menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Kneeling penalty
Page: 2 of 4
mail
person
rpbobcat
5/24/2018 6:38 AM
Buckeye to Bobcat wrote:expand_more
The NFL is asking for it right now and they better be careful. This thing is going to drag into labor negotiations and I can't wait to see how this is played out.

That and the fact that Kaep and Reid have collusion lawsuits at it, if this is not enough evidence to go to court with I don't know what is.
I don't agree.

The alleged collusion is that the team owners collectively and secretly decided not to offer Kaep. a contract.

In this case,the owners voted to make a policy change on the National Anthem.
Its no different then when they put in the policy that all teams had to be on the field for it.
Last Edited: 5/24/2018 6:48:51 AM by rpbobcat
mail
person
Buckeye to Bobcat
5/24/2018 8:20 AM
That one crazy fan wrote:expand_more
The NFL should also enstate a rule that no food or alcohol sales should be made prior the the National Anthem and all restrooms should be locked. Any fan found waiting for those to open or roaming the halls during the time of the national anthem should be removed from the stadium, since the national anthem is truly THAT important.

While we are at it, they should also attach monitors to the TV's at home to make sure those watching are standing for the anthem. If Billy Bob can't stop cramming his face with nachos and get off his couch for the national anthem, then they just stop the feed to his tv for the duration of the game.

I mean it's only right if we truly care that much, right?
Funnier part is was at a game in Texas a couple months back and during the anthem the guy is eating nachos like it's nothing. Ten minutes later I hear him griping about the NFL and their stance on it. Called him out and he proceeded to go to another section.
mail
person
Alan Swank
5/24/2018 8:50 AM
Buckeye to Bobcat wrote:expand_more
The NFL should also enstate a rule that no food or alcohol sales should be made prior the the National Anthem and all restrooms should be locked. Any fan found waiting for those to open or roaming the halls during the time of the national anthem should be removed from the stadium, since the national anthem is truly THAT important.

While we are at it, they should also attach monitors to the TV's at home to make sure those watching are standing for the anthem. If Billy Bob can't stop cramming his face with nachos and get off his couch for the national anthem, then they just stop the feed to his tv for the duration of the game.

I mean it's only right if we truly care that much, right?
Funnier part is was at a game in Texas a couple months back and during the anthem the guy is eating nachos like it's nothing. Ten minutes later I hear him griping about the NFL and their stance on it. Called him out and he proceeded to go to another section.
Bingo and this explains it very well.

http://www.dispatch.com/sports/20180523/rob-ollers-commen...
mail
OU_Country
5/24/2018 10:31 AM
Yeah, I think the thread drift about racing was more fun than the topic at hand. :)
mail
person
bobcatsquared
5/24/2018 10:41 AM
Trump weighs in: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-...

Includes his variation of the juvenile "love it or leave it" stance.
mail
OhioCatFan
5/24/2018 10:46 AM
OU_Country wrote:expand_more
Yeah, I think the thread drift about racing was more fun than the topic at hand. :)
+1

Now about that Torch International Speedway . . .
mail
OU_Country
5/24/2018 11:04 AM
bobcatsquared wrote:expand_more
Trump weighs in: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-...

Includes his variation of the juvenile "love it or leave it" stance.
Most words out his mouth are juvenile. So the talk about racing remains, I'll leave it at that. ;)
mail
OU_Country
5/24/2018 11:06 AM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
Yeah, I think the thread drift about racing was more fun than the topic at hand. :)
+1

Now about that Torch International Speedway . . .
Ha! Yeah, I'm about to look at those links now. I'm already wishing I could make it to a track this weekend.
mail
bigtillyoopsupsideurhead
5/24/2018 11:34 AM
L.C. wrote:expand_more
The one place where people get confused is that some think it is a freedom of speech issue. It is not. It is well established that employers can regulate what employees say while on the job. NFL players doing this are on the job, and not on public property (while it is in public view, only players and invitees are allowed on the sidelines, not the general public).

