PDA

View Full Version : Goodell intends to fine any NFL player wearing 9/11 tribute gear


Gort
09-09-2011, 10:10 AM
the 2nd worst commisioner ever is at it again... fines for you, fines for me, fines for everybody!

http://www.macsfootballblog.com/2011/09/nfl-players-could-face-fines-for.html

Aftermath
09-09-2011, 10:15 AM
Fine by me!

bronco militia
09-09-2011, 10:15 AM
what a dick....**** him for not planning for this

but enjoy your pink bull **** for the entire month of October!

BroncoFiend
09-09-2011, 10:17 AM
what a dick....**** him for not planning for this

but enjoy your pink bull **** for the entire month of October!

I guess you don't know anyone who has battled breast cancer huh? ha ha

bronco militia
09-09-2011, 10:20 AM
I guess you don't know anyone who has battled breast cancer huh? ha ha

nahh, that a good cause. just more hypocrisy from the league

LRtagger
09-09-2011, 10:22 AM
Not necessarily a bad thing...all fine money goes to charity and I would think they would send the money to a 9/11 fund.

TheReverend
09-09-2011, 10:23 AM
I hope the union shows solidarity and they ALL come out wearing em. **** Goodell

Gort
09-09-2011, 10:24 AM
I guess you don't know anyone who has battled breast cancer huh? ha ha

i think the problem is the hypocrisy of mandating fines for even the tiniest violation of the NFL uniform policy, except in cases where the league office jumps on board a politically correct cause and mandates that teams must alter their uniforms. i'd be all for the league raising money to fight cancer. but to choose one type of cancer and one group of funding recipients over all others is discriminatory. the NFL doesn't raise money to fight prostate cancer, or pancreatic cancer, or lung cancer, or any of a dozen other high profile cancers that kill people... but they jump on board the breast cancer "pink ribbon" campaign because it gets their owners and execs pats on the back at all the right cocktail parties in Manhattan.

however, what i really don't like is the fine-happy NFL of the current era.

bronco militia
09-09-2011, 10:25 AM
http://s1.proxy04.twitpic.com/photos/large/392878241.jpg

http://s1.proxy03.twitpic.com/photos/large/392879166.jpg

BroncoFiend
09-09-2011, 10:28 AM
What's odd is that article does not say that the NFL will fine them for wearing a tribute to 9/11, or even for wearing the shoes and gloves, just that the NFL has not approved them.

If they honor the memory of the victims of 9/11 in a different way (which they certainly will), why is he so terrible?

WABronco
09-09-2011, 10:32 AM
Public opinion will save the day.

Gort
09-09-2011, 10:34 AM
What's odd is that article does not say that the NFL will fine them for wearing a tribute to 9/11, or even for wearing the shoes and gloves, just that the NFL has not approved them.

If they honor the memory of the victims of 9/11 in a different way (which they certainly will), why is he so terrible?

don't kid yourself. they wanted to fine Manning $25K for honoring Unitas by wearing old-school black hightops. Plummer was fined $5K for simply putting Tillman's number decal on his helmet. anything having to do with a 9/11 tribute not expressly approved in advance by the NFL (i.e., Goodell's lackeys) will draw a fine.

Dr. Broncenstein
09-09-2011, 10:36 AM
http://images.oprah.com/images/health/200910/20091005-breast-cancer-nfl-shoes-290x218.jpg

Gort
09-09-2011, 10:44 AM
yahoo has picked up the story. more details here:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/NFL-players-may-be-fined-for-wearing-unauthorize?urn=nfl-wp6799

the money quote:

Players expressed confusion over why the NFL would deny them the chance to commemorate the 10th anniversary of 9/11 by wearing different cleats when the league provides pink apparel (including shoes) to be worn by teams to promote breast cancer awareness each October.

Dr. Broncenstein
09-09-2011, 10:49 AM
BRB designing apparel to raise awareness about seat belts.

Rock Chalk
09-09-2011, 10:51 AM
If every single one of them wears this stuff - which would really not be a violation as the word uniform means "the same" - then the fines @ 5K per player would = 8.48 million dollars, all going to charity and - in this case - most likely to a 9/11 charity.

Fine the hell out of those players, if they know the deal they will gladly pay that fine IMO AND they get to remember in their own way. Win for players. Win for NFL (enforcing their policy), Win for charity.

Not often you encounter win/win/win situations in life.

PRBronco
09-09-2011, 10:53 AM
I really don't think he'd actually do it.

Jetmeck
09-09-2011, 11:02 AM
The little dictator strikes again. This guy and McDummy would be best friends.
Uncompromising A-hole !

Garcia Bronco
09-09-2011, 11:10 AM
Roger Goodell is an asshole to the 10th degree. I'll be glad when he's gone.

Crushaholic
09-09-2011, 11:16 AM
I would have hoped that the NFL put together a league-wide tribute to the day. Would it kill them to observe a moment of silence before every game?

RhymesayersDU
09-09-2011, 11:18 AM
Public opinion will save the day.

Meaning?

Miss I.
09-09-2011, 11:20 AM
I would have hoped that the NFL put together a league-wide tribute to the day. Would it kill them to observe a moment of silence before every game?

they have a tribute. I figured they would so I looked it up:
http://www.csnchicago.com/09/01/11/NFL-plans-American-spirit-tributes-for-9/xfinity.html?blockID=557698

Key points:
1.Players, coaches and sideline personnel will wear an NFL 9/11 ribbon as a patch or pin on their uniforms and sideline apparel. All stadiums hosting games on Sept. 11 will feature the ribbon logo on the field.
2. the league and the NFL Players Association announced they will contribute $1 million to three memorials and two charities related to the events of Sept. 11, 2001. They will contribute $500,000 to the 9/11 Museum & Memorial in Manhattan, and $250,000 to be divided between the Flight 93 National Memorial in Shanksville, and the Pentagon Memorial Fund in Washington.
3. league and union also will donate all proceeds from the sale of auction items from Sept. 11 games to Tuesday's Children and MyGoodDeed
4. Pregame tributes will be synchronized on CBS and Fox telecasts and shown on videoboards in each stadium hosting games. Coaches, players and local first responders will hold field-length American flags for the playing of the national anthem.
a. ceremonies will include a video introduction, followed by performances of "Taps" from near the sites of the attacks, and moments of silence. For the early afternoon games, "Taps" will be performed in Shanksville, Pa., while the late-afternoon games will feature a rendition from Arlington National Cemetery outside of Washington.

Crushaholic
09-09-2011, 11:25 AM
they have a tribute. I figured they would so I looked it up:
http://www.csnchicago.com/09/01/11/NFL-plans-American-spirit-tributes-for-9/xfinity.html?blockID=557698

Key points:
1.Players, coaches and sideline personnel will wear an NFL 9/11 ribbon as a patch or pin on their uniforms and sideline apparel. All stadiums hosting games on Sept. 11 will feature the ribbon logo on the field.
2. the league and the NFL Players Association announced they will contribute $1 million to three memorials and two charities related to the events of Sept. 11, 2001. They will contribute $500,000 to the 9/11 Museum & Memorial in Manhattan, and $250,000 to be divided between the Flight 93 National Memorial in Shanksville, and the Pentagon Memorial Fund in Washington.
3. league and union also will donate all proceeds from the sale of auction items from Sept. 11 games to Tuesday's Children and MyGoodDeed
4. Pregame tributes will be synchronized on CBS and Fox telecasts and shown on videoboards in each stadium hosting games. Coaches, players and local first responders will hold field-length American flags for the playing of the national anthem.
a. ceremonies will include a video introduction, followed by performances of "Taps" from near the sites of the attacks, and moments of silence. For the early afternoon games, "Taps" will be performed in Shanksville, Pa., while the late-afternoon games will feature a rendition from Arlington National Cemetery outside of Washington.

