www.google.com
not being blind
... I mean, let's be real, it doesn't matter what link I put, your mind's made up and you think you're right, so the amount of effort I am willing to invest in that is zero.
www.google.com
not being blind
... I mean, let's be real, it doesn't matter what link I put, your mind's made up and you think you're right, so the amount of effort I am willing to invest in that is zero.
See you Space Cowboy ...
Let's be real - major sponsors selling products are not going to pull advertising unless they think there might be some support for why they would do it - that was my point
I can see the merit in both sides of the anthem dispute and that a split of opinion exists regardless of what my own position may be
You may find it inconceivable (aka "not being blind") that more than a "micro-minority" support a view you do not share, but it might not be as outrageous a possibility as you think it to be - this poll was issued this week on whether players should be disciplined, which was the proposed action that prompted the sponsor to allegedly threaten to pull its NFL advertising
In general, Americans have shifted in what they think about the national anthem protests, according to an HBO Real Sports/Marist College poll.
According to the poll, 51% of the country believes professional sports leagues should not require their players to stand for the national anthem and 47% believe they should. When this same poll was taken in September 2016, the results were reversed: 52% said they should be forced to stand and 43% said they should not.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2017/10/25/americans-opposed-pro-sports-leagues-requiring-players-stand-national-anthem/801086001/
On the related issue of whether players should kneel, these poll findings were issued previously
Americans split on anthem protests
Americans are sharply divided over whether NFL players taking a knee during the National Anthem are doing the right thing to express their views, but a majority agree that President Donald Trump did the wrong thing by criticizing their actions, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
Overall, 49% say the protesting players are doing the wrong thing to express their political opinion when they kneel during the National Anthem, while 43% say it's the right thing. Those views are sharply divided by race, partisanship and age.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/29/politi...oll/index.html
That looks like a split involving more than a "small micro-minority" to me, but maybe there is other polling to contradict that
No doubt there's a dispute, but I think that you will find a much higher proportion of people in the general public supporting the protests than you will among football fans, who are by and large either annoyed or indifferent. I don't get the extreme outrage over it, people taking it personally and shit (on either side), but I do think it was poorly thought out and definitely the wrong venue for it.
As for companies deciding to pull their sponsorship - can definitely see how one might think it was a "bad look" to be associated with if it came down to disciplining players ... of course, there were previously also rumblings that certain sponsors didn't want to be associated with supporting the protests either.
While I don't count myself among the "angrily opposed" on this issue, rather the merely annoyed, I do think the league should have simply come out the first time this happened and reiterated the rule, and told the players that anyone engaging in political activity on the field in the future would be fined, or suspended if they ignored repeated warnings. As I said many pages ago in one of these threads: The only good political position for a business to take is no political position. The NFL fucked up big-time by allowing this to take on a life of its own; a certain segment of people are put off by it and you can think of them what you will - but one thing for certain is that it hasn't gained any new fans because of it.
Along those lines, if I told the president of my company that I thought we should post a message in support of Black Lives Matter on our company's website, and he said, "No, stick to promoting the product," and then I went ahead and did it anyway - I absolutely would not be surprised to find myself stripped of those responsibilities or fired outright. If I did the same thing with an even more controversial political message, like posting a picture of a confederate flag, I would pretty much EXPECT to be fired. Politics are bad for business, and I wouldn't be surprised if sponsors were unhappy about being associated with that for any number of reasons.
See you Space Cowboy ...
Deadspin has an interesting article about how Jones and Snyder want to shut down all protests and Goodell has a plan to actual put the NFL and its marketing apparatus behind the players and the social justice statements they want to get out there.
https://deadspin.com/it-was-roger-go...hem-1819905690
I wonder what the recently departed Rooney and Mara would have thought about this issue? I know what I think they would advise doing, but we will never know. I do know that I have zero confidence in a league where the strongest voices are Jones and Snyder.
Bottom line is people watch football for the enjoyment, not to gain political opinions. steelreserve has it right it was poorly thought out and definitely the wrong venue for it.
Give a lib a fish--he eats for a day
Teach a lib to fish--he is back the next day asking for more free fish.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
I think Snyder is regarded as a clown by most owners - Jones has clout because he has helped the other owners get even richer but the ESPN article which Deadspin cites indicates one reason no anthem mandate came down is the other owners are getting tired of Jones taking over every meeting
The NFL has become dysfunctional.
