NFL?

[Bell206]

I don't care if the players take a knee, or stay in the locker room during the anthem. It's a free country.

I agree 100%... except when it's on my nickel. I pay (paid) top dollar for a ticket or a cable subscription to watch football not a protest. I have zero problems if they protest on their nickel. Maybe then I'll start going/watching again. Who knows.

I just wish we could have a real conversation

Like... don't break the law and the cops don't show up?

 

[Matthew]

It was interesting to watch that game last night, a home game for the Chiefs, and me being right here in town. I don't know anyone that went to the game, so I can't get an account from them on the mood of the fans that were there.

Because there was a Royals ball game going on at the same time, I caught a little bit of that before I switched over just before kickoff. I didn't know there was a different "National Anthem" that was played first. I was paying attention to the sidelines during the real National Anthem. One KC player was on a knee, I honestly expected much more. No players from Houston were on the field. Houston came out of the locker room after the anthem and then both teams met at midfield for a show of unity. That's when the crowd began making noises, and now I'm seeing a lot of blowback in some press stories about the "disrespectful" fans. Well, two can play that game, and the fans had paid enough money to also be allowed an opinion on what was going on - so those folks that are complaining about the fans last night can try to explain why one side gets the privilege of making a statement but another side does not. I can go on for a long time here, but I'm not going to.

Some of what happened last night was strictly for network ratings: many times the national anthem isn't even broadcast, it's a commercial break. But last night the network wanted to be part of "history", or whatever, and made sure not to miss a camera angle. That's the kind of thing that I think will fade away quickly when the networks figure out it costs them ratings. I think the NFL will be fine as soon as the first set of games are over and much of this kind of stuff wears off. Had they decided to celebrate the first game of the NFL season as some sort of moral victory over Covid, ratings would have been huge.

 

[SoonerAviator]

I am not sure how that really creates any incentive. If they all have to buy insurance, and then insurance pays the judgment, there really is nothing to encourage the individual officer to make better decisions. Besides, cops aren't paid much anyway. They are never going to individually pay the costs that they can inflict others if they violate citizens' civil rights.

Just like doctors . . . if they have too many incidents, their license can be pulled and they can be un-insurable. If a LEO wants to keep his ability to work as a police officer, he will need to ensure his actions are always in his best interests. If they have to buy insurance and has "skin in the game", they'll be more likely to adjust procedure and police themselves than when they operate solely behind the union curtain. Lots of poor cops with spotty records that never get axed, which sullies the majority of good cops.

 

[flyingron]

San Diego used to do the same thing, it's a very interesting way to treat your fan base. I doubt anyone here misses the Chargers

Roselle rule. The problem is that the teams stopped pretending the games were sold out.

 

[SoonerAviator]

There’s so much wrong with this, but I’ll let it go with one comment. It should be obvious that concern for the quality of education and remembering 3k American deaths is not the same as spoiled, entitled brats clamoring for even greater attention from their privileged platforms. You may want to consider exercising a little more discretion when painting with such a broad brush.

You didn't address my point at all. There is little, if any, "education" going on each year on a remembrance day. I was specifically advocating that your posted video clip painted with a broad brush, so pot, meet kettle. I actually cited in my example that it would be improper to assume that all boomers or all millennials are deficient based off of cherry-picked data.

 

[PPC1052]

I agree with almost all of this, but it's based upon the fallacious premise that there is widespread, "systemic" abuse within the police system.

I am not 100% sure what the "it" is that you are referring to when you say "it's". I am assuming the "it" is my post. If I am wrong, I apologize, but I wanted to state the assumption underlying my response for clarity. Feel free to set me straight if I am wrong. My response to you is to disagree that my statement is based on the premise of "systemic" abuse. I don't believe that there is "systemic" abuse. But, I do believe that there is more abuse than should be tolerated. We are never going to be perfect, and I don't expect us to meet that standard. That being said, when an officer that we depend on to keep the peace violates his or her oath, it is a bigger crime than when private citizen does the same thing. It undermines the faith in our government, and it should be punished accordingly.

What there is is constant, widespread coverage of the extremely rare instances of police brutality, and even then, only when the person being abused is of certain ethnicities. The vast, VAST majority of interactions police engage in with the populace, whether while enforcing the law and engaging with those participating in criminal behavior or while assisting and helping folks with problems, questions, or who've been the victims of a crime, are all very positive.

