Standing during the Pledge or National Anthem

[LD0506]

https://www.facebook.com/traecrowder/videos/669436333267033/

 

NSFW language so I left it as a link, but I love this guy

[Popeman38]

1 minute ago, Springfield said:

You think he’d make a good Redskin after Cousins bounces?

No. 

[StillUnknown]

1 minute ago, Springfield said:

 

You think he’d make a good Redskin after Cousins bounces?

 

honestly, i don't care enough about the skins to think on it

[TradeTheBeal!]

I demand somebody sign Christian Ponder!

[Springfield]

Good on Kaepernick for what he started.  I don’t think he’s a QB that most would want here and it’s not because he’s a SJW or because he’s black or because his girlfriend is a head case.  He’s not a great QB.  And for fans of a team as lowly as the Redskins to reject Kaepernick, I don’t see why any other team would want him over a draft pick.  

[Popeman38]

8 minutes ago, Springfield said:

Good on Kaepernick for what he started.  I don’t think he’s a QB that most would want here and it’s not because he’s a SJW or because he’s black or because his girlfriend is a head case.  He’s not a great QB.  And for fans of a team as lowly as the Redskins to reject Kaepernick, I don’t see why any other team would want him over a draft pick.  

It’s not so much ch that he’s a crappy QB, but he has a specific skill set. And that does not mesh with many coaches. There are like 3 jobs in the NFL he would fit, and the Skins ain’t one of em. 

[Destino]

33 minutes ago, Springfield said:

I mean, Collin Kaepernick is still a crappy QB.  It doesn’t bother me that he isn’t throwing interceptions and running for his life in the NFL.  He isn’t as good as RG3 and that poor adulterer doesn’t have a job either.  The only thing Griffin did wrong was get injured every two weeks and believe in himself too much.

 

He's not a great starting QB but the league is filled with mediocre QBs and even worse ones on the bench. 

[dav87sc]

1 hour ago, The Sisko said:

--Nixon's campaign to criminalize the black community AKA "tough on crime" policies mimicked by the rest of the GOP ever since and by Dem politicians because they can't afford to look weak on crime, never mind that crime rates have plummeted over the past 20 or so years

I may be confused, but being tough on crime and crime rates plummeting over the last 20 years?  Are you saying they are not connected.  I won't pretend to be a data analyst or anything of the sort, but crime rates being reduced is a good thing, and it doesn't matter where you live.

As far as Nixon's intent on making being black a crime, I have no idea.  I was never in a position to see it - some of that being very young, and some of it being overseas.  When were were stateside, we were in base housing and I didn't see what was/may have been going on in the community at large.

I would tell you that I have never met a person that supported the position you state about the GOP or would agree with that intent.

 

1 hour ago, The Sisko said:

Years of voter suppression tactics against POC followed up with gutting the VRA

gerrymandering of voting districts is wrong.  If you think the GOP are the only ones doing it, you are wrong.

if the Supreme Court agrees that some provisions of the VRA are no longer necessary or valid, then I am okay with that(I think the SC made a ruling on that)

Listen, I hold voting to be sacred.   I think CK was a coward for not voting in the last election, after protesting the way he did.

With the amount of technology today, I don't find it oppressive to say people should be able to produce an ID to vote.  You can't open a bank account, receive any government benefit, or even cash a check at the supermarket without one.  I find it ridiculous on its face that we can't agree that 2 elections from now, we can't get every person in this country some form of acceptable ID to vote.  I don't find that unreasonable.  If grassroots campaigns can go door to door and sign people up to vote, we can go door to door get people id's.

 

1 hour ago, The Sisko said:

Years of using coded language to surreptitiously use race in political campaigns, e.g. Willie Horton, McCain's alleged half black love child, etc.

coded language is used by everyone.  people who are nasty by nature will always find ways to be nasty.  that is not a republican monopoly.

dems are not at all adverse to use coded language to denigrate Christians, conservatives, or people of opposing view points.  look at some of the responses to my post and you can find examples right on this board.

The language about race happens to be one you dislike(and frankly so do I)

 

1 hour ago, The Sisko said:

Dividing the country by pushing the idea that every time a white person doesn't get a job/school acceptance, etc. it's because of an affirmative action policy...or in general terms exploiting what I call the tragedy of the poor, downtrodden white male.

you see this as a national issue?  I have barely seen anything of the sort.  the examples I recall, were more an exercise in calling attention to the obsurdity of that specific situation.  I may recall a few that were just idiots looking for some form of sympathy.  Those idiots should have been spanked and put back in their place.

