NFL 2018 Off Season Thread

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by jeff061

I have no clue, doesn't fit their MO, but they on occasion do things completely unexpected. At this point I think it's just as likely that Belichick planted it to piss off Brady.

So sick of Brady. Came to the conclusion years ago that he was a bit of a bitch and only played well when something/someone was pressuring him, but my god. I didn't want him to go out there and prove what a whiny primadonna he is to everyone. Just awful that he's here and Garoppolo isn't. Kraft isn't getting near the amount of shit he deserves for screwing this up.

Lmao

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Logan

Who's buying this rumor that the Pats were willing to move all the way up to #2 for Baker Mayfield if he was there?

It's almost as believable as the one where we were enamored with Lamar Jackson, before passing on him twice and letting the Ravens pick him. (And fwiw using the Jimmy Johnson draft chart #2 is worth like 2650 points and our 5 picks in the top 95 would've added up to about 2200, so I'm not even sure we had the draft capital to do it unless the Giants were eager to trade down - and by most accounts they've been enamored with Barkley during the whole process.) Were the Patriots interested in Mayfield if he slipped? Maybe, possibly, who knows, but the idea we'd actually trade that much draft capital for a backup QB is amusing.

[Danny]

Allen is going to bust. Poor under pressure and lacks accuracy.

Jackson will most likely be productive until he gets seriously hurt and then things go down hill. I dont think someone his size can make it playing the way he does.

Mayfield should be good if he can overcome the curse of the Browns. Big If.

Rosen should be ok, but probably won't be a stud.

Darnold should be an above average starter, but I dont see franchise QB in him.

[Logan]

How Redskins Used Cheerleaders: Topless Photo Shoots and an Uneasy Night Out - The New York Times

Daniel Snyder, folks

When the Washington Redskins took their cheerleading squad to Costa Rica in 2013 for a calendar photo shoot, the first cause for concern among the cheerleaders came when Redskins officials collected their passports upon arrival at the resort, depriving them of their official identification.

For the photo shoot, at the adults-only Occidental Grand Papagayo resort on Culebra Bay, some of the cheerleaders said they were required to be topless, though the photographs used for the calendar would not show nudity. Others wore nothing but body paint. Given the resort’s secluded setting, such revealing poses would not have been a concern for the women — except that the Redskins had invited spectators.

A contingent of sponsors and FedExField suite holders — all men — were granted up-close access to the photo shoots.

[NobodyHere]

I'm sure Roger Goodell will be along with a weakly worded statement any moment now.

[BishopMVP]

As long as they collected their cell phones too so they couldn't post anything that reflected poorly on The Shield I don't see what the problem could be.

[Groundhog]

...what possible reason could they have given to take their passports off them? "Sure, you can get your passport back, just need to entertain some clients first - have to pay back these flights to Costa Rica somehow!" - right out of the sex traffickers playbook.

[AlexB]

Yes, and no. It was standard procedure here up to 20 years ago (I have no direct knowledge since 20 years ago) for sports teams to keep passports for the group on foreign tours for ease of organisation, administration (e.g. at the airport, hotels, etc)

While the situation sounds very wrong in general, the ‘taking away’ of passports didn’t strike me as strange based on my (admittedly outdated) experience.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by AlexB

Yes, and no. It was standard procedure here up to 20 years ago (I have no direct knowledge since 20 years ago) for sports teams to keep passports for the group on foreign tours for ease of organisation, administration (e.g. at the airport, hotels, etc)

While the situation sounds very wrong in general, the ‘taking away’ of passports didn’t strike me as strange based on my (admittedly outdated) experience.

Waiting until after they had reached the resort, though, sounds less like organization.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Waiting until after they had reached the resort, though, sounds less like organization.

Could well be. Also could be that the people needed the passports for immigration, and rather than collect them again at the airport, on the transfer bus, it was done at the hotel. But if they weren’t collected before departure to group check in athe airport too, it does sound less plausible for sure.

Depends on the angle being portrayed, but even if the passports thing is less sinister than it appears, the event sounds seedy from the reports, and easy to see why this element would be looked at quizzically at least.

[stevew]

Mark Ingram suspended for 4 games. No wonder he looked so fresh out there!

