|
Post by Kase1 on Aug 13, 2019 17:31:06 GMT -5
Honestly I wish that I NEVER hear about it again, because the issue has been taken care of. Sadly, that is not the current state of the world we are living in. I get it, people dont want to hear about it. BUT this country protects free speech so if someone wants to tell us how they feel about ketchup on a hot dog, their favorite car, or racial inequality, they are allowed to. And unless the NFL puts a gag order on their players, the players can say whatever they want in their interviews or on social media. You claim its the wrong forum, but whats the RIGHT forum??? I get it, when you want to watch football all you want to do is watch football or any sport for that matter, but its not going on during games, its going on outside of the games, in interviews or on their own time. As for the purpose it brings is bringing the issue to light, that otherwise would be such an issue if an electrician or doctor did it, they dont have the same audience or platform You should be more upset with the issue at hand, not that someone is mentioning it.... But DOES this country protect freedom of speech? And to what extent? If I signed up on this board as a Cowboys troll and started thread after thread about how much Daniel Jones is going to be a bust, I would eventually have my freedom of speech extinguished by being BANNED. Just because I wanted to be a dick doesn't mean others have to put up with it. It's legally within their power to tune me out if the determination is made that I'm abusing my freedom of speech. So if that rule applies on message boards everyone, and moderators reserve the right to ensure that it's members aren't being angered by someone with a single minded purpose to upset the community, why does this same concept not apply to fans who pay owners to WATCH FOOTBALL AND ONLY WATCH FOOTBALL? "Using their platform to bring an issue to light" is an example of abusing that platform. And that is what people don't appreciate But how is kneeling during the national anthem not an example of this going on during games? And how are the interviews that occur outside of games not part of the in-game packaging when they show these interviews on pregame and anywhere football fans have an eye and an ear? What I should be upset about is my own business. It isn't subject to anyone else's judgement. And it's not a matter of whether or not I find it upsetting, but whether or not I actually see the objective reality in the same way you do. Because if people can look at the objective reality and have a different interpretation of it, then there isn't much that anyone should be telling anyone about anything. Well freedom of speech only protects us from getting arrested for what we say, to an extent So when IS an appropriate time for him to mention this issue??? As for the kneeling, they dont show the national anthem on tv, so theres that. As for the interviews, its not part of the game, its part of the post or pre-game, theres is almost no way to control what the players are going to say. There isnt going to be a list of topics you cannot speak about. If you want to be upset or not, thats on you. But in my eyes and the eyes of alot of others is that there is an issue of improper policing policies that are unevenly skewed towards people of color. If you dont care about that its on you, I cant tell you what to believe
|
|
soflo
Special Teams
Posts: 1,718
|
Post by soflo on Aug 13, 2019 17:34:35 GMT -5
The problem with the kap issue is that it's not really a one-sided deal and what happens between people of color and the cops is usually in a gray area and the media is more likely to report the instances where the gray area doesn't exist, or sometimes twist the gray area into something which essentially feeds the victim consciousness narrative. Every see that video where the guy is walking his doberman near a crime scene, and the police wind up shooting the dog after guy starts filming them and shouting stuff at the cops? Some people will look at that and say there the cops go again. Can't wait to pull the trigger. And they killed a beloved dog. But if you add context within definition of the law, the guy was basically committing police endangerment by the act of inciting a riot or violence. The fact is, the police act stupid because people act stupid. What does this have to do with people questioning policing policies and people being called 'disrespectful punks' when they are concerned with over zealous tactics. Police acting stupid because people act stupid is the chicken and the egg theory I don't have a problem with questioning police tactics...on CNN where I don't have to listen to it, especially if I think the way they present this stuff is just an attempt to make a lot of noise and point the finger rather than have a calm discussion that leads to a solution. Because if they actually wanted a solution, or were wise enough to understand how solutions come, they never would have chosen the histrionic approach. I think the "disrespectful punks" response is a reaction to people trying to link the flag as a symbol of oppression, which offends some. Again, objective reality seen differently between different people.
|
|
|
Post by Kruunch on Aug 13, 2019 17:42:40 GMT -5
So all 32 owners unanimously agreed not to allow Kaep a job in the NFL? And of course he won the lawsuit, any blood sucking lawyer would jump on this case when it involves a billion dollar company that is the NFL. How did Vick get another chance in the league? He went to prison and was public enemy #1 around the Country. But yet he found employment in the league. Should I go into all the domestic violence that is in the league? Even are very own Plaxico got a second chance in the league. All these guys I mentioned have something Kaep doesn't have. They all can still play... And who is CK1? Is that what Kaep is calling himself now? What a douche.