Awesome...:thumbs:

underrated29
09-09-2011, 11:26 AM
i Cant wait to see what punter chris kluwe is going to do.


That guy is awesome and if he is anything like what we have seen from him before I will probably wear a flag as a cape when he is punting and kicking.

UberBroncoMan
09-09-2011, 12:01 PM
I guess you don't know anyone who has battled breast cancer huh? ha ha

It's to appeal to women viewers and create more of them. Nothing else...and it is bull****. Have it one week if at all. Personally I'd put some pink ribbons on the field, have the announcers remind people and call it a day. Where's prostate cancer month? How about testicular cancer? It's hypocritical. The end.

BroncoLifer
09-09-2011, 12:09 PM
i think the problem is the hypocrisy of mandating fines for even the tiniest violation of the NFL uniform policy, except in cases where the league office jumps on board a politically correct cause and mandates that teams must alter their uniforms. i'd be all for the league raising money to fight cancer. but to choose one type of cancer and one group of funding recipients over all others is discriminatory. the NFL doesn't raise money to fight prostate cancer, or pancreatic cancer, or lung cancer, or any of a dozen other high profile cancers that kill people... but they jump on board the breast cancer "pink ribbon" campaign because it gets their owners and execs pats on the back at all the right cocktail parties in Manhattan.



Spot on.

ZONA
09-09-2011, 12:26 PM
i think the problem is the hypocrisy of mandating fines for even the tiniest violation of the NFL uniform policy, except in cases where the league office jumps on board a politically correct cause and mandates that teams must alter their uniforms. i'd be all for the league raising money to fight cancer. but to choose one type of cancer and one group of funding recipients over all others is discriminatory. the NFL doesn't raise money to fight prostate cancer, or pancreatic cancer, or lung cancer, or any of a dozen other high profile cancers that kill people... but they jump on board the breast cancer "pink ribbon" campaign because it gets their owners and execs pats on the back at all the right cocktail parties in Manhattan.

however, what i really don't like is the fine-happy NFL of the current era.


Agreed - it's nothing but a popularity thing. Not many people have heard of small cell cancer but everybody knows about breast cancer. I swear I hate this **** up running the league now. What a total baboon. I think at the next draft, fans need to step it up a few notches. Instead of a thunderous boo session when he gets on stage, I think we need to see some flying shoes :)

<iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/xQQuQ2cYy1w" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

OBF1
09-09-2011, 12:29 PM
the 2nd worst commisioner ever is at it again... fines for you, fines for me, fines for everybody!

http://www.macsfootballblog.com/2011/09/nfl-players-could-face-fines-for.html


Do you know what pisses me off??? YOU DO.

Your thread title states: Goodell intends to fine any player...

The first line in the link you post states: NFL player COULD face fine


You are so ready to just whine, cry and complain about Goodell that you yourself start posting sh it that is not true.

I am all for players marking 9-11 in a way they feel they must, but for you to post BS is just as bad as the commish actully fining players for wearing "Tribute" gear

Rock Chalk
09-09-2011, 12:33 PM
i think the problem is the hypocrisy of mandating fines for even the tiniest violation of the NFL uniform policy, except in cases where the league office jumps on board a politically correct cause and mandates that teams must alter their uniforms. i'd be all for the league raising money to fight cancer. but to choose one type of cancer and one group of funding recipients over all others is discriminatory. the NFL doesn't raise money to fight prostate cancer, or pancreatic cancer, or lung cancer, or any of a dozen other high profile cancers that kill people... but they jump on board the breast cancer "pink ribbon" campaign because it gets their owners and execs pats on the back at all the right cocktail parties in Manhattan.

however, what i really don't like is the fine-happy NFL of the current era.
Part of this might be correct but you also have to consider the "mom" effect. Look, most of us love mom. Mom's are the rocks to most families, the stabilizing force. Without mom's, where would any of us be? So when breast cancer hits mom, it hits home...hard. And I think that the Breast Cancer awareness people have capitalized on that. They have all sports involved and it has raised a ton of money for breast cancer research which, in turn, has led to all sorts of new treatments for breast cancer patients. Many of which now beat it when they did not before.

So dad gets prostate cancer and gets no awareness for his prostate cancer. As a dad, I accept that. Kinda like dad's everywhere accept that if there is a burning building or sinking boat, women and children go first. If we make it, great, but mom's and children are more important.

Is it hypocritical? Probably, especially in an age where we are, as a society, STRIVING for equality for all types of people and both genders. But who cares? It seems such a petty thing to be upset about. We all die someday (contrary to what the health nuts tell you, they too will die).

Now, if I get prostate cancer, bet your ass Im going to complain :)

Mogulseeker
09-09-2011, 12:36 PM
I don't like this, but it is understandable cause it could set a precedent for other things. I think some players will wear it anyway and pay the fine as a "donation" of sorts to 9/11 charities.

I remember Plummer getting fined after he had a #40 sticker on his helment to honor Pat Tillman... he wore it anyway and payed the fine.

DomCasual
09-09-2011, 12:39 PM
i think the problem is the hypocrisy of mandating fines for even the tiniest violation of the NFL uniform policy, except in cases where the league office jumps on board a politically correct cause and mandates that teams must alter their uniforms. i'd be all for the league raising money to fight cancer. but to choose one type of cancer and one group of funding recipients over all others is discriminatory. the NFL doesn't raise money to fight prostate cancer, or pancreatic cancer, or lung cancer, or any of a dozen other high profile cancers that kill people... but they jump on board the breast cancer "pink ribbon" campaign because it gets their owners and execs pats on the back at all the right cocktail parties in Manhattan.

however, what i really don't like is the fine-happy NFL of the current era.

Why should the NFL have to cave on what causes it supports? This seems like a strange argument, coming from a guy with the moniker WhoIsJohnGalt.

If I own a company, and I decide that my company is best served by having my employees wear flip-flops to work, then I can decree that they wear flip-flops.

I am really playing devil's advocate here. I think the NFL tends towards pettiness with things like this. But at the same time, I totally understand their point, in theory. They are protecting their brand.

Where do you stop when allowing individual public displays like this? If you allow 9/11 tributes, or Pat Tillman tributes, what do you do when:

1) Player X's grandma dies, and he wants to wear her favorite Bible verse on his socks; or
2) Player Y, a practicing Wiccan, wants to put Merry Meet on the back of his shoes; or
3) Player Z, an Irishman, puts a big shamrock on his towel?

Do you decided on an individual basis what cause is just, and what cause isn't? Do you do it by public opinion? If so, who decides? And who pays to defend the lawsuit when you nix the wrong person's cause?

The NFL isn't a government service. It's a business. They can do what they deem to be in the best interests of their business.