[Thomkal]

jets say goodbye to Hackenberg-traded to Raiders for a conditional 7th rounder


New York Jets trade QB Christian Hackenberg to Oakland Raiders for pick

[stevew]

Isn't he one of the few quarterbacks in the draft era to be taken in the first or second round and never see the field in his first 2 years?

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by stevew

Isn't he one of the few quarterbacks in the draft era to be taken in the first or second round and never see the field in his first 2 years?

Yep, obviously a great pick by the Jets

[bhlloy]

I'm pretty sure he's terrible, but would anyone really be shocked if he turned into a hall of famer now and Darnold ends up being a massive bust? It would be the most Jets-iest thing ever.

[stevew]

I guess they passed an anthem policy.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by stevew

I guess they passed an anthem policy.

Yup if players don't stand they get fined. Players union already said they will review and I assume they fight this one as a violation of players 1st amendment rights. I have no issue with what the players do and am a veteran.

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by Galaril

Yup if players don't stand they get fined. Players union already said they will review and I assume they fight this one as a violation of players 1st amendment rights. I have no issue with what the players do and am a veteran.

Pretty sure it's not a 1st amendment issue. The NFL isn't the government. LIke it or not, this is basically just a workplace conduct rule, and they wisely added the "if you don't want to stand, you can stay in the locker room" caveat to it.

[molson]

Interesting that the NFL wants to draw new attention to this after it all died down towards the end of last season. I guess we're back to compelling minute-by-minute coverage during pre-game shows of what players are choosing to do what.

[Arles]

I think they want to preemptively stop the PR sh*tstorm that was this kneeling thing last year. They pass this, fight with the PA in June/July and then have a policy for the season that limits the issues. I doubt many players will stay in the locker room (maybe a few in preseason to make a point) as it makes them look like they are bigger than the team.

Overall, I think this is a good business move by the NFL. Worst case, players fight this and either overturn it (not sure how) or a bunch stay in the locker room to protest. Even then, they can look to the fans and advertisers that didn't like the kneeling and say they tried.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

... this is basically just a workplace conduct rule, and they wisely added the "if you don't want to stand, you can stay in the locker room" caveat to it.

Yup, good to have this option. Nice compromise.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Arles

Overall, I think this is a good business move by the NFL. Worst case, players fight this and either overturn it (not sure how) or a bunch stay in the locker room to protest. Even then, they can look to the fans and advertisers that didn't like the kneeling and say they tried.

Or, the players will just continue to kneel and accept the fines. Which adds more power, visibility, and significance to the protests. (Which is a win for the protesting players, as the media coverage of the kneeling largely died down by the end of the season).

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

I'm pretty sure he's terrible, but would anyone really be shocked if he turned into a hall of famer now and Darnold ends up being a massive bust? It would be the most Jets-iest thing ever.

I would love that actually because my twin is a Jets fan, and I would have pretty much lifetime bragging rights over him

[Arles]

Originally Posted by molson

Or, the players will just continue to kneel and accept the fines. Which adds more power, visibility, and significance to the protests. (Which is a win for the protesting players, as the media coverage of the kneeling largely died down by the end of the season).

This was never going to die down until the NFL came up with a policy. The media would keep egging them on to protest. Now, with a policy, players have to try and make that decision. Sure, maybe a few like Michael Bennett who make a ton of money may kneel, but I doubt some nickel corner making 400K is going to kneel every week and pay the fine. I'm guessing most who want to protest will stay in the locker room. But that is a much different optic than seeing players openly kneel during the anthem. Over time, people will stop caring if a few star players wait an extra 5-10 min before coming out. And, at that point, the protests will stop because they won't be getting the publicity.

If you think the kneeling was going to stop without NFL intervention, you are just mistaken. There were too many "social crusaders" in the NFL who wanted to keep it going (again with the help of the sports media). Here's what's going to happen moving forward:

1. There will be a massive outcry by the sports media and other outlets about how awful this is. The NFL will be called clueless and stupid by the entire universe of twitter.
2. There will be a few who take a fine early on as a statement and some may even stay in the locker room most of the season.
3. By the end of 2018, this will start drifting into the background.
4. By the end of 2019, this will no longer be an issue.

Without NFL intervention, there was no real path to this no longer being an issue. The moment a cop killed a black kid, everyone would start kneeling again and it would start up again. Now, not every player can afford to do that when the next event happens and staying in the locker room doesn't have the same impact to the league as kneeling did. The NFL created a roadmap to getting out of the bad publicity of players kneeling. They basically invited them to stay in the locker room instead - which is a 100 times better for them than kneeling. It was the smart move.