|
|
|
Post by Nite on Aug 13, 2019 17:44:59 GMT -5
But DOES this country protect freedom of speech? And to what extent? If I signed up on this board as a Cowboys troll and started thread after thread about how much Daniel Jones is going to be a bust, I would eventually have my freedom of speech extinguished by being BANNED. Just because I wanted to be a dick doesn't mean others have to put up with it. It's legally within their power to tune me out if the determination is made that I'm abusing my freedom of speech. So if that rule applies on message boards everyone, and moderators reserve the right to ensure that it's members aren't being angered by someone with a single minded purpose to upset the community, why does this same concept not apply to fans who pay owners to WATCH FOOTBALL AND ONLY WATCH FOOTBALL? "Using their platform to bring an issue to light" is an example of abusing that platform. And that is what people don't appreciate But how is kneeling during the national anthem not an example of this going on during games? And how are the interviews that occur outside of games not part of the in-game packaging when they show these interviews on pregame and anywhere football fans have an eye and an ear? What I should be upset about is my own business. It isn't subject to anyone else's judgement. And it's not a matter of whether or not I find it upsetting, but whether or not I actually see the objective reality in the same way you do. Because if people can look at the objective reality and have a different interpretation of it, then there isn't much that anyone should be telling anyone about anything. Well freedom of speech only protects us from getting arrested for what we say, to an extent So when IS an appropriate time for him to mention this issue??? As for the kneeling, they dont show the national anthem on tv, so theres that. As for the interviews, its not part of the game, its part of the post or pre-game, theres is almost no way to control what the players are going to say. There isnt going to be a list of topics you cannot speak about. If you want to be upset or not, thats on you. But in my eyes and the eyes of alot of others is that there is an issue of improper policing policies that are unevenly skewed towards people of color. If you dont care about that its on you, I cant tell you what to believe The constitution protects free speech between the government and people. Specifically it prohibits the government from abridging the exercise of it by the people. All other venues (private) can do whatever they want in relation to speech. It also have nothing to do with arrest and/or punishment by the government. You can say what you want and others can reply in response. In a public setting it is unfettered. In a private setting it can be altered by any means by the owners of that setting (venue)
|
|
desertash
Starter
The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane. - Mark Twain
Posts: 2,504
|
Post by desertash on Aug 13, 2019 17:47:01 GMT -5
“I mean Kaepernick’s a household name, everybody knows about him, for whatever reason you know him for, and to catch a pass from him [in the charity game] I thought was pretty cool,” Barkley said. “And even though he’s not in the NFL anymore, and like you said with retweeting the videos of him working out, I mean that’s just like I think it’s cool he’s still working out and still waiting for his opportunity for a shot and when the shot comes, he’s showing he’s still gonna be ready for it. And as a man, I respect that.”
-Saquon Barkley
I don't have a problem with this at all.
Some people are already getting distracted yeah, from that to pro-Kap (as has been discussed...to death) is a long leap nothing wrong with what Saquon said, the author attempted to give it more gravitas
|
|
soflo
Special Teams
Posts: 1,718
|
Post by soflo on Aug 13, 2019 17:49:50 GMT -5
But DOES this country protect freedom of speech? And to what extent? If I signed up on this board as a Cowboys troll and started thread after thread about how much Daniel Jones is going to be a bust, I would eventually have my freedom of speech extinguished by being BANNED. Just because I wanted to be a dick doesn't mean others have to put up with it. It's legally within their power to tune me out if the determination is made that I'm abusing my freedom of speech. So if that rule applies on message boards everyone, and moderators reserve the right to ensure that it's members aren't being angered by someone with a single minded purpose to upset the community, why does this same concept not apply to fans who pay owners to WATCH FOOTBALL AND ONLY WATCH FOOTBALL? "Using their platform to bring an issue to light" is an example of abusing that platform. And that is what people don't appreciate But how is kneeling during the national anthem not an example of this going on during games? And how are the interviews that occur outside of games not part of the in-game packaging when they show these interviews on pregame and anywhere football fans have an eye and an ear? What I should be upset about is my own business. It isn't subject to anyone else's judgement. And it's not a matter of whether or not I find it upsetting, but whether or not I actually see the objective reality in the same way you do. Because if people can look at the objective reality and have a different interpretation of it, then there isn't much that anyone should be telling anyone about anything. Well freedom of speech only protects us from getting arrested for what we say, to an extent So when IS an