Some of the owners are displeased that Bill Clinton's former press secretary is the voice of the league on anthem protest responses as the NFL VP of communications
Some owners were upset with a comment by Lockhart a few days after President Trump criticized the league and its players for kneeling during the anthem. Lockhart told reporters that players talking about police brutality is “what real locker room talk is.”The statement was viewed as a flagrant jab at the president, who had dismissed as “locker room banter” comments he made about forcing himself on women, heard in a video leaked during the campaign.
In a meeting at N.F.L. headquarters the next day, Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones and Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder confronted Lockhart to tell him his remarks would inflame an already fiery issue....
a few owners, who by and large lean right, have questioned whether a lifelong Democrat like Lockhart (who sold his house in Washington to former President Barack Obama) was the best person to speak on behalf of the league.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/29/s...T.nav=top-news
And in the latest effort by Texans owner Bob McNair to clean up after his quote reported in the ESPN article that “[w]e can’t have the inmates running the prison,” McNair now claims
"I was not referring to our players when I made a very regretful comment during the owners meetings last week,” McNair said. “I was referring to the relationship between the league office and team owners and how they have been making significant strategic decisions affecting our league without adequate input from ownership over the past few years."
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...e-not-players/
If so, why are the owners giving Roger a contract extension?
Last edited by AtlantaDan; 10-29-2017 at 07:11 AM. Reason: Added link to NYT article
If Trump ends up getting Goodell fired I may have to re-evaluate his presidency
Sounds like a potential coup d'état by a faction of the 32 owners.
Jerry Jones among owners trying to halt Roger Goodell's extension
The Cowboys' Jerry Jones was a leading voice among 17 NFL owners on a conference call Thursday that discussed the possibility of halting commissioner Roger Goodell's pending contract extension, sources involved with the call told ESPN. There is a growing difference of opinion among owners about Goodell's overall performance as commissioner, according to sources. The owners on Thursday's conference call are generally unhappy with Goodell and the NFL's front office for a variety of reasons, including the player protests staged during the national anthem, issues regarding the relocation of teams to Los Angeles and the league's handling of the Ray Rice domestic violence case, according to sources....
We just don't have enough problem solvers," another NFL owner said. "We gotta get it right or we're just going to let it burn....
[Arthur] Blank, who is the point man for negotiations on Goodell's extension, said he invited Jones as an ad hoc committee adviser. Blank said there remains "details to complete" on the extension for Goodell's term, but he continues to express optimism.
A source said Blank was neither aware of nor invited to participate in last week's conference call, as was the case with at least three other owners contacted this weekend.
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/21206250/dallas-cowboys-jerry-jones-owners-trying-halt-roger-goodell-proposed-contract-extension
So basically every issue of any significance that Goodell has dealt with over the past 5 or 6 years?
As I said before, I think the owners are well aware Goodell is not the reason for the league's success - they just have him there to play the role of the dumb ape in a suit.
Any time serious shit goes down: Goodell blunders into the spotlight and soaks up all the abuse from the public and the media. Presto! - the attention is drawn away from the players and the owners and the teams, who all come out of it looking normal and stay as popular as ever.
This time he didn't do his job as a meat shield, and the controversy reached the core of the business. When it hits the ratings, it doesn't take very long for them to turn on him.
See you Space Cowboy ...
It all comes down to money. If the NFL / teams lose money, the players will stand.
If the NFL / teams don't lose money, then they will let it run its course.
The thing I can't stand is the whole argument of "they have a right, a right paid for by the servicemen" blah blah blah. They have a "right" for as long as the fans support it.
I see NFL players and Hollywood as a source of entertainment. WE pay them to entertain us. In principle, they are like a highly paid court jester who lives and breathes solely to provide us entertainment.
The more entertaining they are, the more they get paid. The less they are, the less they get.
Hollywood is apparently taking a hit too, which is nice to see. Ticket sales are way down, big budget movies flopping at the box office. It maybe political kickback or that the tickets are just too insanely expensive unless you're on a first date and you don't want to seem cheap.
I can't take my family (wife and two sons) to a movie without dropping $100+. Why do that when we can wait for the movie to come to VUDU.
