution won't be found. 

 

 

 

 

[Richard Noggin]

8 minutes ago, Lfod said:

I find myself in a grey area. I do understand that this world has problems and if people want to combat those problems, I won't stand in the way. I just won't be dragged into a fight that isn't mine. You won't find me being a part of the division or taking sides.  I believe strongly in freedom, but I call it free will. 

 

I think the issue is that both sides want to be respected and both sides are disrespectful to each other. Therefore I see no innocent people in the fight and I don't see the honor in either cause. After all this time no common ground was agreed upon. It's as simple as yes I can agree a group of people have been wronged, but in you sending that message you wronged another group of people. 

 

That is why my prediction is that the solution won't be found. 

 

 

 

 

I don't agree that players taking a solemn knee during the national anthem (an effing 200 year-old song about war, by the way) is injurious to anyone. They are attempting to call attention to citizens who are truly being injured. That's not a controversial position. How can anyone be disrespected by that? 

 

I'm probably getting too far afield.

 

I hope the Pegulas let their players handle this however they (the players) see fit (in consultation with the Pegulas, who appear to be interested in respecting the players' autonomy and dignity). 

Edited June 2, 2018 by Richard Noggin

[Lfod]

2 minutes ago, Richard Noggin said:

I don't agree that players taking a solemn knee during the national anthem (an effing 200 year-old song about war, by the way) is injurious to anyone. They are attempting to call attention to citizens who are truly being injured. That's not a controversial position. How can anyone be disrespected by that? 

That's because you don't believe it in the same way that those people do. To be honest neither do I, but I won't dismiss thier belief in it just because I don't feel the same way. Just as not everyone suffers police brutality and just because of that they shouldn't dismiss it doesn't exist. 

Edited June 2, 2018 by Lfod

[Richard Noggin]

Just now, Lfod said:

That's because you don't believe it in the same way that those people do. To be honest neither do I, but I won't dismiss thier belief in it just because I don't feel the same way. Just as not everyone suffers police brutality and just because of that should dismiss it doesn't exist. 

Believe in what, though? The sanctity of a song? Of a financial relationship between the NFL and the armed forces?

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, purple haze said:

I don't understand a flag or a song being more important than actual human beings, or the rights, ideals the flag is supposed to represent.   You disagree that's fine.    You have a segment of people who take offense.  You have another segment who simply do not like what the protest is meant to highlight.

 

The NFL owners have partners who are the players.  I highly doubt enough people will stop watching to make any real difference.  Fox just gave the NFL a record contract for Thursday night football, after, to hear them tell it, the offended segment turned their backs and their dollars on the league.  If football goes anywhere it will be based on health of players and less young people growing up in the game because of it.

 

Roger Goodell should go meet with Adam Silver to see how a league that is progressive and openly deals with social issues important to their partners has every player standing for the anthem.   The NBA treats the players with import.  The NFL runs like an authoritarian entity that does everything for a dollar.  The players are disposable.  The league couldn't care less about what the players were speaking about until the anthem protests.  Even the NFL salute to service is finance based.  The owners/league can do what they want, but the players might do the same, fine or no fine.  I would be willing to bet if half the players or more on both teams stay in the locker room we will hear complaints about that too.

 

The protest comes during the anthem because what it is supposed to represent versus the reality of actions.  If the anthem was not played I doubt we would see any disruption of games.  We  don't see that now.  The players would still speak out in various ways as various players did in past decades.  I don't believe the anthem was always played at team sporting events.  Yet you had your Jim Brown's and Bill Russell's and Kareem Abdul Jabbar's, etc.

 

 

You've got a lot going on here, but I'll give it a shot. 

 

I have no idea what you mean by suggesting that anyone believes that a flag or a song is more important than human beings. If you mean to say that honoring the flag and recognizing injustice occurs is incompatible, well again I can only disagree.  

 

The players are not partners.  If they were, Kaepernick would be playing for the team if his choice, Ray Rice would be in Baltimore and Richie Incognito never spends 2 years off the field.   Owners own team, players play, and so it goes. The players are replaceable, not because they are of less human value than owners, but simply as a function of the game. It has to be that way, think of guys like Jim Brown, and in the NBA guys like Bill Russell and Kareem Abdul Jabar.   It's not bad or good, it just is. 