 

1 hour ago, The Sisko said:

Calling into question the citizenship of Barack Obama and using his election/presidency to manipulate the poor, downtrodden white male syndrome described above to their advantage

first, that was idiotic on everybody's part.  Second, I seem to recall Obama's biography created the opening for this to even come up. I never read it, but I recall hearing something about it, and thought, why would you lie in your autobiography, and then be outraged that people go wild with assertions.   I personally thought it led to questions about his integrity.  Same thing with the girlfriend in the book, later to find out it was a collation of several girlfriends.

Some people don't feel useful or intelligent without creating some form of conspiracy theory.  I feel sad for them.

 

As far as your downtrodden white male syndrome.....whatever helps you feel better.  I don't understand your point.  Without understanding, it appears you are making things up to justify some point in your mind.  I don't know

 

[RonArtest15]

I'd take Kaepernick over Colt McCoy in a heartbeat. 

[visionary]

Some interesting stuff about civil rights and policing and the NFL stuff from the weekend in

Preet’s second episode.

 

 

Edited September 27, 2017 by visionary

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

There are serious issues with signing Kaep. Some of it is how polarizing he is. That's not necessarily all about the protest thing but yeah, it's part of it. The other part of it is that there is a 100% chance that if you sign Kaep, you're going to have people screaming for him as soon as your starter has a bad a game. Teams don't want distractions and they don't want QB controversies.

 

The other part of it, like someone previously mentioned, is that he has a different skill set and needs an offense that is tailored to him. If your starter goes down, you need someone that can come in off the bench and run the scheme that's in place.

 

Tebow and Griffin are good comparisons for all of the same reasons.

[TradeTheBeal!]

Veteran Told What Offends Him

 

http://www.theonion.com/article/veteran-told-what-offends-him-57045

[dav87sc]

4 hours ago, Popeman38 said:

Fair, it wasn’t only racism. But only one candidate for President in the last 25 years has had unanimous support from the white supremacist groups. That should give you pause…

You think those same groups voted for Obama either time?  Those nasty folks will vote for anyone that is polar opposite to the Democratic Party at the moment.  Even when that means voting for someone that doesn't like/want you, but is less "icky" than you black folks.(Not my feeling, just how I characterize the thinking of those nasty folk)

4 hours ago, Popeman38 said:

I find it sad that you can’t see this is not the only thing we can hang our hat on.

I was responding specifically to BenningRoadSkin and the posts I saw of his.  I didn't mean that as a generalization.

4 hours ago, Popeman38 said:

Wrong. Donald ****ing Trump was the worst candidate in modern history. Worse than Nixon, worse than Goldwater.

I agree to disagree.

4 hours ago, Popeman38 said:

So, she is a politician?

 

4 hours ago, Popeman38 said:

So, she is a politician?

You seem to be okay with politicians being denigrating to others and putting personal wealth before national interests.

Personally, I find both reprehensible.  And your attitude of "she is a politician" is exactly what enables politicians to act that way.

Maybe you have become jaded, and don't think that will ever change, but I don't accept or agree with either of those.

 

4 hours ago, Popeman38 said:

Nope.

That is exactly what has been stated.  Anyone who voted for Trump is a racist, and by extension white supremacist.

Don't' deny that has been put forward on this board.

You may not be, but it has been stated directly by several others, including BeningRoadSkin

4 hours ago, Popeman38 said:

David Duke says hi.

Congratulations, you have just made the leap to calling someone a white supremacist who disagrees with your thinking or has had a different life experience.

Previous point is amended.  You now are part of that crowd.

4 hours ago, Popeman38 said:

Tell me more of your unsubstantiated thoughts and opinions. Wait, don’t.

She fell, was given non-seizure glasses, regularly needed help up/down stairs, in/out of vans, and needed regular rest and was out of sight weeks at a time on the campaign trail.  I don't thnk it was just age related. You really think she was well?  I think by not being up front with the public, she did herself a disservice.

We see players go through concussion protocol, and they are inactive until the docs clear them.  Does this look anything like what she had going on?  I think so.

I am not a doctor, but we see this in the players every week, and you won't convince me otherwise.  Had she come out and said, I sustained a concussion and it will effect how I campaign, but it will clear up, people wouldn't have let it be an issue.  When people hide medical issues, it causes people to wonder wht is really happening, and people tend to think the worst.