Kaylore
09-09-2011, 12:39 PM
Part of this might be correct but you also have to consider the "mom" effect. Look, most of us love mom. Mom's are the rocks to most families, the stabilizing force. Without mom's, where would any of us be? So when breast cancer hits mom, it hits home...hard. And I think that the Breast Cancer awareness people have capitalized on that. They have all sports involved and it has raised a ton of money for breast cancer research which, in turn, has led to all sorts of new treatments for breast cancer patients. Many of which now beat it when they did not before.

So dad gets prostate cancer and gets no awareness for his prostate cancer. As a dad, I accept that. Kinda like dad's everywhere accept that if there is a burning building or sinking boat, women and children go first. If we make it, great, but mom's and children are more important.

Is it hypocritical? Probably, especially in an age where we are, as a society, STRIVING for equality for all types of people and both genders. But who cares? It seems such a petty thing to be upset about. We all die someday (contrary to what the health nuts tell you, they too will die).

Now, if I get prostate cancer, bet your ass Im going to complain :)
Also, men everywhere are willing fight for a pair of nice tits.

Rock Chalk
09-09-2011, 12:39 PM
Also, men everywhere are willing fight for a pair of nice boobies.

Best.Campaign.Ever.

"Save the TaTa's"

OBF1
09-09-2011, 12:40 PM
PER ESPN......


Chicago Bears linebacker Lance Briggs intends to wear gloves and cleats in the colors of the United States flag on Sept. 11 against the Atlanta Falcons -- and might not be fined for violating uniform policy.
"Reebok great job on these gloves and shoes..looks like I'm getting fined this week. Lol!" Briggs tweeted Thursday. "By far the best fine I will ever have to pay. Thanks"

League spokesman Greg Aiello, however, sent an email to ESPN Radio's "Mike & Mike In The Morning" show Friday saying Briggs "thinks he will be fined. I don't think he will be."

All NFL players Sunday will have a patch on their jerseys featuring a ribbon with stars and stripes along with the dates "9/11/01" and "9/11/11." Coaches, personnel and staff will have pins featuring a similar ribbon.

The NFL is believed to have the most extensive dress-code rules among the four major sports and does not take uniform violations lightly.



Again, the original poster is looking to post incorrect thread titles just to get attention.

Gort
09-09-2011, 12:40 PM
Do you know what pisses me off??? YOU DO.

Your thread title states: Goodell intends to fine any player...

The first line in the link you post states: NFL player COULD face fine


You are so ready to just whine, cry and complain about Goodell that you yourself start posting sh it that is not true.

I am all for players marking 9-11 in a way they feel they must, but for you to post BS is just as bad as the commish actully fining players for wearing "Tribute" gear

what i posted is true. they will face fines unless there is enough public pressure for the NFL to ease off on the fines for the 9/11 anniversary.

do yourself a favor and read about the history of uniform fines in the NFL before you try and call me out. they are over-the-top ridiculous in what gets fined.

http://www.uniformviolation.com/RulesRegs/RulesRegs-NFL-Gen.php

http://www.uniformviolation.com/ViolationDetails-NFL.php?vid=19&ln=Redman

OBF1
09-09-2011, 12:42 PM
Why should the NFL have to cave on what causes it supports? This seems like a strange argument, coming from a guy with the moniker WhoIsJohnGalt.

If I own a company, and I decide that my company is best served by having my employees wear flip-flops to work, then I can decree that they wear flip-flops.

I am really playing devil's advocate here. I think the NFL tends towards pettiness with things like this. But at the same time, I totally understand their point, in theory. They are protecting their brand.

Where do you stop when allowing individual public displays like this? If you allow 9/11 tributes, or Pat Tillman tributes, what do you do when:

1) Player X's grandma dies, and he wants to wear her favorite Bible verse on his socks; or
2) Player Y, a practicing Wiccan, wants to put Merry Meet on the back of his shoes; or
3) Player Z, an Irishman, puts a big shamrock on his towel?

Do you decided on an individual basis what cause is just, and what cause isn't? Do you do it by public opinion? If so, who decides? And who pays to defend the lawsuit when you nix the wrong person's cause?

The NFL isn't a government service. It's a business. They can do what they deem to be in the best interests of their business.

Someone gets it. REP

Gort
09-09-2011, 12:42 PM
PER ESPN......


Chicago Bears linebacker Lance Briggs intends to wear gloves and cleats in the colors of the United States flag on Sept. 11 against the Atlanta Falcons -- and might not be fined for violating uniform policy.
"Reebok great job on these gloves and shoes..looks like I'm getting fined this week. Lol!" Briggs tweeted Thursday. "By far the best fine I will ever have to pay. Thanks"

League spokesman Greg Aiello, however, sent an email to ESPN Radio's "Mike & Mike In The Morning" show Friday saying Briggs "thinks he will be fined. I don't think he will be."

All NFL players Sunday will have a patch on their jerseys featuring a ribbon with stars and stripes along with the dates "9/11/01" and "9/11/11." Coaches, personnel and staff will have pins featuring a similar ribbon.

The NFL is believed to have the most extensive dress-code rules among the four major sports and does not take uniform violations lightly.



Again, the original poster is looking to post incorrect thread titles just to get attention.

stop being stupid. read the actual NFL rules. the rules call for a fine if the players were to wear these shoes without prior league approval. that's a fact.

DomCasual
09-09-2011, 12:46 PM
Take that 9/11 thread the other day. How could starting a thread saying, "Man, 9/11 - that sucked. Good people died! Poor them!" become such a crapstorm that it gets moved to the bowels of the WRP forum?

It wasn't political - at least, it wasn't started that way. But it took all of an hour for someone to jump in and make it political. And so, something with good intentions gets smeared with crap.

Why would the NFL ever want to open up that Pandora's Box? What's greater: the risk, or the potential reward?

Gort
09-09-2011, 12:46 PM
I don't like this, but it is understandable cause it could set a precedent for other things. I think some players will wear it anyway and pay the fine as a "donation" of sorts to 9/11 charities.

I remember Plummer getting fined after he had a #40 sticker on his helment to honor Pat Tillman... he wore it anyway and payed the fine.

the uniform rules started out as a mean to ensure player safety. then they morphed into rules to protect league licensing agreements. now, they are just rules for the sake of being rules.

remember about 20 years ago when they started passing laws requiring seatbelts to be worn? i do. they were sold to the public as being violations that wouldn't be ticketed unless a driver was pulled over for some other reason. now that they are law, these can be primary violations that a cop will use to pull you over and issue you a ticket (i.e., tax for the local jurisdiction). i always wear seatbelts and always did before they were required by law, but this is an example of how a rule/law passed for one reason easily morphs into something it was never supposed to be.

Bob's your Information Minister
09-09-2011, 12:52 PM
NFLfootballinfo Michael Signora
by JasonLaCanfora
NFL confirmed to clubs this morning that players may wear special shoes & gloves from NFL licensees for Week 1 games.

Gort
09-09-2011, 12:52 PM
Why should the NFL have to cave on what causes it supports? This seems like a strange argument, coming from a guy with the moniker WhoIsJohnGalt.

If I own a company, and I decide that my company is best served by having my employees wear flip-flops to work, then I can decree that they wear flip-flops.

I am really playing devil's advocate here. I think the NFL tends towards pettiness with things like this. But at the same time, I totally understand their point, in theory. They are protecting their brand.