I agree with all of this. Many of the recent instances of police brutality are falsely presented by the media to continue a narrative. All police officers should be wearing body cams, and the footage needs to be shared in full immediately. So much that we think is so because of a snippet of video footage turns out to be completely false.

 

[Boone]

But, I do believe that there is more abuse than should be tolerated.

I’d be curious as to what shaped that belief and what makes you think it is being tolerated.

 

[PPC1052]

Like... don't break the law and the cops don't show up?

No. That's sophistry. Just because you have broken the law does not mean it's open season. On the other hand, when someone takes actions in the presence of the police officer to threaten the officer or others, let's not pretend like that's irrelevant when the officer decides it's necessary to use force. Let's not pretend that when someone resists arrest that it's irrelevant to the decision of the officer to use force. What I mean is that we need to discuss these issues and decide calmly before hand what the thresholds are for the legitimate use of force, and the levels of force permited that balance the need for safety of the officer and the safety of the perpetrator. This has already been done, and is set forth in the manuals for officer training across the country. But it seems that we need to revisit those polices and see which ones are right and which are wrong. Maybe we won't change any of those policies, but at least will have confirmed that the procedures are what they need to be.

 

[PPC1052]

I’d be curious as to what shaped that belief and what makes you think it is being tolerated.

Honestly, I don't know that I can really say. Certainly, no one thing. Just 50 years of living. Hearsay. Media reports. Television. Podcasts. Case law I have read. It all goes in to the mix.

edit: Let me also add that I have personally defended police officers and police forces that have been sued for violating civil rights of citizens. In those cases, I do not believe that they actually did violate anyone's civil rights. One case was featured on a national news show, and they left out some pretty important details in telling their story (like the plaintiff's knowledge of where to find his dead daughter's corpse.) I am no bleeding heart liberal, and I don't just accept the media narrative at face value.

 

[Boone]

You didn't address my point at all. There is little, if any, "education" going on each year on a remembrance day. I was specifically advocating that your posted video clip painted with a broad brush, so pot, meet kettle. I actually cited in my example that it would be improper to assume that all boomers or all millennials are deficient based off of cherry-picked data.

Like I said, there is a lot wrong with what you’re arguing. Primarily a confusion of categories and lack of discerning thought. There’s a difference between honoring/remembering/paying tribute and education, even though they overlap.
Memorial Day must really irk you with all that virtue signaling.

 

[Everskyward]

I'm pretty sure people remember 9/11 because that's what it's called. They haven't come up with some other name for it, and I hope they don't.

 

[Zeldman]

I can't forget the date. Today is my moms 89th birthday.

I also know the significance of March 06, 1836.

 

[EdFred]

I once ruint my chances with a girl, because we were at Hooters (her choice actually, and part of a group) and she said something about the 9/11 wings on the menu. I was like, "uh, those are 9-1-1 wings, you know because, hot, fiery, call the fire department."

(Insert McKayla Maroney image here)

 

[PPC1052]

Just like doctors . . . if they have too many incidents, their license can be pulled and they can be un-insurable. If a LEO wants to keep his ability to work as a police officer, he will need to ensure his actions are always in his best interests. If they have to buy insurance and has "skin in the game", they'll be more likely to adjust procedure and police themselves than when they operate solely behind the union curtain. Lots of poor cops with spotty records that never get axed, which sullies the majority of good cops.

I suppose. But one would hope that if there are that many instances that would cause an underwriter to deny coverage, the officer's employer would have decided to terminate employment.

 

[Zeldman]

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”–George Santayana, The Life of Reason, 1905.

Exactly.

There are folks today that are trying to erase part of Americas history. Like That guy in Germany tried to do to Germany in 1932.

If we don't know where we came from, how do we know where we are going?

 

[NHWannabe]

Love football, and am not offended by players’ freedom of speech. Then again I’m a .... (scary music) liberal.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from criticism. I doubt many of us could get away with projecting our political views in our workplace just ask Tim Tebow. Sports used to be an escape for most people, it's no longer that.

 

[SoonerAviator]

Like I said, there is a lot wrong with what you’re arguing. Primarily a confusion of categories and lack of discerning thought. There’s a difference between honoring/remembering/paying tribute and education, even though they overlap.
Memorial Day must really irk you with all that virtue signaling.