appropriate time for him to mention this issue??? As for the kneeling, they dont show the national anthem on tv, so theres that. As for the interviews, its not part of the game, its part of the post or pre-game, theres is almost no way to control what the players are going to say. There isnt going to be a list of topics you cannot speak about. If you want to be upset or not, thats on you. But in my eyes and the eyes of alot of others is that there is an issue of improper policing policies that are unevenly skewed towards people of color. If you dont care about that its on you, I cant tell you what to believe Freedom of speech doesn't protect us from getting arrested at all. Historian David Irving has been arrested and put in jail several times for saying he doesn't believe there were any gassings in concentration camps. Doesn't matter if he presented what he believes to be decent evidence, or that he argued it wasn't even hate speech. They jailed him for it regardless. It's not a matter of the time being appropriate; it's a matter of the place, and probably the people. As in, if players want to be in politics, let them quit football, make a salary that's commensurate to doing THAT job (like they ever would), and join the southern poverty law center. Since none of them would ever have the real guts to actually do the work they would get paid for to talk about these things, I really could care less what they have to say about it and I don't think it's ever going to be an appropriate time for them to mention the issue.
|
|
desertash
Starter
The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane. - Mark Twain
Posts: 2,504
|
Post by desertash on Aug 13, 2019 17:50:09 GMT -5
The statistics don't fit his stance. In what other countries do black people get choked to death for selling cigarettes while a white man gets handcuffed after killing more than 20 at a Walmart? this has no place, no bearing, no relevance and is the perfect example of a "strawman" stance
|
|
|
Post by TEM on Aug 13, 2019 17:51:39 GMT -5
Well freedom of speech only protects us from getting arrested for what we say, to an extent So when IS an appropriate time for him to mention this issue??? As for the kneeling, they dont show the national anthem on tv, so theres that. As for the interviews, its not part of the game, its part of the post or pre-game, theres is almost no way to control what the players are going to say. There isnt going to be a list of topics you cannot speak about. If you want to be upset or not, thats on you. But in my eyes and the eyes of alot of others is that there is an issue of improper policing policies that are unevenly skewed towards people of color. If you dont care about that its on you, I cant tell you what to believe The constitution protects free speech between the government and people. Specifically it prohibits the government from abridging the exercise of it by the people. All other venues (private) can do whatever they want in relation to speech. It also have nothing to do with arrest and/or punishment by the government. You can say what you want and others can reply in response. In a public setting it is unfettered. In a private setting it can be altered by any means by the owners of that setting (venue) Employers have the right to impose policies on employee conduct. While that employee is on the clock or in role that represents the employer. The employer has the right to protect his interests against unwanted or negative publicity that result from an employee.
|
|
|
Post by EliDaGoat713 on Aug 13, 2019 17:52:24 GMT -5
You're right about Odell. I didnt get too many "me" vibes from him during his rookie year. The Josh Norman feud was the following year. That really started it. I would also include Victor Cruz. Totally humble dude...who kind of became more obsessed with his brand after he signed with Rockafella right after the 2012 super bowl. So really, no one is immune to this. Eli? That's why I will always love and support Eli. He is by far one of the classiest players to ever play a sport.
|
|
soflo
Special Teams
Posts: 1,718
|
Post by soflo on Aug 13, 2019 17:57:40 GMT -5
That's why I will always love and support Eli. He is by far one of the classiest players to ever play a sport. Eli was actually in one of the anti-domestic violence commercials run by the NFL. Again, I'm not saying it's not an important issue, and yes, it sort of concerned the NFL, as it was a public relations response to the Ray Rice incident, but it was political and Eli elected to be in it.
|
|
|
Post by EliDaGoat713 on Aug 13, 2019 18:03:03 GMT -5
Apparently Barkley tweeted some kind of political support for Kap and said ,"I don't care if I lose fans." One thing I LOVED about Barkley last year was his humility and his moderation of thought. I really hope this isn't the start of a bigger-than-the-game attitude. Personally, my opinion on this is that I don't care about who sits or stands because I find the pledge of allegiance to be a form of idolatry so to speak, and any pledge is, by design, an oath where you're promising the system not to think for yourself. But I also can't stand how they've pulled politics into a place where it has no business being. A sports team is like a bar - it's supposed to be a forgetting place and if you are paid BY the fans, how do you make the statement that you don't care if you lose them? I'd hate to see Barkley grow an ego. giantswire.usatoday.com/2019/08/13/saquon-barkley-support-colin-kaepernick-dont-care-lose-fans/Good. I support Colin Kapernick too. I don't.
