Anyone who politicizes wearing or not wearing a mask on either side of the spectrum are morons. It's not a political statement. It's about being unselfish, taking precautions, and keeping everyone safe. It may or may not make a difference, but then again it might. There is literally nothing to lose by wearing one.

22 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

I am 100 percent ok with any form of non violent or non disruptive protesting.

That may be but you don't speak for all of America. Don't get me wrong some people are just looking for reasons to hate, but some could be legitimately behind the cause if they stopped doing the kneeling.  

5 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

I was against protesting during games because imo, it wasn’t the place nor time to do it.  

But what’s happened over the past few weeks will roll over into just about anything we do now.  If protesting somehow helps heal the country and lessen the division, I wouldn’t be against it; as long as those who are protesting respect those that choose to stand, etc.

 What I don’t want to see are teammates or fans calling each other out if they decide to do one or the other. 

See above

20 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

I am 100 percent ok with any form of non violent or non disruptive protesting.

It's going to be a never ending issue.  There are people that are OK with it and people that aren't.  We will never agree.  What I don't understand is that we live in this society where so much is cancelled if someone is offended, except for this matter.  You have let's say half of the NFL fan base who is clearly offended by the act of protesting during the anthem while still supporting your message.  Just asking that you do it during a different time.  Why do these people who are offended by the kneeling have to just deal with it while most other scenarios where someone is offended, changes are made.

This statue (not defending Confederate statues but others that have been) offends me, tear it down.  The name of this building offends me, rename it.  Your ad for clothes offends me, take it out of circulation.  George Washington offends me, cover up this mural. You're kneeling during the National Anthem offends me...deal with it.

Why can't there be a compromise be made so the people who clearly have an issue with the timing of the protest can be heard.  We aren't saying don't protest or that the cause doesn't matter, just asking for some respect of our opinions too.

Do you suppose the NFL follows the Trump campaign approach and makes folks sign a liability waiver before games, tests temperature to get admitted and makes masks and hand sanitizer available.  I would take it a step further and require the wearing of a mask. 

NCIggles will back me up on this, pre loss liability waivers have issues with enforcement in many states.  Some flat out prohibit them. Plus you can’t waive the rights of another.  That can mean heirs rights.  That can mean if one person buys the tickets and signs the waiver the other member of the parties haven’t executed one.  Almost universally, a parent cannot waive the rights of a minor.  In other words,  the enforceability of waivers is questionable.  Better to practice a large degree of warning, sanitation, masking etc. to try to establish assumption of risk but that wouldn’t work on minors.  I could see children barred from games this fall.

11 minutes ago, greend said:

That may be but you don't speak for all of America. Don't get me wrong some people are just looking for reasons to hate, but some could be legitimately behind the cause if they stopped doing the kneeling.  

See above

Of course I was speaking for myself and not everyone. So are you. "America" didn't tune out of the NFL when players knelt the first time around, a very small percentage of people did.

11 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

It's going to be a never ending issue.  There are people that are OK with it and people that aren't.  We will never agree.  What I don't understand is that we live in this society where so much is cancelled if someone is offended, except for this matter.  You have let's say half of the NFL fan base who is clearly offended by the act of protesting during the anthem while still supporting your message.  Just asking that you do it during a different time.  Why do these people who are offended by the kneeling have to just deal with it while most other scenarios where someone is offended, changes are made.

This statue (not defending Confederate statues but others that have been) offends me, tear it down.  The name of this building offends me, rename it.  Your ad for clothes offends me, take it out of circulation.  George Washington offends me, cover up this mural. You're kneeling during the National Anthem offends me...deal with it.

Why can't there be a compromise be made so the people who clearly have an issue with the timing of the protest can be heard.  We aren't saying don't protest or that the cause doesn't matter, just asking for some respect of our opinions too.

I didn't bash anyone for their opinion. I read it and then offered my own.

Just now, Boogyman said:

Of course I was speaking for myself and not everyone. So are you. "America" didn't tune out of the NFL when players knelt the first time around, a very small percentage of people did.

I didn't bash anyone for their opinion. I read it and then offered my own.

Didn't take it as a bash at all, respect your opinion.  I was just asking a general question using your response as a prompt.

12 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

It's going to be a never ending issue.  There are people that are OK with it and people that aren't.  We will never agree.  What I don't understand is that we live in this society where so much is cancelled if someone is offended, except for this matter.  You have let's say half of the NFL fan base who is clearly offended by the act of protesting during the anthem while still supporting your message.  Just asking that you do it during a different time.  Why do these people who are offended by the kneeling have to just deal with it while most other scenarios where someone is offended, changes are made.

This statue (not defending Confederate statues but others that have been) offends me, tear it down.  The name of this building offends me, rename it.  Your ad for clothes offends me, take it out of circulation.  George Washington offends me, cover up this mural. You're kneeling during the National Anthem offends me...deal with it.

