New policy for the National Anthem

[JBURGE]

5 minutes ago, Woz said:

I know I am going to regret this, but ... *puts on opposing viewpoint hat*

9 minutes ago, JBURGE25 said:

Not gonna lie, I think this is the best solution the NFL could have come up with (for them, anyway)

So, the best solution the NFL could come up with is to sweep the protesters under the rug ... hide the protesters in the closet ... tell the protesters to stay in the locker room?

Honestly, I think so. There was no policy in place (that's a whole other argument), but it's a statement in itself to decide to stay in the locker room, while not kneeling on national tv and pissing off the subset of fans who have been complaining. 

It is the option with the least potential to blow up in their faces. If they had said you must stand, there would be a backlash from players. If there was "you can do what you want", the owners and the aforementioned subset of fans would be upset/boycott. And finally leaving everyone in the locker room would lose tv time and revenue, and would probably again anger the owners/fans.

[Dome]

1 minute ago, Forge said:

Honestly would have preferred them to keep the teams in the locker room, but I suppose that never was going to happen to be honest. 

Football question now - with the new policy, what does this mean for Eric Reid? One of the things I thought I had heard about Reid's visit with Cincy was that they wanted a plan for the anthem protests and there wasn't one. Now that there is a mandated policy, does Reid get a real look, or did he completely blow any chance of playing against with his lawsuit? Or is not coming out for the anthem going to be seen in the same vain as kneeling when it comes to free agents and the like? 

Isn't that why Kaep didn't sign with the Seahawks? He said he wouldn't stand? Maybe Kaep gets a look?

[Woz]

Just now, ramssuperbowl99 said:

This is probably going to Streisand Effect. Telling people they can't protest is the quickest way to make them protest.

Winner winner, chicken dinner!

[ramssuperbowl99]

Just now, Woz said:

Looking at that statement, is it me, or does it not seem like the NFLPA was part of that decision?

If that's the case, the NFL may have just done the worst thing possible (from a PR perspective): reopened the controversy when the NFLPA files a protest.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/23582533/nfl-owners-approve-new-national-anthem-policy

Quote

"We were not consulted ahead of this meeting on any potential changes to the anthem policy," NFL Players Association assistant executive director of external affairs George Atallah said in a statement. "If there are changes to the policy that put players in a position where they could be disciplined or fined, we are going to do what we always do -- fight anything that encroaches on players' rights to the end."

No es bueno.

[TecmoSuperJoe]

2 minutes ago, Forge said:

Honestly would have preferred them to keep the teams in the locker room, but I suppose that never was going to happen to be honest. 

Football question now - with the new policy, what does this mean for Eric Reid? One of the things I thought I had heard about Reid's visit with Cincy was that they wanted a plan for the anthem protests and there wasn't one. Now that there is a mandated policy, does Reid get a real look, or did he completely blow any chance of playing against with his lawsuit? Or is not coming out for the anthem going to be seen in the same vain as kneeling when it comes to free agents and the like? 

I think Reid continues to get shunned since he's already in the public eye within the football community as someone who won't stand for the anthem. It's not going to be a great look when he walks out of the locker room during every game to join his teammates. 

[Woz]

Just now, JBURGE25 said:

It is the option with the least potential to blow up in their faces. If they had said you must stand, there would be a backlash from players. If there was "you can do what you want", the owners and the aforementioned subset of fans would be upset/boycott. 

Of course, the first time someone doesn't come out of the locker room (or stands in the tunnels), you know it's going to be commented on by the guys in the booth.

[Dome]

1 minute ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

This is probably going to Streisand Effect. Telling people they can't protest is the quickest way to make them protest.

Maybe. But if they're doing it somewhere other than a NFL Broadcast, that's not a bad option for the NFL. 