4 hours ago, Popeman38 said:

t is good advice not to voluntarily associate with white supremacists, or you run the risk of being labeled one. Hence why a candidate for President probably shouldn’t keep retweeting known white supremacists. And then he should denounce white supremacists in the wake of white supremacists killing a woman in Charlottesville. He then shouldn’t call mostly black protestors “sons of ****es” for kneeling during the national anthem in protest of actions such as white supremacists being retweeted by a Presidential candidate and white supremacists killing a woman in Charlottesville.

well, that is many issues in one, and more than I was addressing with that point.

He did denounce white supremacists, several times.  How many time must he do it before you will accept it?  Once an hour, day, week, month?

A white supremacist who murders is a lost soul, regardless of whether you put murder first or supremacist first. There is no excuse for what he did.   

For the record, it doesn't take a genius to figure out if you have 2 forces radically opposed to each other facing off and looking for a fight, something bad is going to happen.  The local police/government failed to adequately protect everyone involved.  I don't agree with the clan position at all, but they had a right to express it.  The Antifa nuts raised it to a whole other level of tension.  And no, I don't think Antifa is a friend of blacks.  I think they are an anti-government group that wants anarchy, and that doesn't benefit anyone but those who like chaos.

5 hours ago, Popeman38 said:

Great. Real original thought here.

Lol, you haven't presented an original thought either.  Well, that makes both of us followers.

5 hours ago, Popeman38 said:

Let me know when "the other side" strings up men/women/kids because of their skin color. And institute laws to alienate a group because of their skin color. Or create a system of city development to isolate a group based on their skin color. I can keep going for pages.  But I’ll stop here and let others who have personal experience finish.

you didn't address my point.

Not sure the last time I heard about someone being strung up, but I will assume that you mean the modern version of police "summary executions" of black people.

Look, I can't begin to fathom how people look at anyone and come to the conclusion that based on skin color, they are not worth anything.

I have been raised to see all people as valued and cherished children of God.  I may find behaviors lacking, but that is not the position I start from.

As far as alienating groups of people, it has been done through history.  Every civilization has separated out those who are different.  I would bet that most of it came to fear - fear of being different, fear of changing "who I am", fear of "them" taking over, or even fear of losing my identity.

I refuse to let fear rule my world.  It is a sad thing to allow yourself to go through life in fear(whatever is the cause, in this case we speak of race.)

Funny(odd), I am hearing how black students on campuses are demanding separate housing, spaces, classes and professors than white students, all the while blaming Trump for feeling unsafe.  So, you can have segregation, but only by your choice?

It is amazing the lengths we go to vilify the opposition, while claiming victim-hood. 

 

Frankly, it is bull#^$% that everyone is so afraid and they need special accommodations and dispensation.  no class for you, you are afraid, no exams for you, you are afraid, no grades for you, you are afraid and can't be held responsible for acting like an adult. we will just pass all of you without having to prove mastery of the subject content.  smh

 

5 hours ago, Popeman38 said:

Or, he is someone who has been made to feel like he has been “shouted down and not accepted as a valued member of society” by a system built by white people on the backs of minorities.

I may be wrong, but not the feeling I get.  Frankly, it comes across as 20 something kid who thinks they can say whatever to whoever and get away with it, all the while justifying those actions by claiming to be a a victim of racism.  Frankly speaking, nasty talk to others is not justified by whatever slight you may have thought you received.  We may disagree, then I would say my sense of morals are different than yours.

[The Sisko]

57 minutes ago, dav87sc said:

I may be confused, but being tough on crime and crime rates plummeting over the last 20 years?  Are you saying they are not connected.  I won't pretend to be a data analyst or anything of the sort, but crime rates being reduced is a good thing, and it doesn't matter where you live.

As far as Nixon's intent on making being black a crime, I have no idea.  I was never in a position to see it - some of that being very young, and some of it being overseas.  When were were stateside, we were in base housing and I didn't see what was/may have been going on in the community at large.

I would tell you that I have never met a person that supported the position you state about the GOP or would agree with that intent.

 

gerrymandering of voting districts is wrong.  If you think the GOP are the only ones doing it, you are wrong.

if the Supreme Court agrees that some provisions of the VRA are no longer necessary or valid, then I am okay with that(I think the SC made a ruling on that)

Listen, I hold voting to be sacred.   I think CK was a coward for not voting in the last election, after protesting the way he did.