Why can't there be a compromise be made so the people who clearly have an issue with the timing of the protest can be heard.  We aren't saying don't protest or that the cause doesn't matter, just asking for some respect of our opinions too.

This is a whole lot of words for telling protesters they cant protest the way they want and to "just deal with it"

45 minutes ago, greend said:

I'm sorry but there needs to be another form of protest. I have no issues with their message, they are not uniting America to their cause by disrespecting the National Anthem.

Something could happen but you should know it's very likely to be kneeling

It would be some insane backlash if Goodell stopped players now

45 minutes ago, greend said:

I'm sorry but there needs to be another form of protest. I have no issues with their message, they are not uniting America to their cause by disrespecting the National Anthem.

That would be the wisest choice.  But wise doesn’t always win out. Whoever named it defunding the police instead of repurposing back to their main function was a moron.  Almost as stupid as the criminal that burned down the small business, Wendy’s, in Atlanta. 

Just now, LeanMeanGM said:

This is a whole lot of words for telling protesters they cant protest the way they want and to "just deal with it"

Not at all.  My whole bunch of words offered reasoning and legit questions.  Again, that's the problem.  People who are against kneeling and truly feel offended by it are the ones being told just deal with it.  

How many times do people that don't like the timing of the protest have to say that we agree with the message just not the platform?  My goodness it's not like no one is aware of the problems in this society anymore.  

In the second quarter of the nineteenth century, the American Abolitionist movement organized. It was divided into three groups: colonialization, gradualism, and immediatism. The first group, of which Lincoln was a part, wanted to ship  the slaves back to Africa. The second said we want to abolish slavery but do it gradually, which in practice meant never. The third wished the thing to be done now, immediately. Immediately took about 40 years.

I think we’re facing a comparable moment here.One hundred fifty-five years of gradualism have not done the trick.

1 minute ago, bpac55 said:

Didn't take it as a bash at all, respect your opinion.  I was just asking a general question using your response as a prompt.

Got it. Protesting is always going to ruffle feathers and be controversial. I almost think it has to be or most people will not attention.

I will say telling someone how to protest an issue that is obviously important to them, while at the same time no one is being hurt or even personally inconvenienced, seems off putting to a lot of people. 

4 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

Of course I was speaking for myself and not everyone. So are you. "America" didn't tune out of the NFL when players knelt the first time around, a very small percentage of people did.

I didn't bash anyone for their opinion. I read it and then offered my own.

Where did I say all of America tuned them out? Did I say anywhere that I speak for all of America?  Do they just want to piss people off or get as many behind them as they can? 

1 minute ago, bpac55 said:

Not at all.  My whole bunch of words offered reasoning and legit questions.  Again, that's the problem.  People who are against kneeling and truly feel offended by it are the ones being told just deal with it.  

How many times do people that don't like the timing of the protest have to say that we agree with the message just not the platform?  My goodness it's not like no one is aware of the problems in this society anymore.  

Point is, its not supposed to make people feel comfortable. The more comfortable it is, the easier everything is swept under the rug. Players were sitting before during the anthem, and then compromised to a knee. So you are suggesting they should again compromise, when there is no compromise from the other side. 

1 minute ago, greend said:

Where did I say all of America tuned them out? Did I say anywhere that I speak for all of America?  Do they just want to piss people off or get as many behind them as they can? 

"That may be but you don't speak for all of America. Don't get me wrong some people are just looking for reasons to hate, but some could be legitimately behind the cause if they stopped doing the kneeling.  "

 

I didn't mean that I thought you said you spoke for all of America. I meant America spoke for itself as much as a lot of people were so much against kneeling, they still tuned in to football. I take that as it not really being as huge a deal as many claim it is.

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Point is, its not supposed to make people feel comfortable. The more comfortable it is, the easier everything is swept under the rug. Players were sitting before during the anthem, and then compromised to a knee. So you are suggesting they should again compromise, when there is no compromise from the other side. 

Sorry to tell you but I have given money and supported many causes the didn't make me feel "uncomfortable". What other "side" are we talking about here? Because I dislike disrespect to the flag I'm on a different "side". I wholeheartedly believe in freedom for all and want the laws to be fair to everyone. And I don't care what color the people kneeling are, or even if it was a cause that I supported for instance I'm against abortion but I'm not going to kneel during the national anthem over it, nor am I going to say that it's cool with me if my church group does it.

5 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Do you suppose the NFL follows the Trump campaign approach and makes folks sign a liability waiver before games, tests temperature to get admitted and makes masks and hand sanitizer available.  I would take it a step further and require the wearing of a mask. 

NCIggles will back me up on this, pre loss liability waivers have issues with enforcement in many states.  Some flat out prohibit them. Plus you can’t waive the rights of another.  That can mean heirs rights.  That can mean if one person buys the tickets and signs the waiver the other member of the parties haven’t executed one.  Almost universally, a parent cannot waive the rights of a minor.  In other words,  the enforceability of waivers is questionable.  Better to practice a large degree of warning, sanitation, masking etc. to try to establish assumption of risk but that wouldn’t work on minors.  I could see children barred from games this fall.