I'm not confusing anything. This was originally about your response to my comment regarding VJ-Day and why I don't believe it's important to know the exact date it happened. Claiming that kids are ignorant because of that sort of detail is virtue signaling, as if prior generations are more virtuous because they know such things. I have no problem with people reflecting on past events, but your stance was specifically that youngsters weren't being taught or were ignorant of historical events. Your video used the Holocaust as an example and likely heavily-edited to show students who couldn't cite what it was. So will having a Holocaust memorial day educate them? What does the day do to solve the problem you claim exists (assumed by your choice of video support)? I know for a fact that the Holocaust is part of the public school curriculum in just about every state in the US. So, it just seems like you're being disingenuous. I think you have a confusion about Memorial Day, as well, since it isn't a day to remember a particular event. May as well throw Veteran's Day and Thanksgiving in there, too. You must get mad about people refusing to celebrate Columbus Day based off of what you were taught in school about him.

 

[Everskyward]

Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from criticism. I doubt many of us could get away with projecting our political views in our workplace just ask Tim Tebow. Sports used to be an escape for most people, it's no longer that.

It's amazing how many people can't keep their mouth shut on the job, especially if they are in a customer facing position. We were specifically forbidden to to talk about politics to the customer, however some did.

 

[Half Fast]

I'm pretty sure people remember 9/11 because that's what it's called. They haven't come up with some other name for it, and I hope they don't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Day

 

[Everskyward]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Day

Count me among the clueless who had no idea. Glad it hasn't caught on.

 

[NHWannabe]

Until reading this, how many of you honestly remembered that today is September 11? And even more poignantly, how many here don't even know, or didn't immediately remember the significance of this date?

I lost a very good friend who was a member of Rescue 5. I never forget this day. I noticed the print edition of the NYT had nothing on the front page about the 9/11 anniversary.

 

[danhagan]

Until reading this, how many of you honestly remembered that today is September 11? And even more poignantly, how many here don't even know, or didn't immediately remember the significance of this date?

No problem here ... my brother was in the Pentagon that day ... luckily, he was ok ...

 

[Flocker]

100% Anti NFL. We were loyal Falcons season ticket holders since 1965. When Blank built the new stadium he told us we had to pay a seat license fee of $50,000 (x4) to renew our seats. That was it for us. Haven't watched a game since.

 

[RussR]

Regarding the "taking a knee", wouldn't the solution to that whole problem be to stop playing the national anthem, or any other song, before the game?

I never understood this about sporting events - what is the connection to a national anthem? I get it in the Olympics' medal ceremonies, where you're representing your nation, but I seem to remember when playing Little League baseball that we were able to start the game just fine without first hearing any song at all.

I just don't get the connection between the two. When did this start? Is it the same way in other countries?

 

[bnt83]

Sure stop the anthem, tax breaks and any taxpayer funding while at it please.

 

[Boone]

I'm not confusing anything. This was originally about your response to my comment regarding VJ-Day and why I don't believe it's important to know the exact date it happened. Claiming that kids are ignorant because of that sort of detail is virtue signaling, as if prior generations are more virtuous because they know such things. I have no problem with people reflecting on past events, but your stance was specifically that youngsters weren't being taught or were ignorant of historical events. Your video used the Holocaust as an example and likely heavily-edited to show students who couldn't cite what it was. So will having a Holocaust memorial day educate them? What does the day do to solve the problem you claim exists (assumed by your choice of video support)? I know for a fact that the Holocaust is part of the public school curriculum in just about every state in the US. So, it just seems like you're being disingenuous. I think you have a confusion about Memorial Day, as well, since it isn't a day to remember a particular event. May as well throw Veteran's Day and Thanksgiving in there, too. You must get mad about people refusing to celebrate Columbus Day based off of what you were taught in school about him.

Tedious, but oh well.

You called BS, kids are just as smart as ever about historical events. I posted a quick video showing college kids at quality schools totally ignorant of one of the greatest human rights abuses of the last century. BTW, a very similar scenario was also conducted on an IVY league campus with similar results. No one claimed that kids today are totally ignorant, or that the video was representative of all students. You brought that silly straw man into the argument. Those type of foolish rejoinders serve no purpose other than to derail the discussion and to confuse the topic. I also never claimed that it was a factual rebuttal that comprehensively refuted your statement. It was placed there for awareness, context and so that people can consider whether a similar display would have been likely 60 years ago. I suppose you’re arguing that there have been fundamentally no changes in education over the last 50 years, unless they were improvements. What it really seems like is that you got triggered because you were challenged.
You also said this:

As far as education vs virtue signaling, why must one make a spectacle each year to "remember" what they didn't forget? What part of that is education?

