New policy for the National Anthem

[ramssuperbowl99]

1 minute ago, Thelonebillsfan said:

Like you can honestly parallel this with the domestic violence issues and Ray Rice and see the same mistakes.

Step 1. Spend a really long time not really doing anything
Step 2. Let the public get really incensed and divisive over it
Step 3. Wait until the issue isn't center stage
Step 4. Make a sweeping change without consulting the union
Step 5. Make a lot of lawyers really fricking rich
Step 6. Be the butt of every joke for a few years

[JAF-N72EX]

Just now, OleXmad said:

They should've done nothing at all and let it go on, let it die out on it's own instead of forcing a policy that gives it new legs.

Yep. When they stopped showing the anthem on TV it was a good compromise and they did a good job of separating their brand as much as possible with that move. Now, with this policy, they have taken two steps back and ultimately put themselves right back in the middle of controversy.

[Calvert28]

6 minutes ago, JustAnotherFan said:

The best thing the NFL could have done at this point is nothing at all and just continue to not show the anthem on TV. 

The anthem wasn't the problem. The players made it a problem. Honestly I think they should have just kept a little black book and stonewall and blackball people who make controversy about anything.

It would have been illegal but almost impossible to prove but it would have eventually eliminated all the controversy without adding a ton of more drama.

[youngosu]

3 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

A percentage of the fans, absolutely. A tiny percentage, I would disagree with.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-do-americans-feel-about-the-nfl-protests-it-depends-on-how-you-ask/

These polls are Americans, not NFL fans, but NFL fans are more conservative than the average American, so you should probably be bumping these numbers up a little bit.

 

Even if true, lets say 50% of fans were bothered by it and didn't understand the reasoning. 50% of fans didn't stop watching. 

And this new policy will anger the other 50%. So what does the league accomplish?

[TXsteeler]

1 minute ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

Step 1. Spend a really long time not really doing anything
Step 2. Let the public get really incensed and divisive over it
Step 3. Wait until the issue isn't center stage
Step 4. Make a sweeping change without consulting the union
Step 5. Make a lot of lawyers really fricking rich
Step 6. Be the butt of every joke for a few years

I for one think it's great the NFL is hiring the mentally handicapped for executive level PR positions.

[Thelonebillsfan]

2 minutes ago, Buc Ball said:

Moreso the owners I’d say.

Goodell just seems to be the lightning rod for the criticism.

Nah the league office absolutely shoulders a lot of the blame here. Their job is to keep the owners from doing anything rash and to craft a solution to an issue that's not, well, stupid and arbitrary. Which they've done nothing but create the most arbitrary set of rules, guidelines and punishments for everything about their league.

The MLB, in contrast, has hard rules set in stone with clearly defined guidelines and progressive punishments that aren't random. They really need to talk to Manfred and us guys at the league office over here (we're only a few blocks away) as to how to handle these things.

[youngosu]

8 minutes ago, Calvert28 said:

15 minutes ago, youngosu said:

 

No. Because this is exactly the sort of thing people don't want to see when they turn on to watch a football game. The silent majority hates it. The loud mouths are the ones who thinks it's a great idea that the players did it. Even though they are a very small percentage of how the NFL gets it profit. It's a fact people hate it. The majority of people did not want to see any of this happen. They just wanted to watch football. Had you wanted to see it. Then go watch CNN or Fox or some other news station because that's what they are there for. The NFL is here to show us a sport. Not a protest, not a Hollywood spectacle. We get far too much of that with the crappy half time shows now. It just needs to be about football. And that's what they were trying to accomplish with this new rule which will probably fail.

Really, the loudmouths are the supporters? I don't know where you can come to that conclusion at all. 

I think you are flat out wrong about what the "majority" of people wanted. I live in a conservative area and don't know a single person that stopped watching NFL games because of this. 

It may be a fact that you hate it, its not a fact that the majority hate it. That simply isn't a fact. 

[ramssuperbowl99]

Just now, youngosu said:

Even if true, lets say 50% of fans were bothered by it and didn't understand the reasoning. 50% of fans didn't stop watching. 

And this new policy will anger the other 50%. So what does the league accomplish?

Nothing productive. I've been very consistent that the NFL is completely idiotic doing this.

But I think it lets the NFL fanbase off the hook collectively to refer to the outrage here as a tiny minority. What Colin Kaepernick did was not popular among Americans in general, and was likely not popular among NFL fans. (How that will change over time is a separate issue out of the scope of this idiotic press release.)

