NFL Kneeling

[pinstripers]

http://ijr.com/the-declaration/2017/10/987978-save-ratings-nfl-considered-five-solutions-anthem-protests/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Owned&utm_term=ijamerica&utm_campaign=ods&utm_content=Politics

[ShockerPhi]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...r-locker-room/


I love a good conspiracy as much as the next guy.

Hang on. Are you saying you believe that silly news story you posted the other day? Just because Carr injured his back? Even after we all pointed out that it was nonsense?

[pinstripers]

http://ijr.com/the-declaration/2017/10/988174-eyes-kneeling-players-real-story-seats-behind/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Owned&utm_term=ijamerica&utm_campaign=ods&utm_content=Politics

[pinstripers]

Hang on. Are you saying you believe that silly news story you posted the other day? Just because Carr injured his back? Even after we all pointed out that it was nonsense?

Just because he keeps getting sacked? I dunno, it hasn't been confirmed, but the rumor has showed up on legitimate sports sites now.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

I'll apologize up front if I missed any reply you made regarding @RoyalShock's post and the information contained in his attachment.

@jdshock, @CBB_Fan, @Rocky Mountain Shock, @ShockCrazy, and @ShockerPhi. Did you read, in its entirety, the attachment? Comments about the article or other information that would refute this information? I value your input.



I needed to "close" the cover of that twitter to be able to scroll down to Sept 25th where I found the video.

Yes, the gentleman makes a very good case and I do hope that all NFL players are sincere in their protest. However, I also will ask that they not take my position lightly that the type of protest they are making (or what they "appear" to be protesting) may very well be counterproductive with many they are targeting or that targeted others will simply say "OK, fine do your protest and get on with the game" basically trying to ignore it (intentionally or unintentionally) because this is NOT why they watch sports.

I will also say that this gentleman got my attention in not so good away when he started talking like a "good ol boy" and lumping anyone who disagrees with the vehicle of their protest with the comments he made in that tone. I took it as racist. It detracted from the otherwise solid message he wanted to make, even if I don't believe he really understands my, and others, position.

Lastly, I wonder what he, and the players, would think and say if the stats from Royal's post are indeed true as this is the basis of the protest. By the way, I feel it should be about so much more than the police in general (as that is just not true) and a small % of questionable police shootings and brutality. I have stated before, that police departments need to up their game and weed out as much as possible those that cannot handle intense situations and make more use of alternative methods other than lethal force.

First of all, thank you.

I did just have a chance to read the article. It is interesting and I do agree with some of its points. That the article comes from the National Review, an admittedly conservative publication, I am forced to be skeptical enough to gather information from other sources. The only scholarly publication I could find was from 2000, so I think its age limits its relevancy (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...tb00893.x/full).

An analysis by Harvard in 2016, but is only in draft form, finds blacks and hispanics are more than 50% more likely to experience the use of force when dealing with police, but find virtually no racial differences in officer-involved shootings. The conclusion of the paper is that only a small number of officers are influenced by discrimination. https://law.yale.edu/system/files/ar...eo16_fryer.pdf

More mainstream, Time (which is slightly left of center) has an article that reports minorities are more likely to be arrested by police but not killed (http://time.com/4422751/police-brutality-violence-race/). Vanity Fair (considered moderately liberal) actually has a very interesting and thorough article summarizing 18 different studies on police and racial bias (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016...ce-racial-bias).

I'm sure none of us are surprised that many studies, papers, and articles come to slightly different conclusions. On the most part, I agree they paint a picture that is not as dire or extreme as the protesters'.

However, I still support the protesters' right to protest. They believe strongly in their cause. In a populace that I feel is becoming dangerously apathetic, it is refreshing that they are standing up for a cause they feel is important. We need more of that. Americans, as a whole, are too disengaged.

[shockmonster]

First of all, thank you.

I did just have a chance to read the article. It is interesting and I do agree with some of its points. That the article comes from the National Review, an admittedly conservative publication, I am forced to be skeptical enough to gather information from other sources. The only scholarly publication I could find was from 2000, so I think its age limits its relevancy (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...tb00893.x/full).

An analysis by Harvard in 2016, but is only in draft form, finds blacks and hispanics are more than 50% more likely to experience the use of force when dealing with police, but find virtually no racial differences in officer-involved shootings. The conclusion of the paper is that only a small number of officers are influenced by discrimination. https://law.yale.edu/system/files/ar...eo16_fryer.pdf

More mainstream, Time (which is slightly left of center) has an article that reports minorities are more likely to be arrested by police but not killed (http://time.com/4422751/police-brutality-violence-race/). Vanity Fair (considered moderately liberal) actually has a very interesting and thorough article summarizing 18 different studies on police and racial bias (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016...ce-racial-bias).

I'm sure none of us are surprised that many studies, papers, and articles come to slightly different conclusions. On the most part, I agree they paint a picture that is not as dire or extreme as the protesters'.