Who said remembering 9/11 is solely about education? Where is the argument made that the only reason we put flags out is to remember the date apart from context so that we can brag about how historically educated our kids are? You’ve taken an absolutely absurd line of argument. The quote you referenced spoke of historical events being unimportant. That’s a value statement and not strictly about bragging rights over trivia. BTW, who are you to impugn the motives of those who wish to remember a significant event? I periodically fly a flag at my house to honor a loved one killed in the line of duty. That is only virtue signaling to someone who thinks their perspective should rule all others, and doesn’t understand the importance of gratitude.

 

[PPC1052]

Tedious, but oh well.

I posted a quick video showing college kids at quality schools totally ignorant of one of the greatest human rights abuses of the last decade.

I find it shocking that they could find that many supposedly college ready students that were so ignorant. The school system has failed them miserably, and so have their parents.

 

[Boone]

Honestly, I don't know that I can really say. Certainly, no one thing. Just 50 years of living. Hearsay. Media reports. Television. Podcasts. Case law I have read. It all goes in to the mix.

edit: Let me also add that I have personally defended police officers and police forces that have been sued for violating civil rights of citizens. In those cases, I do not believe that they actually did violate anyone's civil rights. One case was featured on a national news show, and they left out some pretty important details in telling their story (like the plaintiff's knowledge of where to find his dead daughter's corpse.) I am no bleeding heart liberal, and I don't just accept the media narrative at face value.

With today’s news media, social media, and the people who make it their purpose to feign outrage, it’s easy to get a wrong impression.

 

[SoonerAviator]

Tedious, but oh well.

You called BS, kids are just as smart as ever about historical events. I posted a quick video showing college kids at quality schools totally ignorant of one of the greatest human rights abuses of the last century. BTW, a very similar scenario was also conducted on an IVY league campus with similar results. No one claimed that kids today are totally ignorant, or that the video was representative of all students. You brought that silly straw man into the argument. Those type of foolish rejoinders serve no purpose other than to derail the discussion and to confuse the topic. I also never claimed that it was a factual rebuttal that comprehensively refuted your statement. It was placed there for awareness, context and so that people can consider whether a similar display would have been likely 60 years ago. I suppose you’re arguing that there have been fundamentally no changes in education over the last 50 years, unless they were improvements. What it really seems like is that you got triggered because you were challenged.

So you admit that you posted cherry-picked video evidence to support your assertion that young people don't know history. Then, you admit that it isn't representative of all of them, so which is it? We don't have a good way to compare what education standards look like 60 years ago with a cherry-picked video, do we? I'd imagine you could have surveyed a lot of kids 60 years ago and asked them details about the War of 1812 or or similar and they wouldn't have been any more educated about it than current generations. I also never made any assertion about the changes in education over the last 50 years, in all honesty, I would imagine the scope of knowledge for the average child is greater, but the depth of knowledge in any particular subject is probably shallower, anecdotally of course.

You also said this:


Who said remembering 9/11 is solely about education? Where is the argument made that the only reason we put flags out is to remember the date apart from context so that we can brag about how historically educated our kids are? You’ve taken an absolutely absurd line of argument. The quote you referenced spoke of historical events being unimportant. That’s a value statement and not strictly about bragging rights over trivia. BTW, who are you to impugn the motives of those who wish to remember a significant event? I periodically fly a flag at my house to honor a loved one killed in the line of duty. That is only virtue signaling to someone who thinks their perspective should rule all others, and doesn’t understand the importance of gratitude.

I didn't make any argument about 9/11 should be solely about education. The ONLY time I even mentioned 9/11 was contextually when I lumped it in with a number of other US historical events, where I very clearly stated that I would rather people understand the significance of the event and its impact on future events rather than spending time re-sharing pictures with patriotic slogans on social media. Not sure what quote I referenced, but I never once used the phrase "historical events are unimportant", I asserted that the particular date of most events is relatively unimportant (i.e. V-Day, VJ-Day, etc). Someone not knowing off the top of their head what date marked the end of WWI is of little consequence, and I'd rather they know why the war started, who was involved, and what resulted from it. Forest for the trees. Speaking of triggered, seems like you're getting yourself wound up over things I never said. Maybe quit making assumptions into things I never stated. I'll leave it at that.