That said, there is only one way this can go away. If the revenues fall enough to affect player salaries, the players union will stop it, but by the the damage may be irreversible.
Or they could just leave all the players in the locker rooms during the anthem like they did prior to 2009.
mail
person
catfan28
5/25/2018 11:29 AM
The easy solve here would have been to just make it like college where the anthem takes place prior to team entrances. Everything else (giant flags, flyovers, etc) can be the exact same. There may be a few gripes, but pretty much everyone would be happy.
mail
person
cc-cat
5/25/2018 3:58 PM
catfan28 wrote:expand_more
The easy solve here would have been to just make it like college where the anthem takes place prior to team entrances. Everything else (giant flags, flyovers, etc) can be the exact same. There may be a few gripes, but pretty much everyone would be happy.
But then it couldn't be politicized by our imperial leaders.

I'm just glad it was the Dept of Defense that paid the NFL to have an event right before kick-off. Had it been Bud Light that purchased the commercial time, the NFL would have a policy where the players would all have to yell "Dilly Dilly" right before kick-off, and Trump could tweet, "No Dilly, No play"
Last Edited: 5/25/2018 4:01:58 PM by cc-cat
mail
person
Alan Swank
5/25/2018 4:03 PM
Here's a guy who has it right.

http://abc7chicago.com/sports/warriors-steve-kerr-new-ant... /
mail
greencat
5/25/2018 6:59 PM
You ever notice how NHL players stretch, skate in place, wiggle around etc to stay loose during the "Star Spangled Banner" and (when needed) "Oh Canada"? This includes the biggest culprit PK Subban (one of my favorite NHL players).

I'm really surprised the faux-patriotic RWNJ clan hasn't melted down over it. Must be because the vast vast vast majority of NHL players are white.
mail
person
Deciduous Forest Cat
5/26/2018 2:27 PM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
Or we can just change the Pledge pf Allegiance to be more accurate

"I Pledge Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands,
one Nation under God, indivisible, with varying degrees of liberty and justice for all."

Let's not be upset at people protesting during the anthem, let's protest that we, as a country, are failing to live up to the pledge we make to the flag and the repulbic for which it stands.....oh wait that's what was being protested in the first place.
Say it brother. Amen!
+1
mail
person
BillyTheCat
5/26/2018 4:49 PM
bigtillyoopsupsideurhead wrote:expand_more
The one place where people get confused is that some think it is a freedom of speech issue. It is not. It is well established that employers can regulate what employees say while on the job. NFL players doing this are on the job, and not on public property (while it is in public view, only players and invitees are allowed on the sidelines, not the general public).

That said, there is only one way this can go away. If the revenues fall enough to affect player salaries, the players union will stop it, but by the the damage may be irreversible.
Or they could just leave all the players in the locker rooms during the anthem like they did prior to 2009.
But then the NFL could not charge the DOD as much for advertising
mail
person
Bobcat Grad 86
6/6/2018 9:44 PM
Last Edited: 6/6/2018 9:48:18 PM by Bobcat Grad 86
mail
person
Pataskala
6/7/2018 8:39 PM
The current occupant of the White House wants to deport players who exercise their First Amendment rights by kneeling during the anthem in protest of racism. But he wholly supports someone who sang the anthem way off key, then grabbed her crotch, before a World Series game -- apparently not in protest of anything. And the NFL kowtows to him by penalizing teams for their players' freedom of expression. Just making America grate again.
mail
person
L.C.
6/8/2018 8:26 AM
Pataskala wrote:expand_more
The current occupant of the White House wants to deport players who exercise their First Amendment rights by kneeling during the anthem in protest of racism. But he wholly supports someone who sang the anthem way off key, then grabbed her crotch, before a World Series game -- apparently not in protest of anything. And the NFL kowtows to him by penalizing teams for their players' freedom of expression. Just making America grate again.

As I pointed out above, the First Amendment has nothing to do with this. It is well established that employers have a right to control what employees say while they employees are on the job, and especially on company property. Football players on the sidelines are in a publicly visible location, but not a public place; you or I could not go stand there. They are also clearly on the job. If ESPN or NBC, or Starbucks, or whoever, can censure or terminate employees who say things while on the job that the company doesn't agree with (and they can), then football teams and censure or terminate employees for the same thing.
mail
person
Bcat2
6/8/2018 9:04 AM
L.C. wrote:expand_more
The current occupant of the White House wants to deport players who exercise their First Amendment rights by kneeling during the anthem in protest of racism. But he wholly supports someone who sang the anthem way off key, then grabbed her crotch, before a World Series game -- apparently not in protest of anything. And the NFL kowtows to him by penalizing teams for their players' freedom of expression. Just making America grate again.