With the amount of technology today, I don't find it oppressive to say people should be able to produce an ID to vote.  You can't open a bank account, receive any government benefit, or even cash a check at the supermarket without one.  I find it ridiculous on its face that we can't agree that 2 elections from now, we can't get every person in this country some form of acceptable ID to vote.  I don't find that unreasonable.  If grassroots campaigns can go door to door and sign people up to vote, we can go door to door get people id's.

 

coded language is used by everyone.  people who are nasty by nature will always find ways to be nasty.  that is not a republican monopoly.

dems are not at all adverse to use coded language to denigrate Christians, conservatives, or people of opposing view points.  look at some of the responses to my post and you can find examples right on this board.

The language about race happens to be one you dislike(and frankly so do I)

 

you see this as a national issue?  I have barely seen anything of the sort.  the examples I recall, were more an exercise in calling attention to the obsurdity of that specific situation.  I may recall a few that were just idiots looking for some form of sympathy.  Those idiots should have been spanked and put back in their place.

 

first, that was idiotic on everybody's part.  Second, I seem to recall Obama's biography created the opening for this to even come up. I never read it, but I recall hearing something about it, and thought, why would you lie in your autobiography, and then be outraged that people go wild with assertions.   I personally thought it led to questions about his integrity.  Same thing with the girlfriend in the book, later to find out it was a collation of several girlfriends.

Some people don't feel useful or intelligent without creating some form of conspiracy theory.  I feel sad for them.

 

As far as your downtrodden white male syndrome.....whatever helps you feel better.  I don't understand your point.  Without understanding, it appears you are making things up to justify some point in your mind.  I don't know

 

You thought I didn't have some proof? Nah, that's not how I roll.

Nixon and the trumped up drug war. And FWIW, I never said he tried to make being black a crime

 

Gerrymandering: I agree it's wrong and that the Dems have done it too. However, that's not the VRA. The contention of the states that sued to gut it was that times have changed. Strangely enough, as soon as that happened, southern and other red states immediately set out to disenfranchise POC voters. If they were all upset about being singled out, it would have been better to make the VRA applicable nationwide instead of gutting it. As for SCOTUS, it has become politicized to the point that I have about as much respect for it as I do the flag. None. As for voter ID, that's been covered in other threads.

 

The coded language thing is a bit open to interpretation so I won't die on that hill. However, we all know it happens and a lot more on one side of the aisle than the other.

 

Finally, on to the sense of white male aggrievement. If you haven't noticed this, then quite frankly you're being willfully ignorant. It's what the draft dodger in chief's whole campaign was built on. Didn't you hear the guys in Charlottesville chanting "Jews will not replace us"? Ever heard of Brietbart and the so-called alt right? What about Sessions and his cronies desire to limit LEGAL immigration because in their minds, the country is being inundated with non-white immigrants? Did I make this up to make myself feel better?... 

Mind you, I found this with the most rudimentary Google search ever. I'm sure a little effort would uncover tons more of this. But, please, do tell me if I'm hallucinating so I can see a doctor.

 

You said earlier that conservatives don't post here a lot because they don't feel welcome and all the hostility. This is so very true IF you define hostility as being asked for proof and facts to back their **** up. When you have none, that's a hostile thing indeed. 

[Momma There Goes That Man]

Kaep is a lot better than Griffin and he's not a complete coach killing head-case either. He's also infinitely better and overqualified than probbaly 90% of the current backups in the league. I don't think he's great by any means 

Edited September 27, 2017 by Momma There Goes That Man

[dav87sc]

First, if you highlight in colors, please use one that is a little more distinctive.  That burgundy was very hard for me to catch, and I almost missed them.  I really do want to see what you think is particularly important enough to highlight. 

1 hour ago, The Sisko said:

You thought I didn't have some proof? Nah, that's not how I roll.

Nixon and the trumped up drug war. And FWIW, I never said he tried to make being black a crime

I didn't make any such assumption.

Half of your responses were 1 sentence or less.

I honestly interpreted what you wrote to mean that.  I stand corrected.

