NFL trying to ban long hair - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

NFL trying to ban long hair

Moderator: Football Moderators

Re: NFL trying to ban long hair

Postby eaglesrule » Thu Mar 27, 2008 12:31 pm

PS -- not really annoyed, just making a point, as this offseason is slow all of a sudden.
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.
eaglesrule
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2843
Joined: 3 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Re: NFL trying to ban long hair

Postby Munboy » Thu Mar 27, 2008 1:41 pm

FantasyMan13 wrote:
Munboy wrote:Hey NFL officials....

Find something productive to do with your time. ;-D


I actually heard on the radio that the Chiefs suggested this a few weeks ago. Jokes about the Chiefs offseason priorities proceeded :-b


That's silly of the Cheifs. They should be happy that Troy had hair, or he could have taken that INT to the end zone. Besides, the big huff wasn't LJ's tackle, it's the fact that he held on to the hair and gave it a little tug as he was getting up. The funny thing is, everybody made a big deal about it when it happened except for Troy. He just popped up and went to the sidelines.
Image
Feel small yet?
Munboy
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1934
Joined: 20 Nov 2006
Home Cafe: Football

Re: NFL trying to ban long hair

Postby moochman » Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:27 pm

eaglesrule wrote:
moochman wrote:
eaglesrule wrote:Sorry, in some respects you SHOULd be scared of these guys, when their actions lead to firearms being shot at people and cars going 100 mph on PUBLIC roads. I fail to see the ageism, racism or any -ism in that. That behavior is dangerous for not just the perpetrator, but for everyone else. I don't find that part of it irrational at all. If we are talking about hair and fashion etc., then I think that is where the stronger point is to be made.


My response to that arguement is always remember that athletes are a representative slice of societ. There are good and bad people out there and you can't dress them like you want and make them good. I do believe, however, that letting athletes of questionable moral fiber participate in sports can help to turn what might have been truely scarey people into productive members of society. Don't forget that while we alway hear of our sports figures speeding, shooting, and hitting their women there are exponentially more everyday people out there making the same mistakes that we never hear about. Athletes actions, while I don't condone, are not all that different than what is happening right in our own hood.
\

My response to your response is "so what?" they are a slice of society of course, and there are tons of people doing similar things. They aren't really in any way representative of greater society in many key ways; money, fame, accountability, sheer physical size, etc. They are rewarded the way they are because the stakes are so much higher.

But, you can't serious argue that the ones who do act up are in any way related to real society. What would happen if john q. african american was at the root of a strip club shooting, or knocked down the door to his girlfriend's room, or any of the other litany of things? I would argue the point that "everyday people" don't "make it rain" at the strip club, and have the resultant brouhaha result in a man's paralysis. Everyday people in society can't afford the sports cars to go screaming down the highway like some of these people do, or get away with the DUIs etc.

I realize that there are more good than bad in the NFL and the bad get a disproportionate part of the rep. But ALL news works that way and focuses on the bad. And as it pertains to the bad pro athletes, their wealth, notoriety, sense of entitlement etc. combine in a way that doesn't happen for everyday people. Maybe "exponentially more" everyday people make more mistakes, but many aren't in the position to make the qualitatively bad mistakes. And besides, sometimes sports is the vehicle for making people into better figures of society. But with the accolades and unwiligness of friends, families, coaches to jeopardize winning and fame in the name of kncokcing some sense into these kids, it can also make a bad situation worse. Many quality athletes don't have to man up to their responsbilities, simply because they are good at sports.

Finally, while I thinkt he rule is stupid, if we are going to both comparing things to the "real world" (which the NFL really isn't even on the same planet), people can and are fired and disciplined for much less. Your work can fire you for things done outside of work. Your work can make you adhere to a dress code and behavioral conduct. Heck some employees around the country are being fired for smoking on their own time. I know people who work for Coke who were seen drinking pepsi on their own time and disciplined. Point being is the NFL can put rules in place to help fix the image. Because honestly, whether "regular people" are doing worse things or not is irrelevant. Players get paid so much, admired so much and are in the public eye. You can;t take the good and ignore the bad, the league has a right to clean up that perception, because some (not all) but some, is actually earned and isn't a product of racism or ageism.