 

The NFL is not the NBA anymore than it is Starbucks or a Dairy Queen.   The NFL isn't a petrie dish of great social causes and life lessons, it's about selling tickets, merchandise, PSL, ad revenue etc. The league inserts itself into the great social debate at its own peril. The league lives by emotion (and the irony of discussing the symbolism of the flag when considering tens of thousands of fans stream into a stadium every Sunday wearing their team's colors  is kinda funny to me), and dies by it as well. 

 

Youre probably right about complaints about about players who stay in the locker room. So? From the league perspective, far better for the police union & family to be angry or disappointed in PlayerX than the Philadelphia Eagles, Baltimore Ravens or whatever. Besides, while your disdain for the league is obvious, how come the $90m doesn't count for goodwill and knock back some of the complaints?  How much is the players union offering as a match?  10%, 25%, even 100%? How awesome is that??? 

 

in the end, whether you think enough people will stop watching or not is largely irrelevant.  The league saw the potential for loss as a big enough threat to change the rules to accommodate players who want to protest, honor the fans who respect the flag and anthem, ponied up a hundred mill for the cause...so it's obvious to the ownership group that the issue needed to be addressed.  

 

 

Edited June 2, 2018 by leh-nerd skin-erd

[Lfod]

10 minutes ago, Richard Noggin said:

Believe in what, though? The sanctity of a song? Of a financial relationship between the NFL and the armed forces?

If you were very Patriotic, and those people do exist then it could have special meaning to you. Like say your son or brother joined the military and lost his life in battle. Let's say you yourself fought for the country in a war and lost your legs and lived in a wheelchair. The National Anthem. The way people rise with a hand to heart might represent your sacrifice or your son or brothers. To some it's just a song or ritual. To others it's lost limbs and family members. 

 

I don't think CKs intention was to dishonor those people. CK just wanted to have his message heard. He was successful. Although I can understand if some one lost a loved one to police brutality and felt strongly about it. I won't discount thier feelings. Personally I feel blessed to have suffered none of those things. 

Edited June 2, 2018 by Lfod

[BillsfaninSB]

8 hours ago, formerlyofCtown said:

Kinda like you do what you want with your property.  The NFL is a private business.

 

But many of the stadiums are not private.  They are either owned by the government or heavily financed by the government. 

Edited June 2, 2018 by BillsfaninSB

[Richard Noggin]

3 minutes ago, Lfod said:

If you were very Patriotic, and those people do exist then it could have special meaning to you. Like say your son or brother joined the military and lost his life in battle. Let's say you yourself fought for the country in a war and lost your legs and lived in a wheelchair. The National Anthem. The way people rise with a hand to heart might represent your sacrifice or your son or brothers. To some it's just a song or ritual. To others it's lost limbs and family members. 

 

I don't think CKs intention was to dishonor those people. CK just wanted to have his message heard. He was successful. 

I appreciate what you're saying here. 

 

But taking a knee is considered deferential and reverent enough for religious ceremonies, for wedding proposals, for being knighted for eff's sake...it's about as respectful as a person can be. 

 

As a country we cannot continue to see ourselves as the morally superior force that saved the planet from fascism during WW2. Our military is now strictly volunteer and not always on the right side of history. Bless all those who choose to serve, but it's not a thing to blindly revere any longer. Times change. 

 

Again, I hope the Pegulas allow for some nuance.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

31 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

It's a good thought, but eliminating the anthem will just make a portion of fans who are offended by players kneeling will boycott the NFL until the anthem is reinstated.  A chance for a simple fix on this issue was lost when the president decided to pour gasoline on the fire.

I thought what the president did was wrong, but I feel that way whenever self serving politicos stick their nose in business they have no cause to mess with. 

 

I mentioned it previously, but again, if the protests end when the anthem is no longer played, what was accomplished? 

 

[1st Ammendment NoMas]

I'm over it already. Get politics out of football, stand up, salute and play the game

Edited June 2, 2018 by BillsRdue

[Ol Dirty B]

16 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I thought what the president did was wrong, but I feel that way whenever self serving politicos stick their nose in business they have no cause to mess with. 

