National Anthem Solution

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Just now, BringBackOrton said:

This is not how sports media is run.

 

"So and so chose to stay in the locker room, team refused to comment, now let's throw it over to our panel who will scream at each other with their opinions on the matter."

 

That's more like it.

 

Afraid you've got it.

[CountDorkula]

Can anyone genuinely explain to me why it is important to them that the national anthem has to be played before each sporting event?

[Doc Brown]

My father's solution is that If you want the protesters to stand just require everybody to sit for the national anthem.  He's a WWII vet that admires what Kaepernick did.

[Happy]

4 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

 

This is the USA, my 2 grandparents fought in WW2 for my freedom to sit on my ass, stand up with a flag pole shoved up my a$$ and/or otherwise do as I choose. It's a free country where people have protected rights to protest and share their beliefs and freedom. That is what this country was founded on. Sounds like the people who are saying you should be forced to stand for the NA  #1 - need a history lesson on  what values and the vision for the country was founded on #2 - respect other peoples constitutionally free rights  #3 - instead of calling for the people who live in this country under those rules to leave, maybe, just maybe those who want to live contrary to  those protected beliefs should live and go live in one of the forcefully nationalized countries and most importantly #4 - turn of fu&K!ng Fox news...which by the way has nothing to do with actual and factual reporting of anything considered news.

 

Cool rant.  Don't go throwing dumbells at people and yelling about the government, the NFL, etc coming to get you.

[BringBackOrton]

Just now, CountDorkula said:

Can anyone genuinely explain to me why it is important to them that the national anthem has to be played before each sporting event?

 

2 hours ago, BringBackOrton said:

I did not say those times of war were the same as any other time.  However, you claimed that the playing of the anthem regularly "cheapens" it.  The thousands of times it was played before SB25 and 9/11 did not cheapen EITHER rendition.  

 

Frequency does not reduce the capacity for reflection.  It is no different than praying everyday versus twice a year at Christmas and Easter.  Does the person who prays everyday "cheapen" his experience because he does it more frequently?  Maybe he does, because sometimes he's going through the motions.  But that's on him, not the act of prayer.  There is ZERO reason to blame the anthem itself for the bad behavior of its listeners.

 

 "Regardless, the playing of the anthem commands a certain solemnity. And playing it at raucous sporting events cheapens it far more often than it inspires people."

 

For some, maybe.  Not for me.  Whenever I have been in attendance of the national anthem, since I've been an adult, I choose to reflect on the appropriateness of it being played before a sporting event.  I choose to marvel at how blessed I am to spend the next 2 to 3 to 4 hours caring about an arbitrary game instead of worrying about the world, about food, about shelter, about clean water for my family.  I marvel at how our country is so great, we can pay millions to athletes for a glorified gladiator battle. I think about how incredible it is that people from all walks of life, of all races, of all creeds, of all orientations can sit together and forget all their differences, because they all hate the Jets more than anything else.

 

Maybe I'm the only person who thinks about that.  But I don't think so. And no, I'm not perfect, I've used the restroom during a rendition once or twice. But my mind has wandered while in prayer, too.  That doesn't make regular prayer useless.

I do not have any flag "memorabilia."

 

[K-9]

1 minute ago, BringBackOrton said:

This is not how sports media is run.

 

"So and so chose to stay in the locker room, team refused to comment, now let's throw it over to our panel who will scream at each other with their opinions on the matter."

 

That's more like it.

That's not a report. That's op/ed. If people can't filter simple reports and make up their own minds without a panel of talking heads to tell them how to think, that's pitiful. But I don't believe the majority of people are that helpless. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 minute ago, K-9 said:

That's not a report. That's op/ed. If people can't filter simple reports and make up their own minds without a panel of talking heads to tell them how to think, that's pitiful. But I don't believe the majority of people are that helpless. 

 

K-9, I agree with you, but the problem is much "news reporting" has in fact become "op ed".  So the distinction does become clouded to people who aren't specifically on the watch and wary of it.

[Rocky Landing]

6 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I could be wrong, but I believe that's one reason the owners did incorporate the "remain in the locker room" part of the rule.  That was intended to be a "reasonable accomodation" to someone who argued their personal political beliefs or personal experience as a member of a protected class did not allow them to stand for the anthem.

Well, I don't know a lot of details about the meeting, but I'd be surprised if there weren't more than a few lawyers involved who specialized in labor disputes, civil rights, and protected class litigation.

[BringBackOrton]

1 minute ago, K-9 said:

That's not a report. That's op/ed. If people can't filter simple reports and make up their own minds without a panel of talking heads to tell them how to think, that's pitiful. But I don't believe the majority of people are that helpless. 

Well, I think there's a reason Skip Bayless and Stephen A Smith and every media talking head with pure op/ed stuff makes millions and millions, and reporters on the beat make pennies comparatively.  

 

Who gets more traction? Who are people tuning into more?

[MAJBobby]

7 minutes ago, Bruce_Stools said:

I don’t believe it’s unhelpful at all. People want to talk about facts. If I decided to hold a protest, peaceful or not, at work I would be fired. Case closed. FACT.

 

I believe we all have these rights provided to us, but at work, you face the consequences of your actions. The players should be held to the same standards at the very least that I’m held to.  