|
|
|
Post by EliDaGoat713 on Aug 13, 2019 18:04:02 GMT -5
That's why I will always love and support Eli. He is by far one of the classiest players to ever play a sport. Eli was actually in one of the anti-domestic violence commercials run by the NFL. Again, I'm not saying it's not an important issue, and yes, it sort of concerned the NFL, as it was a public relations response to the Ray Rice incident, but it was political and Eli elected to be in it. I don't see how being against hitting women is political? Besides we all know what Eli's politics are.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2019 18:05:13 GMT -5
So he supports against police brutality. i think we all should. its not anti american or anti military like some like to make it. its not an issue imo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2019 18:10:27 GMT -5
In what other countries do black people get choked to death for selling cigarettes while a white man gets handcuffed after killing more than 20 at a Walmart? this has no place, no bearing, no relevance and is the perfect example of a "strawman" stance this is in response to the police brutality comments. It definitely has a place.
|
|
|
Post by TheAnalyst on Aug 13, 2019 18:10:58 GMT -5
So he supports against police brutality. i think we all should. its not anti american or anti military like some like to make it. its not an issue imo. I think the biggest issue is that Kap said he wasnt anti- American flag or banner, but then made noise when Nike had their Red White Blue kicks come out. How does that take a stand against police brutality? Its a sneaker. Maybe he should be against Nike for abusing child labor in poor countries? But I guess he can pick and choose what offends us today.
|
|
|
Post by EliDaGoat713 on Aug 13, 2019 18:12:44 GMT -5
So he supports against police brutality. i think we all should. its not anti american or anti military like some like to make it. its not an issue imo. I think the biggest issue is that Kap said he wasnt anti- American flag or banner, but then made noise when Nike had their Red White Blue kicks come out. How does that take a stand against police brutality? Its a sneaker. Maybe he should be against Nike for abusing child labor in poor countries? But I guess he can pick and choose what offends us today. Exactly why I don't wear Nike anymore.
|
|
soflo
Special Teams
Posts: 1,718
|
Post by soflo on Aug 13, 2019 18:13:02 GMT -5
Eli was actually in one of the anti-domestic violence commercials run by the NFL. Again, I'm not saying it's not an important issue, and yes, it sort of concerned the NFL, as it was a public relations response to the Ray Rice incident, but it was political and Eli elected to be in it. I don't see how being against hitting women is political? Besides we all know what Eli's politics are. Anything that isn't related to what happens on the gridiron is essentially political. In this case, any commentary on the broader social world is specifically political. I don't know what Eli's politics are. I'm glad not to. But it is possible for fans or players to be apolitical (i.e. my analogy about non-smokers who aren't interested in secondhand smoke in the bar).
|
|
|
Post by TheAnalyst on Aug 13, 2019 18:16:17 GMT -5
I think the biggest issue is that Kap said he wasnt anti- American flag or banner, but then made noise when Nike had their Red White Blue kicks come out. How does that take a stand against police brutality? Its a sneaker. Maybe he should be against Nike for abusing child labor in poor countries? But I guess he can pick and choose what offends us today. Exactly why I don't wear Nike anymore. I wear Nike still, because honestly, I bet Adidas and New Balance are doing shady things too. I guess Im just not on the offended train like a lot these days. Call me a young old school guy. Now get off my lawn you hippie.