As I pointed out above, the First Amendment has nothing to do with this. It is well established that employers have a right to control what employees say while they employees are on the job, and especially on company property. Football players on the sidelines are in a publicly visible location, but not a public place; you or I could not go stand there. They are also clearly on the job. If ESPN or NBC, or Starbucks, or whoever, can censure or terminate employees who say things while on the job that the company doesn't agree with (and they can), then football teams and censure or terminate employees for the same thing.
The billionaires can certainly tell the millionaaires to stand.
mail
person
L.C.
6/8/2018 10:20 AM
Note that if the players wanted to, say, protest on a public street downtown, then it would become a freedom of speech issue. As someone who strongly supports free speech, it's a little disconcerting to me that there is such a broad misunderstanding about what the doctrine means. The Constitution applies only the the government, not to private people, and not to businesses. Thus, you can kick someone out of your house if don't like what he says, or a business can fire people if they say things that hurt the business while representing the business.

Note that Congress can pass specific laws regulating what you can or can not do, or what a business can or can not do, but that is entirely separate from Constitutional rights. Those laws are limited by the Constitutional rights, however.

As to whether they CAN regulate what the players do, there is no doubt that they can. As to whether they SHOULD, that's up to them. They have an interest in keeping the fans happy, and an interest in keeping the players happy. They need to find a solution that works for both.
Last Edited: 6/8/2018 10:32:37 AM by L.C.
mail
person
Pataskala
6/8/2018 11:40 AM
L.C. wrote:expand_more
Note that if the players wanted to, say, protest on a public street downtown, then it would become a freedom of speech issue. As someone who strongly supports free speech, it's a little disconcerting to me that there is such a broad misunderstanding about what the doctrine means. The Constitution applies only the the government, not to private people, and not to businesses. Thus, you can kick someone out of your house if don't like what he says, or a business can fire people if they say things that hurt the business while representing the business.

Note that Congress can pass specific laws regulating what you can or can not do, or what a business can or can not do, but that is entirely separate from Constitutional rights. Those laws are limited by the Constitutional rights, however.

As to whether they CAN regulate what the players do, there is no doubt that they can. As to whether they SHOULD, that's up to them. They have an interest in keeping the fans happy, and an interest in keeping the players happy. They need to find a solution that works for both.
But their "workplaces" are public venues that in many cases are government owned (such as the LA Coliseum) or have been built at least in part using tax dollars through bond issues, etc. In such cases, they have the same limitations on restricting constitutional rights as the government does.
mail
person
Bcat2
6/8/2018 1:26 PM
Pataskala wrote:expand_more
Note that if the players wanted to, say, protest on a public street downtown, then it would become a freedom of speech issue. As someone who strongly supports free speech, it's a little disconcerting to me that there is such a broad misunderstanding about what the doctrine means. The Constitution applies only the the government, not to private people, and not to businesses. Thus, you can kick someone out of your house if don't like what he says, or a business can fire people if they say things that hurt the business while representing the business.

Note that Congress can pass specific laws regulating what you can or can not do, or what a business can or can not do, but that is entirely separate from Constitutional rights. Those laws are limited by the Constitutional rights, however.

As to whether they CAN regulate what the players do, there is no doubt that they can. As to whether they SHOULD, that's up to them. They have an interest in keeping the fans happy, and an interest in keeping the players happy. They need to find a solution that works for both.
But their "workplaces" are public venues that in many cases are government owned (such as the LA Coliseum) or have been built at least in part using tax dollars through bond issues, etc. In such cases, they have the same limitations on restricting constitutional rights as the government does.

Missing the point. During the game, at their place of employment, wearing the uniform of their employer, all are subject to the dictates of the NFL. Players are subject to team and/or NFL guidlines in place to represent the team/NFL in a positive manner as established by the team/NFL. While in the military I participated in many ceremonies. Had I chosen to take a knee during a ceremony I would have received assistance in seperating me from my proud service so that I might be free to protest unencumbered by the expectations, code of conduct, that comes with well representing the uniform. Players who wish to protest need to avail themselves of any oportunity on their own time, out of uniform. If the NFL no longer has their heart in this, players need to be hidden in locker rooms during the Anthem, they shoud stop pretending and drop the Anthem. JMHO.
mail
person
Cleveburg Bri
6/8/2018 2:40 PM
L.C. wrote:expand_more
Note that if the players wanted to, say, protest on a public street downtown, then it would become a freedom of speech issue. As someone who strongly supports free speech, it's a little disconcerting to me that there is such a broad misunderstanding about what the doctrine means. The Constitution applies only the the government, not to private people, and not to businesses. Thus, you can kick someone out of your house if don't like what he says, or a business can fire people if they say things that hurt the business while representing the business.