Where do you stop when allowing individual public displays like this? If you allow 9/11 tributes, or Pat Tillman tributes, what do you do when:

1) Player X's grandma dies, and he wants to wear her favorite Bible verse on his socks; or
2) Player Y, a practicing Wiccan, wants to put Merry Meet on the back of his shoes; or
3) Player Z, an Irishman, puts a big shamrock on his towel?

Do you decided on an individual basis what cause is just, and what cause isn't? Do you do it by public opinion? If so, who decides? And who pays to defend the lawsuit when you nix the wrong person's cause?

The NFL isn't a government service. It's a business. They can do what they deem to be in the best interests of their business.

you use common sense, which seems to be in short supply these days.

somebody's friend dies and he wears the guy's number on his helmet as a silent tribute, you don't fine him for it.

when something is done with good intentions and not self-aggrandizement and is done tastefully, then the NFL should leave it alone. when its not, you can dole out fines.

it's like art. you can't define it, but you know it when you see it.

once upon a time, this whole country was acquainted with the concept of common sense. then the lawyers grabbed control and started writing rules about how everything is supposed to be and how it should not be and most of the country started to think that laws and rules and regulations trumped common sense. i don't.

OBF1
09-09-2011, 12:54 PM
what i posted is true. they will face fines unless there is enough public pressure for the NFL to ease off on the fines for the 9/11 anniversary.

do yourself a favor and read about the history of uniform fines in the NFL before you try and call me out. they are over-the-top ridiculous in what gets fined.

http://www.uniformviolation.com/RulesRegs/RulesRegs-NFL-Gen.php

http://www.uniformviolation.com/ViolationDetails-NFL.php?vid=19&ln=Redman


It is so simple for the average joe to know the difference between "Intends" ( to plan or want to do, something) and "Could" (used to express possibility)

You stating that the commissioner intends to fine players for wearing 9/11 gear and then you follow it up with, and I quote, " the 2nd worst commisioner ever is at it again... fines for you, fines for me, fines for everybody"

Dude, you are no better than SoCal with his hate for anything Patrick Bowlen with your crying about Goodell. Reading the NFL rules on dress code does not mean sh it in this instance. Now the NFL spokesman has come out and said he DOUBTS (Briggs) will get fined. Bottom line, you are wrong with your thread title plain and simple.


PS: Learn how to spell commissioner

Gort
09-09-2011, 12:55 PM
NFLfootballinfo Michael Signora
by JasonLaCanfora
NFL confirmed to clubs this morning that players may wear special shoes & gloves from NFL licensees for Week 1 games.

good. i'm sure yahoo picking this up this story served as a necessary kick in the pants to the NFL league office.

Gort
09-09-2011, 01:01 PM
It is so simple for the average joe to know the difference between "Intends" ( to plan or want to do, something) and "Could" (used to express possibility)

You stating that the commissioner intends to fine players for wearing 9/11 gear and then you follow it up with, and I quote, " the 2nd worst commisioner ever is at it again... fines for you, fines for me, fines for everybody"

Dude, you are no better than SoCal with his hate for anything Patrick Bowlen with your crying about Goodell. Reading the NFL rules on dress code does not mean sh it in this instance. Now the NFL spokesman has come out and said he DOUBTS (Briggs) will get fined. Bottom line, you are wrong with your thread title plain and simple.


PS: Learn how to spell commissioner

oh shut up and get off your ivory tower. i've posted 2 thread EVER about Goodell and they both happened to be within this past week. what's wrong, are you related to him?

do you know anything about how newspapers write headlines? are you not aware that the same rules apply to forum threads?

i've seen threads on here titled simply "Tebow sucks" and "Orton sucks" and "Plummer sucks". did you ever complain on those threads that the titles were misleading? no you didn't. those thread titles are not strictly factual.

anybody with an ounce of common sense understands that "Goodell intends" is also functionally equivalent to "the NFL league office is expected to", but my version is shorter. and its written to grab attention, like a newspaper headline.

and i'll spell "komissuner" any goddamned way i want to spell "comishunher", capice?

DomCasual
09-09-2011, 01:07 PM
you use common sense, which seems to be in short supply these days.

somebody's friend dies and he wears the guy's number on his helmet as a silent tribute, you don't fine him for it.

when something is done with good intentions and not self-aggrandizement and is done tastefully, then the NFL should leave it alone. when its not, you can dole out fines.

it's like art. you can't define it, but you know it when you see it.

once upon a time, this whole country was acquainted with the concept of common sense. then the lawyers grabbed control and started writing rules about how everything is supposed to be and how it should not be and most of the country started to think that laws and rules and regulations trumped common sense. i don't.

Okay, let's go with the "common sense" angle.

Player X has a homosexual brother. He loves his brother. His brother is a gay-rights activist, and has all but given his life for his cause. One day, his brother is arrested at a gay-rights rally - wrongfully arrested, according to the court of public opinion. Maybe his brother even gets roughed up a little, in the process. It's on the news. People are talking about it.

Player X wants to wear shoes with the color of a rainbow, in honor of his brother.

So, where do you apply the "common sense" tag? His brother is a good person - a moral person! Let's say, oh, 60% of Americans think that Player X's brother is getting railroaded.

20% of Americans don't really care much about the issue. But that other 20% care enough that they are willing to do something about it. They HATE homosexuals! Maybe they're closeted homosexuals themselves. Maybe they're just homophobes and bigots. Maybe they have religious convictions against homosexuality. The reasons don't matter. What DOES matter is that they are PAYING CUSTOMERS, and by damn, THEY WILL BE HEARD!

So, whose common sense do you follow? Player X's? Or the 20% of your customer base that is going to be so pissed off, they're going to keep their wallets in their pockets?

It gets complicated, no? Why even get in the middle of all that? Why not just sell your product? When does player's individual expression cross the line to the league being complicit in promoting a cause?

hambone13
09-09-2011, 01:12 PM
oh shut up and get off your ivory tower. i've posted 2 thread EVER about Goodell and they both happened to be within this past week. what's wrong, are you related to him?

do you know anything about how newspapers write headlines? are you not aware that the same rules apply to forum threads?

i've seen threads on here titled simply "Tebow sucks" and "Orton sucks" and "Plummer sucks". did you ever complain on those threads that the titles were misleading? no you didn't. those thread titles are not strictly factual.

anybody with an ounce of common sense understands that "Goodell intends" is also functionally equivalent to "the NFL league office is expected to", but my version is shorter. and its written to grab attention, like a newspaper headline.

and i'll spell "komissuner" any goddamned way i want to spell "comishunher", capice?

I understand the general idea of maintaining control of elements that are profitable and significant in ones business. I do not condone BS rules where a commissioner of a multi-billion dollar sports league would find any value in his players NOT showing nationalism or patriotism on a significant day in history. While the corporations seem to have taken control of our government and big business has taken control of our top sport, let the players show a little American spirit and STFU. Goodell can suck it. Have some balls you corporate pundit. We don't watch football to watch your jackass wield your political power.

Rock Chalk
09-09-2011, 01:16 PM
stop being stupid. read the actual NFL rules. the rules call for a fine if the players were to wear these shoes without prior league approval. that's a fact.

