Today is the last day to cancel DirecTV NFL TICKET

[Bailey Guns]

That about sums it up.

[68Charger]

I think Paul Ryan needs to brush up on his definition of "constitutionally protected free speech". What a dumbass. No wonder nothing's getting done in congress. It's led by idiots.

He probably thinks the Constitution gives us rights, too.

Actually, speaking as a US Congressman- he can't draft a law to stop them... so in that regard, it is constitutionally protected speech...
But just because the 1st amendment protects your speech from being unlawful doesn't mean there won't be consequences. If you're an asshole, expect people to treat you like one.

[Gman]

Mike Rowe, as eloquently as ever, has addressed the issue; https://www.facebook.com/TheRealMike...70661956277274

Hey Mike - I know you avoid politics, (thanks!) and I remember your rant on the Colt’s leaving Baltimore. (As a former Brown’s fan, I feel your pain.) But I gotta ask – what’s happening to professional football, and what do you make of Trump’s comments about those who refuse to stand during the national anthem?
Robert Amon

Hi Robert
In democracies, we the people get the government we deserve. We also get the celebrities we deserve, the artists we deserve, and the athletes we deserve. Because ultimately, we the people get to decide who and what gets our attention, and who and what does not.

Right now, The NFL, the players who choose to kneel, the networks who choose to broadcast their protest, the advertisers who sponsor the games, and the President of the United States, are all eager for our attention. And they are all using football to get it. That's all well and good, right up to the point where it isn't. In my view, the real controversy here isn’t about patriotism, social justice, racial inequality, or free speech. It’s not even about the flag or the national anthem. It’s really only about one thing – what we will tolerate, and what we won't.

I was disappointed last night, to hear President Trump encourage owners to fire players who refuse to stand for the anthem. Not because I dispute the owners right to do so, or the players right to protest. I was disappointed because the President’s comments presuppose that the owners are in charge of the game. They’re not. We are. We decide what to watch, and that decision - far more than any other consideration - will determine the what the owners choose to do. And that in turn will affect what the players choose to do.

As the leader of the country, the President had an opportunity to remind us that The NFL, the networks who broadcast their games, and all of the players – standers and kneelers alike - work for us. He might have also used the occasion to remind us that he too, serves at our pleasure.

I felt a similar bemusement when the Commissioner issued his response, followed by the President of the Player’s Union. Their comments – along with the comments of many of the players themselves – were perfectly reasonable, perfectly understandable, and perfectly in keeping with their first amendment rights. But they were also perfectly arrogant. Because they too, presuppose that millions of fans will continue to watch them play a game - no matter what.

Perhaps they’re right. Historically, football fans have shown a collective willingness to ignore and enable all sorts of dubious behavior. The players have agents and unions, the owners have money and power, and the fans are always caught in the middle. The resulting strikes and the constant uprooting of teams from broken-hearted towns proves beyond all question the overall lack of regard for fans in general.

But here's the thing, Rob. The fans of professional football are not powerless – they're just not yet offended enough to turn the channel. Should that ever change in a meaningful way – if for instance, a percentage of football fans relative to those players who chose to kneel during today’s games, chose to watch something else next Sunday – I can assure you...the matter would be resolved by Monday.

Mike

PS. If you’d like to spend a few minutes with some actual heroes - combat veterans who made sure today’s athletes have the right to kneel for our flag, or honor it – might I suggest the first episode of Returning the Favor? Twenty-five million people have already approved of this segment, and my hope, is that you will, too.

By the way, his new show, Returning the Favor, looks to be a good one.

[Bailey Guns]

Actually, speaking as a US Congressman- he can't draft a law to stop them... so in that regard, it is constitutionally protected speech...
But just because the 1st amendment protects your speech from being unlawful doesn't mean there won't be consequences. If you're an asshole, expect people to treat you like one.

But that's not the issue. The issue is can the employer still censor speech or require certain behavior and the answer is undoubtedly "yes". Far too many people shout "free speech" when it doesn't apply.