 

Tell me why this is unimportant.  Tell me how you have the freedom to do whatever you want while “on the clock” without any consequence.  

 

In my opinion, which is worth less than $.02, this is the deciding factor on these players’ freedom of speech. It’s among the only facts that actually matter in this situation and it gets overlooked and understated at every turn.  

 

Some people think their feelings should trump facts.....not me

 

 

 

Do you have Forced Patriotism at your Office?

[SoCal Deek]

6 minutes ago, CountDorkula said:

Can anyone genuinely explain to me why it is important to them that the national anthem has to be played before each sporting event?

Can you explain why the players are protesting during the national anthem?  Or do you simply accept that at its face? If they don't play the anthem...does that make this so-called 'social justice' issue disappear? 

[HappyDays]

26 minutes ago, K-9 said:

I'd add giant, field-size flags, color guards, camo gear, etc. The military spends MILLIONS on this kind of advertising. Remember how outraged we were a few years ago when we found that out; that it wasn't a genuine outpouring of respect and a genuine display of patriotic love for our country? I was wrong when I suggested they were pushing an agenda. It's much more insipid than that. 

 

I can't help but wonder if the US military pushed the NFL to change their anthem policy. Everyone assumes it's because they're afraid of losing viewers but we know from the data that that isn't really a problem. What would be a problem is if the military threatened to pull funding if they didn't push the protests off the field. This wouldn't surprise me at all.

[K-9]

1 minute ago, BringBackOrton said:

Well, I think there's a reason Skip Bayless and Stephen A Smith and every media talking head with pure op/ed stuff makes millions and millions, and reporters on the beat make pennies comparatively.  

 

Who gets more traction? Who are people tuning into more?

People tune in to get their opinions. Although they both have strong backgrounds in journalism and maintain sources, they don't break a lot of news. They are paid to interpret and comment. Nothing more. 

[SoCal Deek]

2 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I can't help but wonder if the US military pushed the NFL to change their anthem policy. Everyone assumes it's because they're afraid of losing viewers but we know from the data that that isn't really a problem. What would be a problem is if the military threatened to pull funding if they didn't push the protests off the field. This wouldn't surprise me at all.

Wait a minute!  I thought the players were protesting the local police?  I'm confused.

[Gugny]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

Can you explain why the players are protesting during the national anthem?  Or do you simply accept that at its face? If they don't play the anthem...does that make this so-called 'social justice' issue disappear? 

 

I don't think you answered his question.

Just now, SoCal Deek said:

Wait a minute!  I thought the players were protesting the local police?  I'm confused.

 

I think a lot of people are going out of their way to NOT be nasty in this thread and have it shipped to PPP.  Can you join us in that effort?

[BringBackOrton]

3 minutes ago, K-9 said:

People tune in to get their opinions. Although they both have strong backgrounds in journalism and maintain sources, they don't break a lot of news. They are paid to interpret and comment. Nothing more. 

Absolutely.  But I'm saying their interpretation and comment is likely the vehicle for the news.

 

How many people heard about the NFL anthem policy from independent reporters?  How many people heard about the NFL anthem policy from ESPN talking heads or SportsCenter personalities, or podcasters, or radio hosts, or sports blogs, or Twitter personalities?

 

I think the numbers aren't close, to be honest K-9.  That's just my opinion.

Edited May 25, 2018 by BringBackOrton

[SoCal Deek]

2 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

I don't think you answered his question.

I'm not trying to answer his question.  His question makes no sense...just like the protesting doesn't. And thus the entire problem.  It's a misguided protest, who's target is simply the wrong symbol in the first place.  If the players started a protest based on the symbol of the American Bison...would the Bills have to change their helmets?  Would the players play with duct tape over the logo?  Would they not wear helmets at all?

[Gugny]

3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I'm not trying to answer his question.  His question makes no sense...just like the protesting doesn't. And thus the entire problem.  It's a misguided protest, who's target is simply the wrong symbol in the first place.  If the players started a protest based on the symbol of the American Bison...would the Bills have to change their helmets?  Would the players play with duct tape over the logo?  Would they not wear helmets at all?

 

This is why we can't have nice things.

[K-9]

3 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I can't help but wonder if the US military pushed the NFL to change their anthem policy. Everyone assumes it's because they're afraid of losing viewers but we know from the data that that isn't really a problem. What would be a problem is if the military threatened to pull funding if they didn't push the protests off the field. This wouldn't surprise me at all.

The military isn't a very big advertiser compared to others so I'd be reluctant to say it was the military exercising that kind of influence. 

 

But in looking at the industries on the list of top 10 advertisers and their own exploitation of the flag and patriotic identification in their own advertising, yeah, I can see the league listening if they raised a stink. And it's not like the league is gonna wait for them to complain, anyway. The anthem policy is all about protecting their revenues. 

[SoCal Deek]

8 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

I don't think you answered his question.

 

I think a lot of people are going out of their way to NOT be nasty in this thread and have it shipped to PPP.  Can you join us in that effort?

My comments are not intended to be nasty. I'm asking real questions here.

2 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

This is why we can't have nice things.

Now...that I agree with.   Way, way too much protesting these days.