1 hour ago, The Sisko said:

Gerrymandering: I agree it's wrong and that the Dems have done it too. However, that's not the VRA. The contention of the states that sued to gut it was that times have changed. Strangely enough, as soon as that happened, southern and other red states immediately set out to disenfranchise POC voters. If they were all upset about being singled out, it would have been better to make the VRA applicable nationwide instead of gutting it. As for SCOTUS, it has become politicized to the point that I have about as much respect for it as I do the flag. None. As for voter ID, that's been covered in other threads.

I don't know enough of the details to come to a conclusion.  I will have to read up more on the VRA.  Again, gerrymandering is wrong, regardless of who is doing it.  Sometimes I think people will try anything to see if they can get away with it.  Look, some people are rockheads.  I won't sit here and justify bad behavior.  As far as your thought it should be implemented nationwide, instead of selectively, haven't thought that through yet.  Not going to at this point tonight.

1 hour ago, The Sisko said:

The coded language thing is a bit open to interpretation so I won't die on that hill. However, we all know it happens and a lot more on one side of the aisle than the other.

Gimme a break, you can't just say we all do, but we know you do it more, and expect it the lie there without question. haha

1 hour ago, The Sisko said:

Finally, on to the sense of white male aggrievement. If you haven't noticed this, then quite frankly you're being willfully ignorant. It's what the draft dodger in chief's whole campaign was built on. Didn't you hear the guys in Charlottesville chanting "Jews will not replace us"? Ever heard of Brietbart and the so-called alt right? What about Sessions and his cronies desire to limit LEGAL immigration because in their minds, the country is being inundated with non-white immigrants? Did I make this up to make myself feel better?... 

First, that kid is a bozo.  And, no, it didn't really get any traction.  The fact that some kid wants to protect "his" isn't anything new.  It is just that his is doing it about his skin color.  Frankly, with all of the ethnic/and national clubs/societies out here, I am surprised someone hasn't gone there before.  Doesn't make it a smart thing to do.  Second, the idiots in Charlottesville were white supremacists.  Does this shock you?  They think the Nazis were right!  That does not mean every/or even most Republican voters agree with that.  Honestly, that hostility to Jews is not just a white supremacist issue.  How many Muslims do you think side with the Jews.  I have heard people of different races make snide comments about Jews and money.  All those remarks are cut from the same cloth. 

 

When you(read liberals) have to make up a name to create another bogeyman, it is very amusing. Alt-right, haha.  Breitbart is to the right. That they present an opposite viewpoint as no different than MSNBC or the Onion, or insert your left leaning media.  btw, there are 10 left leaning media outlets per 1 right leaning media outlet.  If I were to go to any of those left leaning outlets, I would hear some pretty disturbing things about what a horrendous person I am, as a white christian, without any of it being true.(No, I don't want old people to hurry up and die, no I don't want the earth to come to an end, no I don't want dirty air or water.  No, because I believe in God, I am not a (insert demeaning statement)).

 

We can discuss immigration to your hearts content.  You won't convince me that a nation doesn't have the right and obligation to control its borders.  There have been plenty of times that there was no immigration allowed, for years a a time.  Immigration was slowed and stopped in order to allow immigrants time to assimilate into society.  If you want, I will be happy to discuss how many of the last generation haven't bothered to assimilate, but instead they form/join closed communities, and keep everyone else out and themselves in.  Really, why bother to come to America if you don't want to be a part of the whole.  I don't want to be used just for my land, money, resources if you aren't going to be part of it.

By the talking point estimates of the liberal media, I have heard there are anywhere from 10-50M illegal immigrants in this country.  You want them to come out of the shadows, great.  Then let them come out and assimilate.  In the meantime, you want another 1-3 million per year to come in?  At what point do you say, enough, let us figure out how to deal with what we have before adding millions more to worry about.  You think the food, medicine, schools can just handle that kind of influx without skipping a beat?  our schools are already a mess, healthcare is already unsustainable, but let's add another 3 million to that each year, no problem.  Finding food for that many more isn't any easier a task.

You may want to see this as an issue solely about race, but I think it is a much deeper issue than that.

 

The constant snarking about draft -dodging is amusing.  There a tens of thousand of people who got out of the draft for various reasons.  So he was able to use his family influence.  There are many politicians on both sides who did not serve and avoided it by using family influence.

Did/do you hold Bill Clinton to the same level of vitriol for avoiding the draft?

http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/felon.asp

And by association, Hillary becomes a draft dodging supporter.  smh

 

Edited September 27, 2017 by dav87sc
double post

[dav87sc]

1 hour ago, The Sisko said:

You said earlier that conservatives don't post here a lot because they don't feel welcome and all the hostility. This is so very true IF you define hostility as being asked for proof and facts to back their **** up. When you have none, that's a hostile thing indeed.