[molson]

I didn't say I thought the kneeling would stop, just that the media coverage had died down. In the early weeks of the season, the pre-game shows literally featured a stadium-by-stadium analysis of what was going on at each sideline during the anthem. And then, just to make sure you didn't miss it, there'd be recaps of the protests during the game and at halftime. By the end of the season, it just wasn't covered in the same way. We were used to it, it was what it was, it wasn't newsworthy anymore. This move does nothing but give power to the protests and bring them back to the forefront of the games. Telling protesters they can't protest just emboldens protests. That's kind of the entire point of a protest - to defy something. They'll keep doing it, or they'll find new ways to protest. The NFL owners just were desperate to put their own moral stamp on this.

Edit: I'm wondering if this is the year we add anthem participation as a fantasy league stat. The NFL seems really determined to make sure the this continues to be a central issue in their league.

[miami_fan]

I wonder if a team can require all personnel to be on the for the anthem. Also, do they have to stand with their hands on their heart or can they raise the black gloved fist in the air?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Don't fine the worthless bastards, suspend them. Permanently.

Anything less, honestly, the NFL remains unfit to continue to exist.

[albionmoonlight]

The NFL has done a masterful job of re-defining these police brutality protests as anthem protests.

The players let the messaging get away from them.

[molson]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

The NFL has done a masterful job of re-defining these police brutality protests as anthem protests.

The players let the messaging get away from them.

The original messaging, as stated by Kaepernick, was about refusing to show respect to the flag and the country. It was only later that other players tried to alter that original message. Then it really evolved to where we had these heavily choreographed team displays, which include coaches and owners and which professed to be about "unity" rather than being against anything in particular. So the messaging changed, but the form, time, and place of protest remained the same. Which definitely muddled the message. People protesting at the state capitol building down the street from me generally aren't going out of their way to insist that they aren't actually protesting some action or inaction of the state government.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

The NFL has done a masterful job of re-defining these police brutality protests as anthem protests.

Or the players did a great job of conning some people into believing it was anything more than their fucking disconnect with reality, selling a comically false narrative in the process.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Don't fine the worthless bastards, suspend them. Permanently.

Anything less, honestly, the NFL remains unfit to continue to exist.

The one thing I can say about this proposed rule is that its done a great job pissing off the more vocal folks on both sides at the same time. Great job NFL.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

The NFL has done a masterful job of re-defining these police brutality protests as anthem protests.

The players let the messaging get away from them.

They've never really had it. It's not like these players are protesting in front of police stations. They're specifically targeting the national anthem.

"I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color," - Colin Kapernick

Colin says it right there that he doesn't want to show pride in the country which standing for the anthem represents.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Radii

The one thing I can say about this proposed rule is that its done a great job pissing off the more vocal folks on both sides at the same time. Great job NFL.

Well, I'm not any more disgusted by the NFL than I was last week.
I'm simply not particularly less disgusted by them either.

Until the league is purged of every single solitary SOB that took part in those "protests", and of every single owner that allowed them to take place, then any measures they take are insufficient.

This will be effective -- if it works as hypothetical intended -- on some with weaker constitutions who value watching football over rational behavior or ethics. I've yet to see a single person amongst my friends who walked away from the league last year say anything other than this being far short of what it takes to bring them back.

I'd say the league probably lost 1/3rd of the viewers among my extended circle last year, I simply think less of the ones who didn't walk away {shrug}

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Well, I'm not any more disgusted by the NFL than I was last week.
I'm simply not particularly less disgusted by them either.

Until the league is purged of every single solitary SOB that took part in those "protests", and of every single owner that allowed them to take place, then any measures they take are insufficient.

This will be effective -- if it works as hypothetical intended -- on some with weaker constitutions who value watching football over rational behavior or ethics. I've yet to see a single person amongst my friends who walked away from the league last year say anything other than this being far short of what it takes to bring them back.

I'd say the league probably lost 1/3rd of the viewers among my extended circle last year, I simply think less of the ones who didn't walk away {shrug}

They trying hard to get YOU and yours back while accepting they will continue to lose those on the other side.

[miami_fan]

And it starts...