|
|
desertash
Starter
The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane. - Mark Twain
Posts: 2,504
|
Post by desertash on Aug 13, 2019 18:23:09 GMT -5
this has no place, no bearing, no relevance and is the perfect example of a "strawman" stance this is in response to the police brutality comments. It definitely has a place. the Wal-Mart comment was conflating 2 completely unrelated events (first said topics, events is a better word here...topics debatable with some Venn overlap) that Wal-Mart comment was beyond a reach...total strawman
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2019 18:27:30 GMT -5
So he supports against police brutality. i think we all should. its not anti american or anti military like some like to make it. its not an issue imo. I think the biggest issue is that Kap said he wasnt anti- American flag or banner, but then made noise when Nike had their Red White Blue kicks come out. How does that take a stand against police brutality? Its a sneaker. Maybe he should be against Nike for abusing child labor in poor countries? But I guess he can pick and choose what offends us today. wasnt that betsy ross flag during the 13 colonies and during slavery?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2019 18:29:50 GMT -5
Eli was actually in one of the anti-domestic violence commercials run by the NFL. Again, I'm not saying it's not an important issue, and yes, it sort of concerned the NFL, as it was a public relations response to the Ray Rice incident, but it was political and Eli elected to be in it. I don't see how being against hitting women is political? Besides we all know what Eli's politics are. What if Eli kneeled during the national anthem? would your head explode? or would it be rationalized and he would get a privileged pass?
|
|
|
Post by TCHOF on Aug 13, 2019 18:37:55 GMT -5
That's why I will always love and support Eli. He is by far one of the classiest players to ever play a sport. Eli was actually in one of the anti-domestic violence commercials run by the NFL. Again, I'm not saying it's not an important issue, and yes, it sort of concerned the NFL, as it was a public relations response to the Ray Rice incident, but it was political and Eli elected to be in it. Anti-domestic violence is political? Don’t you have to have another point of view to make it political? Who is pro domestic violence??
|
|
|
Post by TheAnalyst on Aug 13, 2019 18:40:16 GMT -5
I think the biggest issue is that Kap said he wasnt anti- American flag or banner, but then made noise when Nike had their Red White Blue kicks come out. How does that take a stand against police brutality? Its a sneaker. Maybe he should be against Nike for abusing child labor in poor countries? But I guess he can pick and choose what offends us today. wasnt that betsy ross flag during the 13 colonies and during slavery? Oh, so that explains why Obama hung it at his inauguration after becoming the first African American president.
|
|
soflo
Special Teams
Posts: 1,718
|
Post by soflo on Aug 13, 2019 18:42:12 GMT -5
Eli was actually in one of the anti-domestic violence commercials run by the NFL. Again, I'm not saying it's not an important issue, and yes, it sort of concerned the NFL, as it was a public relations response to the Ray Rice incident, but it was political and Eli elected to be in it. Anti-domestic violence is political? Don’t you have to have another point of view to make it political. Who is pro domestic violence?? Well, it's kind of like propaganda. Does propaganda need to be FALSE in order for it to qualify as propaganda...or does it simply have to be information deliberately arranged in a certain way to manipulate and control how people think? I do think you can weave something dishonest by using a truth. That to me was the basis of the Kapernick controversy.
|
|
|
Post by trueblueatnyc on Aug 13, 2019 18:43:38 GMT -5
I dont think this is real news
|
|
soflo
Special Teams
Posts: 1,718
|
Post by soflo on Aug 13, 2019 18:56:27 GMT -5
I dont think this is real news I'm no longer sure what IS real news.
|
|
desertash
Starter
The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane. - Mark Twain
Posts: 2,504
|
Post by desertash on Aug 13, 2019 19:03:33 GMT -5
I dont think this is real news I'm no longer sure what IS real news. If power structures didn't already know how to conduct their business, they certainly did after George Orwell.
|
|
|
Post by trueblueatnyc on Aug 13, 2019 19:06:14 GMT -5
I dont think this is real news I'm no longer sure what IS real news. Well, what I mean isn't whether the story is factually accurate, only that, is it really news about what Barkley personally feels about the whole Kaepernick saga? I'd understand if he started kneeling during the pre-game and all that stuff, but otherwise, it's his personal feelings. Not sure why I should really be concerned with it.
|
|
|
Post by EliDaGoat713 on Aug 13, 2019 19:09:22 GMT -5
I think the biggest issue is that Kap said he wasnt anti- American flag or banner, but then made noise when Nike had their Red White Blue kicks come out. How does that take a stand against police brutality? Its a sneaker. Maybe he should be against Nike for abusing child labor in poor countries? But I guess he can pick and choose what offends us today. wasnt that betsy ross flag during the 13 colonies and during slavery? So you're saying that the entire history of this country is represented by that?
|
|
|
Post by EliDaGoat713 on Aug 13, 2019 19:09:57 GMT -5
I don't see how being against hitting women is political? Besides we all know what Eli's politics are. What if Eli kneeled during the national anthem? would your head explode? or would it be rationalized and he would get a privileged pass? He wouldn't do that
|
|