 

[Boone]

So you admit that you posted cherry-picked video evidence to support your assertion that young people don't know history. Then, you admit that it isn't representative of all of them, so which is it?

This is laughably fallacious and an insult to reasonable discussion. I should’ve heeded my instinct and a well known proverb. You represent the modern age well.

 

[midwestpa24]

I've never been big on pro sports to begin with. I don't spend much time watching tv in the first place. Spending hours on a precious weekend to watch a bunch of overpaid athletes play a rigged game with 5 minutes of ads every 30 seconds, doesn't carry much interest to me. And that was before it all got politicized, which is just another strike against it. Life's too short, and I've got better things to do.

 

[PPC1052]

I'd imagine you could have surveyed a lot of kids 60 years ago and asked them details about the War of 1912

I know I couldn't tell you the first thing about the War of 1912.

 

[SoonerAviator]

I know I couldn't tell you the first thing about the War of 1912.

Lol, nice catch. Very short war, so short that no one ever heard about it!

 

[OneCharlieTango]

I've never been big on pro sports to begin with. I don't spend much time watching tv in the first place. Spending hours on a precious weekend to watch a bunch of overpaid athletes . . . . Life's too short, and I've got better things to do.

I agree completely. Yet, here we are, posting to PoA. . . .

 

[Tarheelpilot]

I watch my NFL team regularly. I am certainly not a liberal. Far from it. I don't care if the players take a knee, or stay in the locker room during the anthem. It's a free country. Protest how you wish, as long as you are not destroying other's property or hurting people. The players' protests at the beginning of games clearly meets that threshold. Frankly, I abhor police abuse, too. Everyone should. I don't agree that every instance that is raised in the media actually is police misconduct. I just wish we could have a real conversation and analysis of acceptable police policy without everyone going to their own corners and coming out fighting. We need the police to keep the peace, and we need them to exercise the use of force judiciously. Let's re-evaluate police procedures and train our police to apply them fairly, punish those who don't and support those who do.

I’m not hard right or liberal. Straight down the middle moderate in most things. Some issues more right, others more left.

players have a right to feel anyway they want to and openly express those opinions anytime they want to except for when I’m paying them to entertain me. Then they can STFU and entertain me. How would you like it if I as the captain of your flight took the opportunity to protest or otherwise endorse my social and political views during my welcome aboard PA on your flight? Do you think I have a right to do that at work on your time and your dime. That’s what players are doing. They get paid to be there and entertain. It’s not their right to say **** squat about politics at work.

 

[midwestpa24]

I agree completely. Yet, here we are, posting to PoA. . . .

Ok got me there. Main difference is I usually just POA as a time killer or distraction while I'm waiting on one thing or another, and when convenient to me. Thats why some times I'm here a lot, then times I may be gone for days or weeks.

 

[PPC1052]

I’m not hard right or liberal. Straight down the middle moderate in most things. Some issues more right, others more left.

players have a right to feel anyway they want to and openly express those opinions anytime they want to except for when I’m paying them to entertain me.

Nothing says you have the right to tell them not to express their opinions before the game just because you bought a ticket. Your right is to simply not buy a ticket. Or to boo.

How would you like it if I as the captain of your flight took the opportunity to protest or otherwise endorse my social and political views during my welcome aboard PA on your flight? Do you think I have a right to do that at work on your time and your dime. That’s what players are doing. They get paid to be there and entertain. It’s not their right to say **** squat about politics at work.

I might buy a ticket on another airline, of fly myself. But I would never claim that you don't have the right to run your airline how you want to.

 

[Bell206]

Nothing says you have the right to tell them not to express their opinions before the game just because you bought a ticket. Your right is to simply not buy a ticket. Or to boo.

Agree. And that is what I stated earlier. What will be interesting is to see if the sporting fan base, i.e., revenue, starts to go south due to this increased change in the game. However, I guess if they ever start kneeling on the Golf channel I'll have to give up on all sports.

 

[Matthew]

Good news!!

Yesterday, the Kansas Department of Health and Environment amended their mandatory quarantine policy. Now if you attend an out-of-state mass gathering of 500 or more, wear masks, and maintain social distancing more than 6 feet you don't have to self quarantine. By sheer coincidence, that order was modified in time for the game last night.

 

[schmookeeg]

I'll not turn on a game. If I want political content, there are more than enough other sources.

I have been having trouble finding content consistently free of politics. It's pretty much down to tech and aviation anymore (and both have "moments" of flare-up)