And another fact is that the NFL is under no obligation to ENFORCE any rule.

Kinda like how Obama is under no obligation to enforce legal citizenship.

DomCasual
09-09-2011, 01:16 PM
I understand the general idea of maintaining control of elements that are profitable and significant in ones business. I do not condone BS rules where a commissioner of a multi-billion dollar sports league would find any value in his players NOT showing nationalism or patriotism on a significant day in history. While the corporations seem to have taken control of our government and big business has taken control of our top sport, let the players show a little American spirit and STFU. Goodell can suck it. Have some balls you corporate pundit. We don't watch football to watch your jackass wield your political power.

Okay, so let's go with that!

Why DO you watch football?

OBF1
09-09-2011, 01:18 PM
I like puppies

That One Guy
09-09-2011, 01:20 PM
LOL

Thread starter is a dork.

Though, I'll agree that big media picking up the story surely didn't hurt the end-state.

Gort
09-09-2011, 01:21 PM
Okay, let's go with the "common sense" angle.

Player X has a homosexual brother. He loves his brother. His brother is a gay-rights activist, and has all but given his life for his cause. One day, his brother is arrested at a gay-rights rally - wrongfully arrested, according to the court of public opinion. Maybe his brother even gets roughed up a little, in the process. It's on the news. People are talking about it.

Player X wants to wear shoes with the color of a rainbow, in honor of his brother.

So, where do you apply the "common sense" tag? His brother is a good person - a moral person! Let's say, oh, 60% of Americans think that Player X's brother is getting railroaded.

20% of Americans don't really care much about the issue. But that other 20% care enough that they are willing to do something about it. They HATE homosexuals! Maybe they're closeted homosexuals themselves. Maybe they're just homophobes and bigots. Maybe they have religious convictions against homosexuality. The reasons don't matter. What DOES matter is that they are PAYING CUSTOMERS, and by damn, THEY WILL BE HEARD!

So, whose common sense do you follow? Player X's? Or the 20% of your customer base that is going to be so pissed off, they're going to keep their wallets in their pockets?

It gets complicated, no? Why even get in the middle of all that? Why not just sell your product? When does player's individual expression cross the line to the league being complicit in promoting a cause?

what's the purpose? is he wearing the shoes so that his gay brother will see them from his jail cell while watching the game as a silent show of support? or is he wearing them because he wants to be the center of attention so that he'll get interviews about his shoes, giving him a platform to rail about whatever it is he wants to rail about? the shoes by themselves aren't the issue... the intent of the guy wearing them is. was Plummer seeking attention when wearing Tillman's number? no. was Manning seeking attention when he wanted to wear black hightops? no. was Chad Johnson simply seeking attention the multiple times he violated the uniform code? yes. so long as somebody wants to make a temporary, tasteful tribute for whatever they want (within reason of course... here's where common sense comes in. e.g., you can't put a swastika on your helmet), the league should have a mechanism to allow it. if you want to make a spectacle of yourself to promote your reality TV show or some such nonsense like that, then i'd say fine the guy.

about those 9/11 shoes. i think they're hideous. i wouldn't wear them. but there are some players who feel strongly that they want to do something above and beyond on this 10th anniversary. as a onetime thing, i'm fine with it. to them, and to lots of people, it will have an extra significance. except for the "blame America first" people in the audience, how can anyone be upset with a little bit of patriotic remembrance exactly 10 years to the day later?

crowebomber
09-09-2011, 01:25 PM
Public opinion is a powerful thing. We should remember that more often.


NFL says players can wear red, white and blue on 9/11

Posted by Michael David Smith on September 9, 2011, 3:30 PM EDT
http://nbcprofootballtalk.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/usflagap.jpg?w=250 AP The NFL will not fine players for wearing red, white and blue on 9/11.
That commonsense decision came down today, a day after Bears linebacker Lance Briggs (http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/2438/lance-briggs) said he would wear red, white and blue gloves and shoes and was expecting a fine from the NFL (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/09/08/lance-briggs-ill-get-fined-for-wearing-red-white-and-blue-on-911/), which strictly controls what players can wear on game days.
The league office informed all 32 teams today that players are allowed to wear special shoes and gloves to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks, as long as those special shoes and gloves are made by companies that have sponsorship deals with the NFL. The NFL is usually strict about allowing players to wear anything other than the standard team-issued apparel, although the league has made exceptions in the past, such as allowing players to wear pink for Breast Cancer Awareness Month.
It obviously would have been a public relations disaster for the NFL to fine players for expressing their patriotism on 9/11, although it wouldn’t be out of character for the NFL, which demanded that Jake Plummer remove his helmet decal honoring Pat Tillman (http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/6221633/) in 2004. The NFL made the right call this time.

Gort
09-09-2011, 01:26 PM
LOL

Thread starter is a dork.

Though, I'll agree that big media picking up the story surely didn't hurt the end-state.

Thread starter does not agree with your unfair characterization of said thread starter. Thread starter prefers the phrase "dork, but not nearly as dorky as That One Guy".

hambone13
09-09-2011, 01:26 PM
Okay, so let's go with that!

Why DO you watch football?

It's a valid question but it's not to watch a politician fine the players for nationalism on a significant day in history.

DomCasual
09-09-2011, 01:26 PM
what's the purpose? is he wearing the shoes so that his gay brother will see them from his jail cell while watching the game as a silent show of support? or is he wearing them because he wants to be the center of attention so that he'll get interviews about his shoes, giving him a platform to rail about whatever it is he wants to rail about? the shoes by themselves aren't the issue... the intent of the guy wearing them is. was Plummer seeking attention when wearing Tillman's number? no. was Manning seeking attention when he wanted to wear black hightops? no. was Chad Johnson simply seeking attention the multiple times he violated the uniform code? yes. so long as somebody wants to make a temporary, tasteful tribute for whatever they want (within reason of course... here's where common sense comes in. e.g., you can't put a swastika on your helmet), the league should have a mechanism to allow it. if you want to make a spectacle of yourself to promote your reality TV show or some such nonsense like that, then i'd say fine the guy.

about those 9/11 shoes. i think they're hideous. i wouldn't wear them. but there are some players who feel strongly that they want to do something above and beyond on this 10th anniversary. as a onetime thing, i'm fine with it. to them, and to lots of people, it will have an extra significance. except for the "blame America first" people in the audience, how can anyone be upset with a little bit of patriotic remembrance exactly 10 years to the day later?

My point is that I could come up with lots of issues that are decidedly gray. But at the end of the day, I don't really care. All I am saying is that I understand their position. The tolerance meter could probably be moved a little. I think their position is clearly that it's safer not to move it at all.

Although, that being said, it sounds like they're trying to figure out a happy way to let this one slide.

OBF1
09-09-2011, 01:28 PM
oh shut up and get off your ivory tower. i've posted 2 thread EVER about Goodell and they both happened to be within this past week. what's wrong, are you related to him?

do you know anything about how newspapers write headlines? are you not aware that the same rules apply to forum threads?

i've seen threads on here titled simply "Tebow sucks" and "Orton sucks" and "Plummer sucks". did you ever complain on those threads that the titles were misleading? no you didn't. those thread titles are not strictly factual.

anybody with an ounce of common sense understands that "Goodell intends" is also functionally equivalent to "the NFL league office is expected to", but my version is shorter. and its written to grab attention, like a newspaper headline.

and i'll spell "komissuner" any goddamned way i want to spell "comishunher", capice?