Right, is that what you call it.

I have been openly called a white supremacist because I voted for Trump, and been told that it is disturbing that anyone could even think that way.

No questions, no requests for clarification or justification allowed or wanted.

How fun it will be to watch and listen to a republican dupe.  Oh by the way, shut up and listen and maybe you  will learn something.

 

That is some outright bull$%.

Maybe not you directly, but others.

 

Frankly, there are people here who don't want to hear the other side, and will say things to get the other people to shut up or leave.

That is a sad thing.  If you constantly push those away who are willing to listen and engage, then who do you expect to help make things better.

The entire point of the kneeling was to start a dialogue.  Those here trying to shut it down are counter-productive to the entire discussion.

 

Well, you go girls.  Have it your way.

That is as much bigotry and racism as you want to rail about.

 

Sometimes, it is no wonder people don't want to listen or be a part of social change.

-Dav87sc

[88Comrade2000]

The history of singing the national anthem before NFL games

 

Interesting that before 2009, the players didn't even come out until after the anthem.

 

The NFL and the NFLPA need to find an acceptable solution quickly. or eventually their won't be anyone watching the NFL and coming to the games; which will affect their wallets. Also, i fully expect congress to remove the NFL's anti-trust exemption.

 

I was watching a podcast where they tackled this and boy was it heated.   The host is something who does podcasts on Doctor Who and shows/movies like that but he does occasional off topic stuff.   He was against the protest and one lady was for it, got heated.

 

It's too bad we don't have a leader. A leader would use this controversy to bring all side together and talk about this and maybe find solutions to the problem.

[DallasCowboyFan156]

10 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

 

The NFL and the NFLPA need to find an acceptable solution quickly. or eventually their won't be anyone watching the NFL and coming to the games; which will affect their wallets. Also, i fully expect congress to remove the NFL's anti-trust exemption.

 

 

 

I don't expect it to reach that level. Americans have a notoriously short memory. I almost guarantee that most of those people that swore off the NFL this weekend will be back watching it and claiming they've always been loyal to their teams within four weeks.

[88Comrade2000]

9 minutes ago, DallasCowboyFan156 said:

 

I don't expect it to reach that level. Americans have a notoriously short memory. I almost guarantee that most of those people that swore off the NFL this weekend will be back watching it and claiming they've always been loyal to their teams within four weeks.

Trump is going to make it his mission.

 

OR maybe the NFL will give him a team and Trump can resign as President.  Give him the Jaguars.

[The Sisko]

2 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said:

It's too bad we don't have a leader. A leader would use this controversy to bring all side together and talk about this and maybe find solutions to the problem.

Actually, a real leader wouldn't have a Russia probe and a poor response in certain places to the recent storms to need a distractor and wouldn't have used one even if she did. ?

 

2 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said:

Trump is going to make it his mission.

 

OR maybe the NFL will give him a team and Trump can resign as President.  Give him the Jaguars.

I'm ashamed of you.  The Cowturds would have to be choice número uno. 

[Bang]

So without reading through five pages since last checking..  some thoughts on what i am seeing most recently posted..

lol  Trump vs the NFL...

you'd think he'd be tired of getting his ass kicked since he got elected..  but nope, here he is,, biting off more than he can chew yet again.

I am getting a big kick out of all the boycotters, and how they seem to believe that their boycott is somehow going to diminish my enjoyment of the sport.

if the boycott is WILDLY successful, successful beyond their dreams,,  it MAY lower ticket prices. (Dang! I love paying super high prices!) It MAY open up other TV Markets to something like the Sunday Ticket. (Oh no! You mean i might get more ways to watch? Heaven forbid!)

 

Kill the NFL? lol..  much more danger of that from the CTE situation.

 

As far as signing Kaepernick..  good grief,, he isn't even PLAYING and he's distracting the entire league. The Steelers had a big controversy because one player came out,, so much that he had to take the podium and state he did not want to be a part of controversy. (How many other offensive linemen had to call a press conference this week? None?  Oh and they lost to one of the league's worst teams on the same day. Could be coincidental, but you'd have to believe in coincidence.)