Jets chairman Christopher Johnson backs players’ right to protest | Newsday

[molson]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

And it starts...

Jets chairman Christopher Johnson backs players’ right to protest | Newsday

He's also going to pay any fines for the players who want to protest by kneeling. Even though the Jets voted for this.

The NFL has made this much more complicated.

[SirBlurton]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Well, I'm not any more disgusted by the NFL than I was last week.
I'm simply not particularly less disgusted by them either.

Until the league is purged of every single solitary SOB that took part in those "protests", and of every single owner that allowed them to take place, then any measures they take are insufficient.

This will be effective -- if it works as hypothetical intended -- on some with weaker constitutions who value watching football over rational behavior or ethics. I've yet to see a single person amongst my friends who walked away from the league last year say anything other than this being far short of what it takes to bring them back.

I'd say the league probably lost 1/3rd of the viewers among my extended circle last year, I simply think less of the ones who didn't walk away {shrug}

I'm trying to determine if this an extreme viewpoint expressed for dramatic effect or if it's truly how you feel....can describe HOW MUCH less you think of the people who "failed" to stop watching? On a scale of "they're dead to me" to "won't be getting a Christmas card this year"?

I'm consistently mystified by the level of polarization in discourse in America these days...

It just seems like such an extreme view to take to want every person who protested to "rounded up" and at least we're only talking about "purging" from the league and not....existing...I think? And I'm glad they were just kneeling and not doing something truly awful like holding signs or writing subversive slogans on their socks and t-shirts...

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by molson

The original messaging, as stated by Kaepernick, was about refusing to show respect to the flag and the country. It was only later that other players tried to alter that original message. Then it really evolved to where we had these heavily choreographed team displays, which include coaches and owners and which professed to be about "unity" rather than being against anything in particular. So the messaging changed, but the form, time, and place of protest remained the same. Which definitely muddled the message. People protesting at the state capitol building down the street from me generally aren't going out of their way to insist that they aren't actually protesting some action or inaction of the state government.

Here's the timeline of events.

https://www.sbnation.com/2016/9/11/1...n-marshall-nfl

Kapernick's $1M offer came about after he started getting heat for his publicity stunt but kudos to him for completing his pledge earlier this year.

To me, still a spoiled, multi-millionaire baby who decided to do something after his career was in decline. Its not what he said, its how he said it.

Glad he was not picked up (so far) and looking forward to see how he spends his time furthering his anti-discrimination goals while unemployed.

[Logan]

He's probably going to be just fine once the inevitable collusion settlement comes in. As hard as it typically is to prove, the NFL owners seem like they've done a great job in simplifying things in this case.

[Julio Riddols]

I've never understood why exercising the freedoms the flag stands for is anything but patriotic. It's silly, frankly, and one of the absolute least important things in the world right now. The only reason it was made into a big deal is because news corporations know that divisive shit is what really gets the public going anymore.

To oppress the freedom for someone to peacefully protest anything is the exact opposite of what this country and that flag stands for. Meanwhile, everybody is cool with things like holding a giant flag horizontally or having patriotic flag napkins despite those things being something expressly forbidden in U.S. flag code.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Julio Riddols

To oppress the freedom for someone to peacefully protest anything is the exact opposite of what this country and that flag stands for. Meanwhile, everybody is cool with things like holding a giant flag horizontally or having patriotic flag napkins despite those things being something expressly forbidden in U.S. flag code.

So you're cool with employees engaging in political activities at work? Can I wear a MAGA hat or a BLM shirt to work or should the company be able to suppress my freedom of speech by making me adhere to a dress code.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

So you're cool with employees engaging in political activities at work? Can I wear a MAGA hat or a BLM shirt to work or should the company be able to suppress my freedom of speech by making me adhere to a dress code.

Different things. The NFL do enforce a dress code, so they can't wear BLM or MAGA kit. But I'm guessing your workplace wouldn't be able to force you to stand for the anthem if they tried.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by AlexB

Different things. The NFL do enforce a dress code, so they can't wear BLM or MAGA kit. But I'm guessing your workplace wouldn't be able to force you to stand for the anthem if they tried.

You'd stand or be fired from my job.
If there was an anthem played for some weird reason.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by AlexB

Different things. The NFL do enforce a dress code, so they can't wear BLM or MAGA kit. But I'm guessing your workplace wouldn't be able to force you to stand for the anthem if they tried.