You are making this way to easy...

You are still going on and on about your invalid point that GOODELL is going to fine anyone that wears 9-11 gear. Newsflash ahole, it has come out that players will not be fined, YET you are still fighting and trying to prove a point (Whatever in the hell it might be)

Just because the NFL has a uniform dress code, does not mean that everyone, in every single instance gets fined JUST BECAUSE YOU SAY SO. <---- this is my point, you are not the commissioner, just one of many stupid, uninformed wannabe's that post on the internet before knowing all of the facts. How damn hard is that to understand???

Please show me in print, anywhere that QUOTED Roger Goodell saying he was going to fine any player/players that wore the shown/stated reebok commemorative spikes or gloves and I will admit that I am wrong to the entire world.... something you will never do.

That One Guy
09-09-2011, 01:33 PM
Thread starter does not agree with your unfair characterization of said thread starter. Thread starter prefers the phrase "dork, but not nearly as dorky as That One Guy".

Haha, I'm good with that.

Gort
09-09-2011, 01:35 PM
You are still going on and on about your invalid point that GOODELL is going to fine anyone that wears 9-11 gear. Newsflash ahole, it has come out that players will not be fined, YET you are still fighting and trying to prove a point (Whatever in the hell it might be)

go to post #43 from 33 minutes ago.

you seem to have a thing for Goodell. are you in jail? do you send him steamy love letters from your jail cell?

Bowlen owns the Broncos. he gets blamed for the policies of his team even though he's not actually involved in any day to day implementation of those policies.

Goodell is the commissioner (oops, spelled it correctly) of the NFL. he is responsible for the actions of his employees even if he's too busy responding to your love letters and not ACTUALLY the one sitting down and issuing fines.

see how that works?

Gort
09-09-2011, 01:40 PM
You are making this way to easy...

You are still going on and on about your invalid point that GOODELL is going to fine anyone that wears 9-11 gear. Newsflash ahole, it has come out that players will not be fined, YET you are still fighting and trying to prove a point (Whatever in the hell it might be)

Just because the NFL has a uniform dress code, does not mean that everyone, in every single instance gets fined JUST BECAUSE YOU SAY SO. <---- this is my point, you are not the commissioner, just one of many stupid, uninformed wannabe's that post on the internet before knowing all of the facts. How damn hard is that to understand???

Please show me in print, anywhere that QUOTED Roger Goodell saying he was going to fine any player/players that wore the shown/stated reebok commemorative spikes or gloves and I will admit that I am wrong to the entire world.... something you will never do.

did you just discover the neg rep feature? here's a tip. try saying something funny or cogent in your neg rep. saying the same dumb thing and neg repping a dozen times in a row is something Bob would do. it is funny how mad you are about Goodell's name being taken in vain. you clearly have some sort of emotional connection to the guy. here's another tip... once i put you on ignore, all your neg reps magically disappear. i never even see them. ever.

:wave:

OBF1
09-09-2011, 01:40 PM
go to post #43 from 33 minutes ago.

you seem to have a thing for Goodell. are you in jail? do you send him steamy love letters from your jail cell?

Bowlen owns the Broncos. he gets blamed for the policies of his team even though he's not actually involved in any day to day implementation of those policies.

Goodell is the commissioner (oops, spelled it correctly) of the NFL. he is responsible for the actions of his employees even if he's too busy responding to your love letters and not ACTUALLY the one sitting down and issuing fines.

see how that works?


All everyone is seeing is you going on and on. Back to the thread title.... Where is your proof that the NFL league office (Notice no mention of goodell) ever said it was going to fine any NFL player wearing anything considered 9/11 or patriotic this weekend.

Again, I ask you to post any quotes from the league office or Roger Goodell saying that player will be fined this weekend

Everyone on the mane already knows you can not come up with a quote, yet you will keep going on and on like the normal raider fan stating that the raiders are going to win the superbowl again this year..... ALL TALK, zero substance.

That One Guy
09-09-2011, 01:43 PM
did you just discover the neg rep feature? here's a tip. try saying something funny or cogent in your neg rep. saying the same dumb thing and neg repping a dozen times in a row is something Bob would do. it is funny how mad you are about Goodell's name being taken in vain. you clearly have some sort of emotional connection to the guy. here's another tip... once i put you on ignore, all your neg reps magically disappear. i never even see them. ever.

:wave:

I think he was the one that did it to me a few years ago too. Ya piss 'em off then get like a dozen in a row every time you post something. Makes me chuckle more than it upsets me.

OBF1
09-09-2011, 01:43 PM
Again my girl friday is wrong. I have known about rep feature for years, and use it when needed.... funny thing is that my negative repping of your useless posts warrents a response from you.

Game over girl.

bendog
09-09-2011, 01:43 PM
this is such a non-story. The league has a contract with the uni guys that all players wear standard contracts. The players have contracts with the teams mandating they wear standard unis. The players want some way to commemorate 9-11, and the uni guys made special shoes or gloves or something.

Gort
09-09-2011, 01:44 PM
and there it is...

CBF1
This message is hidden because CBF1 is on your ignore list.

bye bye. all your neg reps are gone too. but hey, thanks for playing.

you have now been sent to the cornfield. :)

http://media-files.gather.com/images/d522/d353/d746/d224/d96/f3/full.jpg

BMF Bronco
09-09-2011, 01:50 PM
I think he was the one that did it to me a few years ago too. Ya piss 'em off then get like a dozen in a row every time you post something. Makes me chuckle more than it upsets me.

JUST SO HE CAN SEE IT. :sunshine:

WABronco
09-09-2011, 01:57 PM
Meaning?

Meaning there will be such a negative backlash on top of the media going ape covering this story...I can't imagine any punishment will come of this.

BroncoFiend
09-09-2011, 02:15 PM
Public opinion is a powerful thing. We should remember that more often.


NFL says players can wear red, white and blue on 9/11

Posted by Michael David Smith on September 9, 2011, 3:30 PM EDT
http://nbcprofootballtalk.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/usflagap.jpg?w=250 AP The NFL will not fine players for wearing red, white and blue on 9/11.
That commonsense decision came down today, a day after Bears linebacker Lance Briggs (http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/2438/lance-briggs) said he would wear red, white and blue gloves and shoes and was expecting a fine from the NFL (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/09/08/lance-briggs-ill-get-fined-for-wearing-red-white-and-blue-on-911/), which strictly controls what players can wear on game days.
The league office informed all 32 teams today that players are allowed to wear special shoes and gloves to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks, as long as those special shoes and gloves are made by companies that have sponsorship deals with the NFL. The NFL is usually strict about allowing players to wear anything other than the standard team-issued apparel, although the league has made exceptions in the past, such as allowing players to wear pink for Breast Cancer Awareness Month.
It obviously would have been a public relations disaster for the NFL to fine players for expressing their patriotism on 9/11, although it wouldn’t be out of character for the NFL, which demanded that Jake Plummer remove his helmet decal honoring Pat Tillman (http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/6221633/) in 2004. The NFL made the right call this time.

It bears noting again that the NFL never said they would fine, Reebok said the gear wasn't approved so everyone assumed.