[ET80]

20 minutes ago, cddolphin said:

If I'm a smart-*** player with an axe to grind I push that limit every game.

Back to the field/flag. Probably next best thing to a knee, and can be quickly dismissed as "looking/honoring the fans" during the anthem. 

Gotta go, now.

[Buc Ball]

3 minutes ago, Calvert28 said:

No. Because this is exactly the sort of thing people don't want to see when they turn on to watch a football game. The silent majority hates it. The loud mouths are the ones who thinks it's a great idea that the players did it. Even though they are a very small percentage of how the NFL gets it profit. It's a fact people hate it. The majority of people did not want to see any of this happen. They just wanted to watch football. Had you wanted to see it. Then go watch CNN or Fox or some other news station because that's what they are there for. The NFL is here to show us a sport. Not a protest, not a Hollywood spectacle. We get far too much of that with the crappy half time shows now. It just needs to be about football. And that's what they were trying to accomplish with this new rule which will probably fail.

The best side to take when you want to earn money is to honestly take no side. Which is the ultimate goal of NFL Owners. Which means had they always kept neutral as well as keeping the voices to a minimum none of this would even be an issue and it would be business as usual.

 

Most people probably don’t care if a player protests or not. It makes no difference to anyone unless you choose to get annoyed by it.

The media has a clear goal to create its own content and they latched onto this issue to keep the news cycle spinning. It would have went away very quickly if the media paid no attention to it.

[Thelonebillsfan]

2 minutes ago, Calvert28 said:

The anthem wasn't the problem. The players made it a problem. Honestly I think they should have just kept a little black book and stonewall and blackball people who make controversy about anything.

It would have been illegal but almost impossible to prove but it would have eventually eliminated all the controversy without adding a ton of more drama.

Not even like 3 days ago Colin Kaepernick's camp disclosed they have evidence that multiple teams viewed him as a starter.

You cannot blackball a player in the social media/computer age, there would be records of a communication on at least one level that reveals the collusion.

[Thelonebillsfan]

1 minute ago, EliteTexan80 said:

Back to the field/flag. Probably next best thing to a knee, and can be quickly dismissed as "looking/honoring the fans" during the anthem. 

Gotta go, now.

You sure your robot knees can shimmy out in time?

[ramssuperbowl99]

1 minute ago, Thelonebillsfan said:

Nah the league office absolutely shoulders a lot of the blame here. Their job is to keep the owners from doing anything rash and to craft a solution to an issue that's not, well, stupid and arbitrary. Which they've done nothing but create the most arbitrary set of rules, guidelines and punishments for everything about their league.

The MLB, in contrast, has hard rules set in stone with clearly defined guidelines and progressive punishments that aren't random. They really need to talk to Manfred and us guys at the league office over here (we're only a few blocks away) as to how to handle these things.

And when an Oakland A kneeled last year it made no headlines. Mostly because he wasn't very good, but partially because the league didn't Streisand Effect the living dog crap out of it.

[jebrick]

29 minutes ago, Thelonebillsfan said:

If the NFL wanted this to go away they'd find sponsors that didn't require 10-15 minutes of jingoism before every game so they didn't have to show the anthem on the broadcast like what used to be standard. There, issue gone, bye bye issue.

No no no, instead of doing that, lets just make rash decisions that only inflame the player base, NFLPA, and a subset of fans more.

I've said for a while Goodell gets too much flak for some stuff but my god I am beginning to notice more and more how entirely awful at his job he is.

Remember that the DoD PAID for all of this extra military fluff at the start of games.  They did pay the NFL and not the networks so your idea may work but only if all the networks agreed.

[Calvert28]

Just now, youngosu said:

Really, the loudmouths are the supporters? I don't know where you can come to that conclusion at all. 

Because they are the ones who started the drama? Actions can speak a whole lot louder then words. Hence why we are here.

Just now, youngosu said:

I think you are flat out wrong about what the "majority" of people wanted. I live in a conservative area and don't know a single person that stopped watching NFL games because of this. 

Yea ratings just fell last year because the Eagles were winning. That actually makes sense.

But what I said is true. The "silent majority" is a thing incase you missed the last election. But people turn on football to watch football. They turn it on to watch political opinions from different people. I don't know where you actually got that idea from.