Not really different things. By enforcing a dress code aren't they limiting my freedoms? I'm also sure they wouldn't want me to kneel in the middle of work either.

The point being that any employer generally restricts an employee's "freedom". Not sure why it should be different for the NFL.

[JPhillips]

But we all understand that there are limitations to what an employer can force employees to do. Can an employer ban kneeling in prayer? Can they force employees to wear Satanist t-shirts? Can they demand all the players offer salute and pledge loyalty to Satan before playing?

It would take the court system to decide whether this is across the line, but the idea that employees have to do what they are told clearly has limits.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by AlexB

Different things. The NFL do enforce a dress code, so they can't wear BLM or MAGA kit. But I'm guessing your workplace wouldn't be able to force you to stand for the anthem if they tried.

In this case different because the dress code is part of the rules that are agreed to in collective bargaining.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by SirBlurton

I'm trying to determine if this an extreme viewpoint expressed for dramatic effect or if it's truly how you feel....can describe HOW MUCH less you think of the people who "failed" to stop watching? On a scale of "they're dead to me" to "won't be getting a Christmas card this year"?

I think it shows a lack of character basically. Something that isn't unique, plenty of stuff in everyday life illustrates the amount of character people have/don't have. So it'd only be one more straw on the proverbial camel's back, taken in conjunction with the sum total of all I know about that given person.

It just seems like such an extreme view to take to want every person who protested to "rounded up" and at least we're only talking about "purging" from the league and not....existing...I think? And I'm glad they were just kneeling and not doing something truly awful like holding signs or writing subversive slogans on their socks and t-shirts...

Whaddya want me to tell you? I think the planet would be better off if anyone that #$%#$ stupid was no longer on said planet. At best, they're either stupid or crazy. At worst, simply plain evil. Either falling for an almost entirely false narrative or willfully participating in promoting such. The law, however, protects their right to remain on it therefore I won't suggest any action to the contrary. But if one of them dies in a random meteor strike, I'll consider it a small improvement in the state of the planet, smile for a fleeting moment & carry on.

[SirBlurton]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I think it shows a lack of character basically. Something that isn't unique, plenty of stuff in everyday life illustrates the amount of character people have/don't have. So it'd only be one more straw on the proverbial camel's back, taken in conjunction with the sum total of all I know about that given person.



Whaddya want me to tell you? I think the planet would be better off if anyone that #$%#$ stupid was no longer on said planet. At best, they're either stupid or crazy. At worst, simply plain evil. Either falling for an almost entirely false narrative or willfully participating in promoting such. The law, however, protects their right to remain on it therefore I won't suggest any action to the contrary. But if one of them dies in a random meteor strike, I'll consider it a small improvement in the state of the planet, smile for a fleeting moment & carry on.

You definitely don't owe me any kind of explanation...

I'm just taken aback that it could evoke enough emotion to think that wiping them from existence would be an improvement. For kneeling during a song before a game played for entertainment...which I know is kind of an over-simplification...but at least partially true.

And to call it potentially "evil" - I personally reserve that for crimes worse than kneeling or even promoting an arguably false narrative. How do they profit from it? Attention?

It's just a really bleak POV - in my opinion, it's a pretty heavy discounting of basic human value...but again, I have no right to comment on how you feel - it's just....surprising...

Anyway, thanks for answering with how you feel about - I'm trying to understand, not provoke.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Anyway, thanks for answering with how you feel about - I'm trying to understand, not provoke.

I'm on board with that. That's the tone/approach I perceived in your question and why I tried to give at least one person's answer to it.

Honestly, I went for a bit milder response than my actual feelings on the matter but an honest answer nonetheless.

[Julio Riddols]

You know, I get the viewpoint of it when it is considered an employee-employer thing. On the other hand, these owners often employ people who are definitely doing worse things than kneeling for the national anthem and somehow that is way less of a headache. I really don't care either way if a player wants to profess that they believe the earth is flat or worship Xenu or wants to wear a MAGA hat on the sidelines, whatever. The players who do these things clearly are not representative of the beliefs of their entire team or the whole team would do it. I don't care really what kind of beliefs they want to express as long as they aren't harmful to anyone. I understand that some people do care though.

I guess ultimately I am just mad that this is being made into such a huge thing when there is so much more important shit to worry about.