Also, keep in mind, the NFL doesn't fine for honoring people or events, they fine for breaking the uniform code. There are often fines for minor things like not tucking in your shirt. You may disagree, but this did not start with Goodell.

PRBronco
09-09-2011, 02:27 PM
I really don't think he'd actually do it.

I win I win!

Requiem
09-09-2011, 02:30 PM
Let the players wear anything they want. If Peyton Hillis wants pink socks with his brown jersey, he can do that. Those colors look good on cake.

Aftermath
09-09-2011, 03:03 PM
You do realize ALOT of the players will wear the gear for personal attention towards themselves. That is not needed.

spdirty
09-09-2011, 03:06 PM
I now hate October because of the pink. Wish all the players would just band together and stop wearing it. Tell Goodell to shove the pink crap up his ass. It's distracting.

DomCasual
09-09-2011, 03:10 PM
I now hate October because of the pink. Wish all the players would just band together and stop wearing it. Tell Goodell to shove the pink crap up his ass. It's distracting.

IIRC, the first year, they did it for a week, and the pink stuff was limited. It was kind of cool. Now, it seems like they've splashed it everywhere. And it's not subtle pink. It's cornea-searing hot pink that burns your corneas with burns in a burning, searing manner.

GreatBronco16
09-09-2011, 03:33 PM
So what exactly is the fuss about in this thread again?

tsiguy96
09-09-2011, 03:35 PM
and original poster is an idiot. players can wear red white and blue as long as its from an NFL licensed apparel person.

Arkie
09-09-2011, 04:08 PM
Every player on Sunday should wear a headband that says Goodell.

http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lfzy6dA5Aw1qe6vsbo1_400.jpg

BroncoFiend
09-09-2011, 05:29 PM
I now hate October because of the pink. Wish all the players would just band together and stop wearing it. Tell Goodell to shove the pink crap up his ass. It's distracting.

Breast cancer kills over 30,000 women a year, many of which could survive if it was detected early. The NFL's campaign put this cause on the national stage and raises awareness in a very unique way.

But if it distracts you, well, that's much more important. sheesh

Rock Chalk
09-09-2011, 05:39 PM
Breast cancer kills over 30,000 women a year, many of which could survive if it was detected early. The NFL's campaign put this cause on the national stage and raises awareness in a very unique way.

But if it distracts you, well, that's much more important. sheesh

About 33,00 men die of prostate cancer every year.

Just saying.

Dr. Broncenstein
09-09-2011, 05:52 PM
Breast cancer kills over 30,000 women a year, many of which could survive if it was detected early. The NFL's campaign put this cause on the national stage and raises awareness in a very unique way.

But if it distracts you, well, that's much more important. sheesh

Breast cancer kills about 500 men per year. Not much awareness about that. Car "accidents" kill about 50,000 people per year, and almost every single one could have been avoided.

Gort
09-09-2011, 05:53 PM
and original poster is an idiot. players can wear red white and blue as long as its from an NFL licensed apparel person.

easy there sparky.

when this thread was started, the NFL had not made any statement allowing that.

call me an idiot again and i'll send michael vick to your house to kill your dogs and give your wife herpes.

bronco militia
09-09-2011, 05:54 PM
easy there sparky.

when this thread was started, the NFL had not made any statement allowing that.

call me an idiot again and i'll send michael vick to your house to kill your dogs and give your wife herpes.

just send vick anyways

Bronx33
09-09-2011, 06:23 PM
I think this is aimed at clowns like Ocho Cinco that might completely over do it someway somehow.

Yoda
09-09-2011, 07:08 PM
That's just assanine, screw him.

DarkHorse30
09-09-2011, 07:15 PM
I hope the union shows solidarity and they ALL come out wearing em. **** Goodell
this.

Can Goodell be impeached? Fans should just start mocking him unmercilessly

BroncoFiend
09-09-2011, 08:20 PM
Breast cancer kills about 500 men per year. Not much awareness about that. Car "accidents" kill about 50,000 people per year, and almost every single one could have been avoided.

Soooo, is breast cancer just an unworthy cause, or is Goodell an a-hole because he doesn't honor ALL causes.

You are missing the point, people are criticizing the NFL and Goodell specifically because they wear pink to try and help spread awareness for a cause. And the only reason is that it 'distracts' them.

Give me a break.

BroncoFiend
09-09-2011, 08:22 PM
That's just assanine, screw him.

You do know the NFL is allowing players to wear red, white and blue right? And that they never said they wouldn't right? So what exactly is 'assanine'?

spdirty
09-10-2011, 12:33 AM
Breast cancer kills over 30,000 women a year, many of which could survive if it was detected early. The NFL's campaign put this cause on the national stage and raises awareness in a very unique way.

But if it distracts you, well, that's much more important. sheesh
Yeah, well call me an a-hole, but I don't give a flying **** about Rogers crusade to cure breast cancer anymore by making/encouraging the players to wear pink. When I sit down to watch a football game, me, and probably millions of other Americans don't want to be inundated with pink bull**** on players unis all for Rogers new little pet cause, which is actually to try to score female viewers much more than raise awareness for anything.

But beyond that, if this really was about raising awareness, they would put a ribbon on the field, and make it classy, rather than have the players of every team wear eye scorching hot pink uniforms for an entire month, annoying the he'll out of 90% of every male fan and at least 50% of every female fan that pays his salary. And by Halloween, it gets so annoying that most fans just want "breast cancer awareness" to be over.

So before you spout off another high and mighty post about the great thing Roger is doing, ask yourself 2 questions. How many lives has pink uniforms saved, and why did Roger pick this one disease to raise awareness for?

spdirty
09-10-2011, 12:41 AM
Soooo, is breast cancer just an unworthy cause, or is Goodell an a-hole because he doesn't honor ALL causes.

You are missing the point, people are criticizing the NFL and Goodell specifically because they wear pink to try and help spread awareness for a cause. And the only reason is that it 'distracts' them.

Give me a break.

And why is breast cancer the disease of choice for Goodell to raise awareness to? Give me a break, all we ever hear about is that the NFL is a business. Doing this in October was, and is, a lot more a business decision than a charity/awareness raising decision.

Doggcow
09-10-2011, 12:42 AM
Where can I buy a set of those 9-11 kicks? I'd be honored to wear them.

boltaneer
09-10-2011, 01:58 AM
Boy, this thread was a complete FAIL.

schaaf
09-10-2011, 05:38 AM
Regardless of the hate, I think Goodell is good for the league

tsiguy96
09-10-2011, 05:44 AM
Yeah, well call me an a-hole, but I don't give a flying **** about Rogers crusade to cure breast cancer anymore by making/encouraging the players to wear pink. When I sit down to watch a football game, me, and probably millions of other Americans don't want to be inundated with pink bull**** on players unis all for Rogers new little pet cause, which is actually to try to score female viewers much more than raise awareness for anything.

But beyond that, if this really was about raising awareness, they would put a ribbon on the field, and make it classy, rather than have the players of every team wear eye scorching hot pink uniforms for an entire month, annoying the he'll out of 90% of every male fan and at least 50% of every female fan that pays his salary. And by Halloween, it gets so annoying that most fans just want "breast cancer awareness" to be over.