[Woz]

Just now, ramssuperbowl99 said:

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/23582533/nfl-owners-approve-new-national-anthem-policy

Quote

"We were not consulted ahead of this meeting on any potential changes to the anthem policy," NFL Players Association assistant executive director of external affairs George Atallah said in a statement. "If there are changes to the policy that put players in a position where they could be disciplined or fined, we are going to do what we always do -- fight anything that encroaches on players' rights to the end."

No es bueno.

There's not enough facepalm in the world for the stupidity of the NFL owners on this one.

#1 rule of crisis management - don't make it worse.

[HDsportsfan]

2 minutes ago, domepatrol91 said:

Yeah but as we've seen time and time again, without video evidence of those guys not participating in the anthem, theres a lot less for people to get mad about

Now what are they gonna do with the thousands of drunk people in the stadium who are taking selfies, peeing on themselves as the urinal, ordering a $12 Bud Light or still out tailgating when the anthem is being played? 

Who is/are "they"? Obviously the NFL doesn't care if the fans stand o not. Even if they did, nothing "they" can do about it. I just don't see how this is relevant.

[Woz]

Just now, domepatrol91 said:

Maybe. But if they're doing it somewhere other than a NFL Broadcast, that's not a bad option for the NFL. 

Front page of ESPN.com and major news items on the shows?

[youngosu]

4 minutes ago, domepatrol91 said:

Isn't that why Kaep didn't sign with the Seahawks? He said he wouldn't stand? Maybe Kaep gets a look?

No, he didn't sign because Carroll wasn't convinced he'd be happy as a clear back up without any possibility of competing for the starting job. 

 

[Dome]

1 minute ago, Woz said:

Front page of ESPN.com and major news items on the shows?

Aren't those shows tanking? Who watches ESPN?  but serisouyl, without videos of players kneeling on the sidelines during the broadcast, or on loop on these shows a lot of fans are going to be able to ignore players who stay in the locker room. I really think this cuts down a lot of the outrage and backlash. Obviously this still won't be acceptable to some, but I think it helps.

 

2 minutes ago, HDsportsfan said:

6 minutes ago, domepatrol91 said:

 

Who is/are "they"? Obviously the NFL doesn't care if the fans stand o not. Even if they did, nothing "they" can do about it. I just don't see how this is relevant.

It was a joke. My point was plenty of fans are disrespectful of the anthem when it's playing as well and nobody cares. which is why I'm hoping we can move on once people are protesting away from the NFL broadcast.

[Forge]

3 minutes ago, domepatrol91 said:

Isn't that why Kaep didn't sign with the Seahawks? He said he wouldn't stand? Maybe Kaep gets a look?

I still think that Kaep is a bigger grenade than teams want to deal with. His spotlight is so much larger being the start of this entire thing, a quarterback, etc. 

I chose Reid because, quite frankly, less well known (to the average football fan, I would think there's a huge chunk who don't even know who he is), the spotlight isn't as large, he plays safety rather than the premiere position, etc. There's also debate about how good Kaepernick is; even if you view him as a back up quarterback, that's a lot of baggage for a back up quarterback. I don't think that anyone even in the FF community doubts that Reid is a starting safety in the NFL. 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

6 minutes ago, Forge said:

If they are legitimately concerned about what the protesting is doing to their bottom line, I at least can understand it. I don't see why the players have to be out there at all for the anthem, any of them, to be perfectly honest. 

Don't think the protesting is hurting the NFL in the slightest. Are there legions of football fans sitting in bars and on their couch ticked off that players aren't standing when they themselves aren't standing for the anthem in their own living and socializing space? 

What's hurting the NFL is the dwindling ratings which have been going on for quite some time. For all of TV. 

[ramssuperbowl99]

2 minutes ago, domepatrol91 said:

Maybe. But if they're doing it somewhere other than a NFL Broadcast, that's not a bad option for the NFL. 

That's not what's going to happen, if I had to guess. You tell someone you'll fine them for protesting during the anthem, they'll protest, then make a publicity stunt out of paying the fine.