[ray1970]

This whole thing is just another example of how consequences for ones actions just don't exist in our society anymore. The NFL already has rules in place stating something to the effect that players on the field or the sidelines during the national anthem will stand at attention. One player violated his companies official policy and suffered no official consequences and once others realized that the rule wasn't going to be inforced I'm sure they figured why not. The commissioner needs to put on his big boy pants and enforce the rules of the league and this thing will go away. Obviously, suspensions or terminations would hurt the business. Dishing out substantial fines and hitting these douche bags in the wallet would likely make them lose interest in the "equality" BS pretty quickly.

[68Charger]

But that's not the issue. The issue is can the employer still censor speech or require certain behavior and the answer is undoubtedly "yes". Far too many people shout "free speech" when it doesn't apply.

I think you misunderstand my point (and possibly Rep. Ryan's as well)
If you were to ask Paul Ryan to "do something about it, you're a congresscritter for cripe's sake"
IN THAT CONTEXT, it IS constitutionally protected speech... any action Congresscritter Ryan took in official capacity as a congresscritter to stop it would be unconstitutional. Because the constitution limits gov't powers, and therefore the powers of all who work for it.

Now the NFL owners can tell the players to respect the flag or be fired... and that's fine, they can take a knee in the unemployment line... not a constitutional issue.

I doubt many politicians would state that, because it's taking a side on a hot issue... they'd be advised to not "fall on that sword"

[Dave_L]

Im not a fan of the NBA but I'm impressed by the commish.

http://www.nba.com/article/2017/09/2...-during-anthem

“It's been a rule as long as I've been involved with the league, and my expectation is that our players will continue to stand for the anthem,” Silver said.

Asked if there would be a penalty if a player or team were to violate that rule, Silver said: “All I can say is if that were to happen, we’ll deal with it when it happens.”

“Sports historically, and in the NBA in particular, has been a unifying force,” Silver said. “While there's always been disagreements in society, sports arenas have been places where people from all walks of life have come together and for a common experience.”

“I have a general concern as a citizen that there's a huge gap – call it a gulf – in our society right now, and it's incredibly divisive,” he said. “And I believe this league can play a role in attempting to unify people.

“It’s always been an opportunity in our arenas for both teams to come together and have a moment of reflection,” the NBA commissioner said. “Clearly for the non-American players, it's not necessarily a moment of patriotism for the United States, but it's about respect. It's about respect for the country they play in. It's about respect for the principles that underlie this country."

[MED]

But that's not the issue. The issue is can the employer still censor speech or require certain behavior and the answer is undoubtedly "yes". Far too many people shout "free speech" when it doesn't apply.

^^^^this

This is old case law; the NFL can choose to legally amend their code of conduct and enforce it or not. By not doing so, they are by default adopting the position that what the players are doing is acceptable. What the players do on their own time and not representing the NFL is their own business; however, if they act like asses they will suffer the consequences with their reputation. Any company can decide whether a new contract with such an individual is a good idea or not. So many of the problems come from the inability of people to accept there are consequences for their actions. A business/business owner knows what the cost of their reputation is worth as well as the associated risk with different actions...at least the ones that actually stay in business.

Personally, I don't see what is so damn hard about understanding the first amendment (CONGRESS shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.), but all kinds of dumb stuff gets said enough that people accept it as truth.

EDIT: This is not a political issue. The president, congress, or any state official should stay out of it other than deciding whether or not personnel and/or resource participation in events. This is a something for the NFL to address with the fans. All the other political chatter is BS, and just gives air time to what the players are doing.

[Bailey Guns]

I think you misunderstand my point (and possibly Rep. Ryan's as well)
If you were to ask Paul Ryan to "do something about it, you're a congresscritter for cripe's sake"
IN THAT CONTEXT, it IS constitutionally protected speech... any action Congresscritter Ryan took in official capacity as a congresscritter to stop it would be unconstitutional. Because the constitution limits gov't powers, and therefore the powers of all who work for it.

Now the NFL owners can tell the players to respect the flag or be fired... and that's fine, they can take a knee in the unemployment line... not a constitutional issue.

I doubt many politicians would state that, because it's taking a side on a hot issue... they'd be advised to not "fall on that sword"

I understand clearly what you're saying and I agree. But I still contend that is not the issue here so it's a moot point. But I don't think Ryan was putting it in that context, either. Not from just reading the quote from him anyway. We're on the same page.