So before you spout off another high and mighty post about the great thing Roger is doing, ask yourself 2 questions. How many lives has pink uniforms saved, and why did Roger pick this one disease to raise awareness for?

i think you speak for you and you only, as no other logical, reasonable person would ever have the same viewpoint as you. you have issues.

RhymesayersDU
09-10-2011, 07:13 AM
i think you speak for you and you only, as no other logical, reasonable person would ever have the same viewpoint as you. you have issues.

Seriously. I openly ask this to anybody reading: How do idiots like this actually make it through life? It's mind boggling sometimes.

spdirty
09-10-2011, 07:44 AM
i think you speak for you and you only, as no other logical, reasonable person would ever have the same viewpoint as you. you have issues.

And do you have any idea why he chose breast cancer as a cause to pursue?

GreatBronco16
09-10-2011, 09:01 AM
Boy, this thread was a complete FAIL.

Boy you aren't kidding.

Thread gets started because some players say they are getting some 9-11 cleats and gloves from Reebok to wear on Sunday, and they expect a fine.

Reebok says they haven't sent these things to the NFL for approval.

Everyone starts hammering the NFL and mainly Roger Goodell for not allowing the players to wear these things, even though the NFL has not made a statement either way.

NFL finally gets to look at the stuff Reebok sent, and agrees that the players should wear stuff for 9-11 as long as they are from NFL licensed apparel.

Now the mood shifts to why does Goodell only choose breast cancer to celebrate a month to.


That's what makes this board so much fun though. Everyone will argue about everything just because they can.

GreatBronco16
09-10-2011, 09:03 AM
And do you have any idea why he chose breast cancer as a cause to pursue?


Because he isn't the sole person who chooses this. AFAIK the nfl has been supporting breast cancer awareness month for a very long time. The NFL doesn't force the players to wear pink, but only gives the players the options to do so if they want to during that month.

Gort
09-10-2011, 09:03 AM
Everyone will argue about everything just because they can.

no, we won't.

:thanku:

Bronx33
09-10-2011, 09:12 AM
no, we won't.

:thanku:


yes we will!!!

BroncoFiend
09-10-2011, 10:53 AM
And do you have any idea why he chose breast cancer as a cause to pursue?

Most businesses pick causes to support, breast cancer is in no way the only cause the NFL supports. United Way and their 'Play 60' campaign to support kids' health are just two others that they put a great deal of focus on.

The NFL supported breast cancer research before Goodell came around. They have stepped up the amount but it's not like Goodell makes these decisions alone. Besides the NFL DOES NOT require ANY player to wear pink, that is up to the players. So maybe you should direct some hate their way too, you know spread it around a bit. :)

Bigdawg26
09-10-2011, 11:01 AM
Regardless of the hate, I think Goodell is good for the league

Maybe for profit for the owners! He's taking all the fun out of the game. You can't celebrate ANYTHING anymore, you can't touch receivers (your just suppose the let them catch the ball and hope they trip), and God help you if you even look at the QB to hard (mainly Manning and Brady)! It's not because he's concern "for the safety of the players" it's because high scoring offensive games brings alot of money and TV ratings! He's a lying a-hole, and players and coaches see right through him!

Agamemnon
09-10-2011, 12:20 PM
Soooo, is breast cancer just an unworthy cause, or is Goodell an a-hole because he doesn't honor ALL causes.

You are missing the point, people are criticizing the NFL and Goodell specifically because they wear pink to try and help spread awareness for a cause. And the only reason is that it 'distracts' them.

Give me a break.

The breast cancer thing is just a thinly veiled marketing ploy targeting women. Don't be naive.

RhymesayersDU
09-10-2011, 12:28 PM
The breast cancer thing is just a thinly veiled marketing ploy targeting women. Don't be naive.

You're probably right, but to that I say "who cares?"

What I mean is, the relationship seems pretty win-win to me. The NFL benefits and a great, worthy cause gets money and attention. I don't really see the problem.

Miss I.
09-10-2011, 12:46 PM
The breast cancer thing is just a thinly veiled marketing ploy targeting women. Don't be naive.

Oh ****, is that why I watch football, damn...I thought it was the hot guys in tight pants jumping on each other in an expression of their suppressed homoerotic tendancies (or I just like the game), but you are sooo right. Clearly it's because I really feel joined to the NFL in our joint concern over breast cancer.

This thread has turned into a big pile of fail...The commissioner alone doesn't pick the cause, get the **** over it already. It's time to let this NON issue go.

1. The original post was about the possible fines for wearing non issued apparel.
2. This turns out to be false and they will be allowed to wear the 9/11 memorial gear.
3. In addition the NFL is hosting all sorts of charity and other 9/11 memorial tie ins.
4. Breast cancer is ONE of many charities the NFL supports, sometimes for a minimal time period the players even wear pink, those bastards, distracting from the game about as much as the throw back uniforms do.

Wow you guys are a bunch of whiny crybabies. Woman up would you and pull your big girl pink panties out of your ass.

:curtsey::egbgb: :peace:
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/9105107/2/istockphoto_9105107-breast-cancer-awareness-ribbon.jpg

TailgateNut
09-10-2011, 01:09 PM
Oh ****, is that why I watch football, damn...I thought it was the hot guys in tight pants jumping on each other in an expression of their suppressed homoerotic tendancies (or I just like the game), but you are sooo right. Clearly it's because I really feel joined to the NFL in our joint concern over breast cancer.

This thread has turned into a big pile of fail...The commissioner alone doesn't pick the cause, get the **** over it already. It's time to let this NON issue go.

1. The original post was about the possible fines for wearing non issued apparel.
2. This turns out to be false and they will be allowed to wear the 9/11 memorial gear.
3. In addition the NFL is hosting all sorts of charity and other 9/11 memorial tie ins.
4. Breast cancer is ONE of many charities the NFL supports, sometimes for a minimal time period the players even wear pink, those bastards, distracting from the game about as much as the throw back uniforms do.

Wow you guys are a bunch of whiny crybabies. Woman up would you and pull your big girl pink panties out of your ass.

:curtsey::egbgb: :peace:
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/9105107/2/istockphoto_9105107-breast-cancer-awareness-ribbon.jpg


Awesome post!

OBF1
09-10-2011, 01:12 PM
Best post yet. Rep

gunns
09-10-2011, 01:32 PM
Oh ****, is that why I watch football, damn...I thought it was the hot guys in tight pants jumping on each other in an expression of their suppressed homoerotic tendancies (or I just like the game), but you are sooo right. Clearly it's because I really feel joined to the NFL in our joint concern over breast cancer.

This thread has turned into a big pile of fail...The commissioner alone doesn't pick the cause, get the **** over it already. It's time to let this NON issue go.

1. The original post was about the possible fines for wearing non issued apparel.
2. This turns out to be false and they will be allowed to wear the 9/11 memorial gear.
3. In addition the NFL is hosting all sorts of charity and other 9/11 memorial tie ins.
4. Breast cancer is ONE of many charities the NFL supports, sometimes for a minimal time period the players even wear pink, those bastards, distracting from the game about as much as the throw back uniforms do.

Wow you guys are a bunch of whiny crybabies. Woman up would you and pull your big girl pink panties out of your ass.

:curtsey::egbgb: :peace:
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/9105107/2/istockphoto_9105107-breast-cancer-awareness-ribbon.jpg

Damn girl, great post!