However, I still support the protesters' right to protest. They believe strongly in their cause. In a populace that I feel is becoming dangerously apathetic, it is refreshing that they are standing up for a cause they feel is important. We need more of that. Americans, as a whole, are too disengaged.

Vanity Fair and Time are moderate like MSNBC is moderate. The media is overwhelmingly liberal.

[wufan]

First of all, thank you.

I did just have a chance to read the article. It is interesting and I do agree with some of its points. That the article comes from the National Review, an admittedly conservative publication, I am forced to be skeptical enough to gather information from other sources. The only scholarly publication I could find was from 2000, so I think its age limits its relevancy (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...tb00893.x/full).

An analysis by Harvard in 2016, but is only in draft form, finds blacks and hispanics are more than 50% more likely to experience the use of force when dealing with police, but find virtually no racial differences in officer-involved shootings. The conclusion of the paper is that only a small number of officers are influenced by discrimination. https://law.yale.edu/system/files/ar...eo16_fryer.pdf

More mainstream, Time (which is slightly left of center) has an article that reports minorities are more likely to be arrested by police but not killed (http://time.com/4422751/police-brutality-violence-race/). Vanity Fair (considered moderately liberal) actually has a very interesting and thorough article summarizing 18 different studies on police and racial bias (https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016...ce-racial-bias).

I'm sure none of us are surprised that many studies, papers, and articles come to slightly different conclusions. On the most part, I agree they paint a picture that is not as dire or extreme as the protesters'.

However, I still support the protesters' right to protest. They believe strongly in their cause. In a populace that I feel is becoming dangerously apathetic, it is refreshing that they are standing up for a cause they feel is important. We need more of that. Americans, as a whole, are too disengaged.

For the Harvard (Yale?) paper, I only read part of it as it was incredibly in depth. Overall, this seems like the right kind of research to be doing. It was incredibly bizarre, however, that the last statement in the paper was, in large font, “Black dignity matters.”

Huh?

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

Vanity Fair and Time are moderate like MSNBC is moderate. The media is overwhelmingly liberal.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

For the Harvard (Yale?) paper, I only read part of it as it was incredibly in depth. Overall, this seems like the right kind of research to be doing. It was incredibly bizarre, however, that the last statement in the paper was, in large font, “Black dignity matters.”

Huh?

That's interesting. When I view it, the font is no different from the rest of the paper. Appearances aside, like you I don't know what point the author is trying to make with that statement.

[shockmonster]

If anyone read the newspaper this morning, they had an article around a change of policy from USD 259 on the morning Flag Salutes. In the past, it was policy that students (who weren't Jehovah's Witnesses and had filed the correct paperwork), that students stand for the Flag Salute. Now, according to the article that enforcing students standing, is becoming a problem. Now the students will be allowed to sit if they do some paperwork.

Teaching RESPECT for the flag/our country is now problematic (it's always been a problem because it is natural for Middle/High School kids to buck rules, but evidently our schools have tried) and even though, the district will try to make this a teaching moment, I have a feeling that their words (of a noble experiment where people broke from Kingdoms to a democratic way to rule our country that has developed over time) will fall on deaf ears.

Many high school students enjoyed the movie "The Purge" (where government suspended rules for a time period and chaos followed). The attitude behind this movie over rebelling against authority in my opinion, just gained a stronger foothold in our schools. It all started with the NFL and mass demonstrations and has moved down.

[pinstripers]

So the commissioner of the NFL says that everybody should stand for the National Anthem. We all knew that already, and so did he. I'm tellin ya, it's always about the money.

[shockfan89_]

So the commissioner of the NFL says that everybody should stand for the National Anthem. We all knew that already, and so did he. I'm tellin ya, it's always about the money.

And Trump knew that when he made his initial statement and then doubled and tripled down. Trump with another win, the NFL, owners, and players that kneeled are now in a very bad position. It will be interesting to see if there is actually a rule "change" or if they start to enforce the current rules after this statement. I wonder if any players will continue to kneel and what the NFL will do to discipline them (fine, bench, remove from the team). The owners now have to decide between their employees and their customers. The NFL, and NBA, are in a tough position because their employees and customers have very different views on many items. Maybe they should have kept politics out of sports?

[pinstripers]

It will never come back. Baseball never really recovered from the players' strike.

[WuShock16]

It will never come back. Baseball never really recovered from the players' strike.

Not sure I agree with the baseball comparison. Baseball attendance numbers is generally pretty good as a whole. Lots of money is being made by MLB teams and players because people are spending that money to consume baseball, whether be in-person or through various media outlets.

It of course is much more of a corporate event than a family-friendly event, but that's pretty much the story with any level of major college or major league professional athletics.

[SHOCKvalue]

I predict with Goodell's proclamation will come a large public surge of confusion at the intersection of the First Amendment and its limitations when you are being paid for your time as an employee.

A learning moment for the intellectually disadvantaged among us.