 

I mentioned it previously, but again, if the protests end when the anthem is no longer played, what was accomplished? 

 

 

It would be the corporate solution. Stay away from the issue and ignore it because as MJ reportedly once said, "Republicans buy shoes too".

 

I've never heard a player say they don't want the national anthem played. It's a platform for them. So it really does nothing but further sanitize the NFL from any political/social issues, which it understandably wants nothing to do with.

 

It's a shame that this country can't get to a point where guys knee, a reporter asks them why. And then people can decide for themselves if that guy is an idiot or whatever. People going all I'm boycotting the NFL and this and that are just loons. It's actually the same problem that plagues our political system. 

 

The loons who don't realize they look crazy have no shame yelling the loudest because they don't also realize they are idiots. They also don't respect other points of view or compromise. It exists on the left and right and it's awful. That's why we end up with **** candidates because those loons make up a larger percentage of those who participate in primaries. Anyone who tells me they're boycotting the NFL because someone is exercising their rights under the most strongly protected amendment, the 1st Amendment, doesn't love or understand this country despite how obnoxiously they'll yell that they do.

 

Sorry went on a bit of a rant there.

Edited June 2, 2018 by Ol Dirty B

[LeGOATski]

22 minutes ago, Lfod said:

If you were very Patriotic, and those people do exist then it could have special meaning to you. Like say your son or brother joined the military and lost his life in battle. Let's say you yourself fought for the country in a war and lost your legs and lived in a wheelchair. The National Anthem. The way people rise with a hand to heart might represent your sacrifice or your son or brothers. To some it's just a song or ritual. To others it's lost limbs and family members. 

 

I don't think CKs intention was to dishonor those people. CK just wanted to have his message heard. He was successful. 

And people wrongfully killed by police officers? 

 

How are their families supposed to feel? The National Anthem only covers certain groups of Americans? Do they have a song? Is that song below the National Anthem in the hierarchy of anthems?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

26 minutes ago, BillsfaninSB said:

But many of the stadiums are not private.  They are either owned by the government or heavily financed by the government. 

 

True, but when the football teams are using them, they are leased to the football team.  In which case the teams both control what goes on there and have liability for it.

[Ol Dirty B]

7 hours ago, tumaro02 said:

After being a diehard Bills fan for many years--when the Bills players took a knee last year I immediately called Direct TV and cancelled my Sunday  Ticket and didn't attend or watch another Bills game last year. I have no interest in players (most of whom have done "nothing" in their life to earn the right to disrespect the flag and anthem provided by the blood shed for that freedom) use the stage to protest anything. I am one of those who hurt the NFL business in my disgust by stopping my payments for fan gear, tickets, etc. I am hoping the protests end so I can return to paying my hundreds of dollars this year to the Buffalo Bill coffers. If they adopt the Jets owner's lead they will save me a lot of money again this year. Whats next? So when 1500 players want to protest 1500 different social causes  you want the NFL ownership to support ALL of  those Player's causes too, and shove that down a $200.00 ticket payer 10 times? Provide them another venue if you wish but not one I am paying hundreds to watch.

 

So your issue isn't the kneeling during the anthem. It's that if some do it for some causes, then others could do it for different causes and it would just be too much protest? I mean your argument is stupid, baseless, and should be used as an example for the slippery slope fallacy for kids.

 

The reason the protest was effective is because it was a decent number of guys, unified in protesting for a cause.

 

No white guys went out their and knelt because of reverse racism with affirmative action, no guys of any color went and keeled for abortion laws, for or against gay marriage, no Muslims kneeled on religious grounds. Your logic is just wholly wrong. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

14 minutes ago, Ol Dirty B said:

 

It would be the corporate solution. Stay away from the issue and ignore it because as MJ reportedly once said, "Republicans buy shoes too".

 

I've never heard a player say they don't want the national anthem played. It's a platform for them. So it really does nothing but further sanitize the NFL from any political/social issues, which it understandably wants nothing to do with.

 

It's a shame that this country can't get to a point where guys knee, a reporter asks them why. And then people can decide for themselves if that guy is an idiot or whatever. People going all I'm boycotting the NFL and this and that are just loons. It's actually the same problem that plagues our political system. 