Note that Congress can pass specific laws regulating what you can or can not do, or what a business can or can not do, but that is entirely separate from Constitutional rights. Those laws are limited by the Constitutional rights, however.

As to whether they CAN regulate what the players do, there is no doubt that they can. As to whether they SHOULD, that's up to them. They have an interest in keeping the fans happy, and an interest in keeping the players happy. They need to find a solution that works for both.
I believe the current legal argument making the rounds is that the kneeling is (or can be) a protected concerted activity. Debatable, but certainly a viable argument. So there is at least some doubt whether the nfl can legally punish players for kneeling.
mail
person
L.C.
6/8/2018 4:52 PM
Cleveburg Bri wrote:expand_more
I believe the current legal argument making the rounds is that the kneeling is (or can be) a protected concerted activity. Debatable, but certainly a viable argument. So there is at least some doubt whether the nfl can legally punish players for kneeling.

Whether than can punish them for that or not is certainly an employment contract question. I don't think there would be any constitutional issues.

Note also that, even if they can do it, that doesn't make it a good idea. As raised above, the best alternative is probably to just keep both teams in the locker room until after the anthem.
Last Edited: 6/8/2018 4:57:53 PM by L.C.
mail
person
Pataskala
6/8/2018 11:17 PM
Bcat2 wrote:expand_more
Note that if the players wanted to, say, protest on a public street downtown, then it would become a freedom of speech issue. As someone who strongly supports free speech, it's a little disconcerting to me that there is such a broad misunderstanding about what the doctrine means. The Constitution applies only the the government, not to private people, and not to businesses. Thus, you can kick someone out of your house if don't like what he says, or a business can fire people if they say things that hurt the business while representing the business.

Note that Congress can pass specific laws regulating what you can or can not do, or what a business can or can not do, but that is entirely separate from Constitutional rights. Those laws are limited by the Constitutional rights, however.

As to whether they CAN regulate what the players do, there is no doubt that they can. As to whether they SHOULD, that's up to them. They have an interest in keeping the fans happy, and an interest in keeping the players happy. They need to find a solution that works for both.
But their "workplaces" are public venues that in many cases are government owned (such as the LA Coliseum) or have been built at least in part using tax dollars through bond issues, etc. In such cases, they have the same limitations on restricting constitutional rights as the government does.

Missing the point. During the game, at their place of employment, wearing the uniform of their employer, all are subject to the dictates of the NFL. Players are subject to team and/or NFL guidlines in place to represent the team/NFL in a positive manner as established by the team/NFL. While in the military I participated in many ceremonies. Had I chosen to take a knee during a ceremony I would have received assistance in seperating me from my proud service so that I might be free to protest unencumbered by the expectations, code of conduct, that comes with well representing the uniform. Players who wish to protest need to avail themselves of any oportunity on their own time, out of uniform. If the NFL no longer has their heart in this, players need to be hidden in locker rooms during the Anthem, they shoud stop pretending and drop the Anthem. JMHO.

The NFL and the military are two entirely different animals. Your point is invalid.

As for being subject to the dictates of their employer, all employers -- even the almighty NFL -- have limitations on how far they can undermine their employees' constitutional rights. For example, employers must allow their employees to take off legitimate religious holidays if they want. And they can't require employees to give to the company's PAC (a form of political expression). The best way for most players to make a statement is in on gameday. But if they have to stay in the locker room to make their statement, that's singling them out through exclusion, like excluding non-Christians from mandatory school prayers.

It's not the NFL's heart that's at issue. It's their money. They've been dropping TV ratings for years and pricing themselves beyond most people's budgets, so they can't afford to lose season ticket holders. I agree that if the NFL isn't going to be part of the solution, they should drop the anthem altogether. The anthem is a tradition, not a requirement.
Showing Messages: 26 - 50 of 93
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)