As a parent or guardian, you are ultimately responsible for the actions of your child (In most cases, depending on age, circumstances, etc.)  You are also responsible for their safety when under your guardianship.  If you as a parent are well aware of the risks, then you would be ultimately accountable for their safety.
 

 I can’t see any fair minded judge holding a professional sports franchise/league liable if a child at a game gets sick, especially if they are following all CDC guidelines in relation to social distancing, masks, sanitizing, etc   
 

Also, it would be pretty hard to prove; unless there was some sort of massive spike in infections among people that attended the game.  Even so, I would think that "assumption of risk” would come into play for the adult, who is also ultimately responsible for the minor. 

8 minutes ago, justrelax said:

The first group, of which Lincoln was a part, wanted to ship  the slaves back to Africa.

I thought Lincoln was a "free soiler," which was the group that opposed the expansion of slavery into territories but did not oppose slavery in states where it was established.

3 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

"That may be but you don't speak for all of America. Don't get me wrong some people are just looking for reasons to hate, but some could be legitimately behind the cause if they stopped doing the kneeling.  "

 

I didn't mean that I thought you said you spoke for all of America. I meant America spoke for itself as much as a lot of people were so much against kneeling, they still tuned in to football. I take that as it not really being as huge a deal as many claim it is.

I still tuned in because members of our team chose not to kneel and football is about the only sport I can stand. That could change though. 

Just now, greend said:

I still tuned in because members of our team chose not to kneel and football is about the only sport I can stand. That could change though. 

I can only speak about my personal experiences. But pretty much all of the people I know who said they would not watch because of the protests didnt really watch football anyway. 

Does anyone still think the medical staff has to do with injuries after what happened with Brooks? My main issue with the staff last season was how they treated injuries when they happened (i.e. lagging DeSean out and not having the surgery done even though it was reported that he didn't want to have the surgery and Howard's mysterious shoulder injury which lingered and somehow got worse during a bye week.)

I don't think there's really much you can do to prevent injuries. I mean in an odd twist of fate, Brooks was in the weight room trying to get stronger when he tore his achilles. I really think that this team is just snake-bitten. You can't prevent a guy from blasting Ertz in the ribs or spearing Wentz in the head to give him a concussion. The Chargers are another team that is in the same boat with having a ton of key injuries. It just happens and it's not really anyone's fault. 

 

Circling back to Reagor, I think it’s smart to let him focus on one position initially. Put the onus on vets like Goodwin and DJax to move around early in the season and keep things simple for the rookie. 

Since they’re starting him at the Z, I think that means they see him as a Z for the most part, but with the ability to eventually move around. That keeps him off the press as much, which again, is one fewer thing for him to worry about in a weird offseason with limited real reps. 

1 minute ago, justrelax said:

In the second quarter of the nineteenth century, the American Abolitionist movement organized. It was divided into three groups: colonialization, gradualism, and immediatism. The first group, of which Lincoln was a part, wanted to ship  the slaves back to Africa. The second said we want to abolish slavery but do it gradually, which in practice meant never. The third wished the thing to be done now, immediately. Immediately took about 40 years.

I think we’re facing a comparable moment here.One hundred fifty-five years of gradualism have not done the trick.

I will have to disagree somewhat on gradualism.  It was making progress in Northern states. Most of their laws abolishing slavery were gradual. That said, one should not assume that being a free black man in the North meant a person with equal rights treated equally in cultural society. That just wasn’t the case.  

It should also be noted that colonization wasn’t just a position taken by white abolitionists.  It was adopted by some blacks as well.  That resulted ultimately in Liberia. I have found limited reading on that subject but what I have found was some of the leaders towards going to Africa and founding Liberia understood the prejudices a freed black faced in America. 

3 minutes ago, BDawk_ASamuel said:

Does anyone still think the medical staff has to do with injuries after what happened with Brooks? My main issue with the staff last season was how they treated injuries when they happened (i.e. lagging DeSean out and not having the surgery done even though it was reported that he didn't want to have the surgery and Howard's mysterious shoulder injury which lingered and somehow got worse during a bye week.)

I don't think there's really much you can do to prevent injuries. I mean in an odd twist of fate, Brooks was in the weight room trying to get stronger when he tore his achilles. I really think that this team is just snake-bitten. You can't prevent a guy from blasting Ertz in the ribs or spearing Wentz in the head to give him a concussion. The Chargers are another team that is in the same boat with having a ton of key injuries. It just happens and it's not really anyone's fault. 

 

I think most of it is just bad luck to be honest. And the teams propensity to sign players that have bad injury history's.

8 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

I can only speak about my personal experiences. But pretty much all of the people I know who said they would not watch because of the protests didnt really watch football anyway. 

Speaking from my own personal experience people did stop watching