 

The loons who don't realize they look crazy have no shame yelling the loudest because they don't also realize they are idiots. They also don't respect other points of view or compromise. It exists on the left and right and it's awful. That's why we end up with **** candidates because those loons make up a larger percentage of those who participate in primaries. Anyone who tells me they're boycotting the NFL because someone is exercising their rights under the most strongly protected amendment, the 1st Amendment, doesn't love or understand this country despite how obnoxiously they'll yell that they do.

 

Sorry went on a bit of a rant there.

 

I'd just like to point out that a person with the opposite point of view could pen something very similar to this.  Maybe instead of "loon" or "idiot" they'd use different words and they'd point at different things.  They'd point out that the 1st amendment is intended to keep the government from imprisoning people for speaking against it and from protesting in the public sphere, not to prohibit private employers from directing employee behavior within very wide bounds.

 

There's a bit of irony in saying "they don't respect other points of view or compromise" in a post which, well, kind of seems disrespectful of those with a different view - don't you think.

[Lfod]

16 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

And people wrongfully killed by police officers? 

 

How are their families supposed to feel? The National Anthem only covers certain groups of Americans? Do they have a song? Is that song below the National Anthem in the hierarchy of anthems?

I can understand if some one lost a loved one to police brutality and felt strongly about it. I won't discount thier feelings. 

 

I had edited my post to reflect that thier feelings should absolutely matter. That is what I said above. CK was heard. He sacrificed his career to send his message. His message was honorable, only in the way it happened some people felt disrespected. If you look at it without bias at all then it would go back to my original post. Both sides want respect. Both sides felt disrespected. I'm not talking about justification. I'm talking about preception of the subject. 

 

The message was lost if the focus is on the kneeling and not the police brutality you dig? If I asked CK what he wanted to be remembered for, raising awareness or kneeling during anthem I don't think the kneeling part would be as important as the actual message. The kneeling was a gimmick to get attention brought to the subject. 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 2, 2018 by Lfod

[Boca BIlls]

Tell him to worry about important politics. Stop trying to gain cudos for something as meaningless as this.

[Ol Dirty B]

12 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I'd just like to point out that a person with the opposite point of view could pen something very similar to this.  Maybe instead of "loon" or "idiot" they'd use different words.

They'd point out that the 1st amendment is intended to keep the government from imprisoning people for speaking against it and from protesting in the public sphere.

 

There's a bit of irony in saying "they don't respect other points of view or compromise" in a post which, well, kind of seems disrespectful of those with a different view.

 

Not really at all. If you want to boycott the NFL go for it, yet they rarely do it silently. Even though that defeats the point, but go on and tell everyone about it. No one cares.

 

I'm also fine with people calling them idiots for kneeling, that's their prerogative. That's why I think allowing them to kneel and then be asked to explain why they did it is fair. As well as the investigative work I'm sure would ensue to see if they are invested in the cause, be it financially or through volunteer work.

 

I understand the 1st Amendment is in regards to the government, yet it becomes very much so a 1st Amendment issue. The NFL has every right to set a conduct policy barring it, and players can just pay the fine if they want. 

 

Just booing, yelling at them, telling teams to demand they stand isn't at all similar to that and I see that in this thread and at NFL games. So I'm going to completely disagree with you. Those who I called loons couldn't have penned my post. I also never said the loons shouldn't be able to continue behaving as loons. I just said they're a plague. Also, it's a fact, people who are more polarized participate in primaries at a higher rate which causes candidates to adopt positions to appeal to extremes. Or those who are just naturally extreme are more attractive to primary voters.

Edited June 2, 2018 by Ol Dirty B

[LeGOATski]

10 minutes ago, Lfod said:

The message was lost if the focus is on the kneeling and not the police brutality you dig? If I asked CK what he wanted to be remembered for, raising awareness or kneeling during anthem I don't think the kneeling part would be as important as the actual message. The kneeling was a gimmick to get attention brought to the subject. 

 

You lost me on this last part. I don't see how the message is lost. It's only lost on those who choose to ignore it and get mad about kneeling protesters. The kneeling is symbolic. It's not a gimmick.