Instead of preparing for a game, teams wasted time on Saturday trying to coordinate teir response. Teams held meetings on something that had nothing to do with their game the next day. But yeah, Colin isn't a distraction, and he's just being blackballed. The media and other assorted outside forces wouldn't ever try to exploit this for their own gain, right? Well, except every single media outlet that covers anything, and the President of the United States and every single member of his cult.

But other than that, no biggie.

the NFL and NFLPA do not need to find any solutions. All they need to do is play the games, and if they want to kneel, then kneel, or stand or whatever form of quiet you choose (Looked to me like Derek Carr was reciting a prayer during the anthem on Sunday. Eyes closed, not on the flag, and doing something other than revering the country ) . So long as they play the game, it won't matter. Goodell is handling this very well by keeping the league neutral, and other than one statement not letting the Toddler in Chief drag them into a playground slap fight. The owners are handling it well (except for that one Packers Shareholder..), they've shown solidarity with their players, whose talent happens to make them very rich.

They have released short statements, made a simple demonstration,  and then gone about their business.
So long as they play the game, they will have fans who will love it just as much as they ever did.

And those that want to leave?

Recognize that what you saw this weekend was the league getting stronger as a result of your hysteria and incompetence of our President.

 

as far as people not wanting to listen to thev other side..  well, the fact is this. The other side won't even recognize what the protest is over. They have twisted it to e a protest against the flag, the military, the song, everything BUT what it is about.
If all the other side brings to the table is utterly contemptible ignorance, if all they have indicated is that they are not listening in any way shape or form to the message being sent..  tell me one good reason to listen to them? 

 

 

~Bang

Edited September 27, 2017 by Bang

[grego]

8 hours ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

Kaep is a lot better than Griffin and he's not a complete coach killing head-case either. He's also infinitely better and overqualified than probbaly 90% of the current backups in the league. I don't think he's great by any means 

 

but you need to be committed to a system (we know this from griffin). hes not good at running a traditional offense (like mccoy can, even though mccoy is limted and less athletic than somebody like keap). now if theres a team running that kind of offense, or wanted to, hes your guy. but, if not (and i dont know of any teams running it or wanting to), then hes not useful as your backup. thats a large part of the problem, that doesnt even take into account the cluster**** that would ensue just with the media attention. it would be non stop. 

[justice98]

11 hours ago, Popeman38 said:

It’s not so much ch that he’s a crappy QB, but he has a specific skill set. And that does not mesh with many coaches. There are like 3 jobs in the NFL he would fit, and the Skins ain’t one of em. 

 

That's 3 more than about 50-75% of the terrible QBs junking up NFL rosters.  

24 minutes ago, grego said:

 

but you need to be committed to a system (we know this from griffin). hes not good at running a traditional offense (like mccoy can, even though mccoy is limted and less athletic than somebody like keap). now if theres a team running that kind of offense, or wanted to, hes your guy. but, if not (and i dont know of any teams running it or wanting to), then hes not useful as your backup. thats a large part of the problem, that doesnt even take into account the cluster**** that would ensue just with the media attention. it would be non stop. 

 

That's simply a false narrative.  I think people say it enough that the perception becomes reality, but it just isn't true. His QB rating from the pocket was better than the league average for backup QBs.

 

 

https://twitter.com/billbarnwell/status/872562095669358592/photo/1

Edited September 27, 2017 by justice98

[grego]

1 hour ago, Bang said:

 

 

as far as people not wanting to listen to thev other side..  well, the fact is this. The other side won't even recognize what the protest is over. They have twisted it to e a protest against the flag, the military, the song, everything BUT what it is about.
If all the other side brings to the table is utterly contemptible ignorance, if all they have indicated is that they are not listening in any way shape or form to the message being sent..  tell me one good reason to listen to them? 

 

 

~Bang

 

the protest is about one thing now, but it was about something else. 'I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color." this is almost word for word why abdul rauf 20 years before declined to stand for the anthem. he said it was a "symbol of oppression, of tyranny". 

9 minutes ago, justice98 said:

 

That's 3 more than about 50-75% of the terrible QBs junking up NFL rosters.  

 

That's simply a false narrative.  I think people say it enough that the perception becomes reality, but it just isn't true. His QB rating from the pocket was better than the league average for backup QBs.

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/billbarnwell/status/872562095669358592/photo/1

 

i dont think that stat says what you think it says. to say that kaep is a good drop back style qb is just not factual. we, of all people, know this as redskins fans.