They say all marriages are made in heaven, but so are thunder and lightning.
― Clint Eastwood
https://www.avclub.com/papa-johns-ce...zza-1820052849
This has to take the cake. Papa Johns is blaming slumping sales of its terrible pizza on the NFL protests!
Or maybe it is the fact that most of the country is fortunate enough to live in an area where your mixture of carpet squares and carboard covered in cheese is not the best pizza in town?
What next? Budweiser? Makers of nacho cheese?
Godfather's is the best pizza. They're not in Virginia though.
Is it possible that association with the increasingly unpopular NFL is denting pizza sales? Maybe. But is it also possible that Papa John’s is suffering due to innovation from competitors (Domino’s, for example, is doing well), the rise of DoorDash and Grubhub, or the fact that their pizza isn’t the greatest? Sure is.
http://awfulannouncing.com/nfl/papa-...medium=twitter
Might also be worth considering a retooling of your ad campaign - the main spokesman in your ads retired from the NFL two years ago
I do not know what the demographic is for Papa John's target audience, but while Peyton Manning might work for the age and income group that buys Nationwide Insurance it might not be as effective for targeting the group that regards Papa John's as balanced and healthy fine dining.
Exactly. Far easier to blame some shifty outside forces rather than your crappy product, your aging target audience, and increasing innovation from competitors.
But I suspect a certain group of consumers will now be purposely subjecting themselves to Papa Johns pizza in order to make some sort of point.
Or maybe as a business owner who is sinking millions of dollars into an advertising channel that he feels entitled to voice his opinion about said channel?
- - - Updated - - -
Seems that people who want to stand up for the Flag and their country are marginalized or seen as behind the times (not directing that at you AD).
He can say whatever he wants, but as a champion of the free market and accountability maybe take a look in the mirror - perish the thought this has anything to do with the CEO being a Trump supporter
CEOs are notorious for blaming anything other than management errors when they miss on earnings
It’s worth noting, however, that the pizza chain also missed its revenue growth target in the second quarter. And the wave of NFL protests set off by Trump did not begin until Sept. 23, in the final days of the third quarter results that were discussed in the earnings call.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.b196aac6b55e
If being affiliated with the NFL is such a killer, Microsoft Surface as the official tablet of the NFL should be murdering Microsoft tablet sales
Now, back to pizza talk......
With the proper tinfoil hat to pick up the secret coded messages it becomes clear pizza is the latest tool used by Jerry Jones to take a carom shot at Goodell. This conspiracy theory from PFT.
Jones has become a significant Papa John’s franchise owner, with the total number of stores owned by Jones in excess of 100 as of 2014....
The suspicion in some league circles is that Jones, who has reason to be even more upset with Commissioner Roger Goodell now that running back Ezekiel Elliott‘s suspension is back on, instigated Papa John’s CEO John Schnatter to use Wednesday’s quarterly earnings conference call to dump on the NFL, and to call out NFL leadership for failing to solve the anthem issue before it became a full-blown problem.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...pa-johns-rant/
PFT posted this before Elliott's suspension was temporarily stayed again this morning
In the days following a rant by Papa John's CEO and Louisville resident John Schnatter, where he blamed the NFL and anthem protests for low sales, a white-supremacist publication claimed it as their official pizza.
In a blog post at the Daily Stormer, a photo of pizza with pepperonis arranged in a swastika has a caption that reads "Papa John: Official pizza of the alt-right?"
Peter Collins, the senior director of public relations at Papa John’s, said the company was caught off-guard by the endorsement.
http://www.ajc.com/business/papa-joh...d5nFKI3lENymM/
THAT is a Tombstone oven-baked pizza if I ever saw one.
See you Space Cowboy ...
https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2017/1...otests-ratings
Interesting piece arguing that NFL ratings are down. But they were down before the anthem protests became a thing. Additionally, all other sports ratings are down as well. This tracks with a general across the board trend in TV ratings decline.
In other words, people are watching far less live television than ever before. Companies and advertisers need to "adapt or die" to deal with this.
The NFL, needs to start prepping (like RIGHT NOW - TODAY) for the fact that it will never make as much $$$ as it did in the last TV deal. Never. Who is taking less cash? Owners? Players?