Dude, John Q Public is doing these things every day!!! All news simply doesn’t report on it, it cannot because there wouldn’t be enough time to talk of the issues people want to hear about. I would argue that given their relative invisibility, John Q is in position to make the qualitatively poorer mistakes than athletes. And they do. Somewhere, even as I type, some poor John Q is destroying his or her life in ways that most athletes aren’t that desperate to conceive of. They are, however, just as prone to making poor decisions as they grow up. A process that takes many people longer than what is considered normal, most of all those who have earned lots of money or favor early in the development as people.
My issue is with the out-of-touch NFL Goodell Boys is that they choose to take the ignorant and fear driven tact to punish players who don’t look and act as they want their world to look and act. Not unlike decades ago when a professional sports organization that didn’t allow those who were different than they to play. Then Jackie Robinson came along. I know, it’s a dramatic leap.
So rather than take the time to develop programs to educate players on the making better decisions, the close-minded Goodell Boys would rather take the easy time-tested punitive approach. We’ll take away their best shot at a better life. That’ll teach ‘em! Meanwhile, that tact can actually cause more damage than any good that can come of it. (Theoretically some young kid may identify with a Pacman type and may watch the way he is treated and give up on a game that could have forced him to pay attention in school, learn the discipline it takes to play an organized team sport, and grow to respect others on some level. This kid, who may not have the options the Goodell Boys kids all had, may then end up never becoming a productive member of society. Or they can see how Pacman, with the help of his employers, overcame his demons and grew to be a person to be emulated. Which scenario would you rather have?)

People watch football to watch football, not to see nice wholesome boys playing a respectful game of football. That goes against the very essence of this beautiful and brutal game. Let them look at they are, it’s really not that scary. It’s just longhair, or tattoos. It’s not like they are out there abusing Vicodin or anything. Oh wait, that would have been Bret Favre, poster boy for all that is good in football.
Image


I think, therefore I am. I think fantasy, therefore I am unreal?
moochman
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterSurvival Of The Fittest WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 16300
(Past Year: 80)
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Living in the shame only a Lions fan knows

Re: NFL trying to ban long hair

Postby eaglesrule » Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:57 am

Dude, John Q Public is doing these things every day!!! All news simply doesn’t report on it, it cannot because there wouldn’t be enough time to talk of the issues people want to hear about. I would argue that given their relative invisibility, John Q is in position to make the qualitatively poorer mistakes than athletes. And they do. Somewhere, even as I type, some poor John Q is destroying his or her life in ways that most athletes aren’t that desperate to conceive of. They are, however, just as prone to making poor decisions as they grow up. A process that takes many people longer than what is considered normal, most of all those who have earned lots of money or favor early in the development as people.

Um, do you watch the news? Seems like every time I turn around (and the common lament of the state of news) is that almost all of it is negative. The vast majority of news today is how the "common man" is killing, addicted, stealing etc. If you want to get precise, I remember a hell of a lot of coverage about Enron, Tyco, etc. I remember Martha Stewart getting busted too. Eliot Spitzer. The list goes on for nonathletes... so I hear you argument, but not buying it. The news is infatuated with murder, theft, and all other manner of human drama. Its why the "feel good" stories generally go to the seemingly poorer reporters. That's what I can't stand about the "we're singled out" argument from pro athletes. No, they really aren't in relation to anyone else. Other notable people get busted ALL the time. Un-notable people get busted all the time. But when you lead a life of privilege like they do, and share in the notoriety, you will get called on it for acting up, and it will be on the news. And the employer of such people, knowing that this is how the world works, has every right to project the best possible image. As it pertains to hair, I think its stupid in the specific, but the general sentiment in the aggregate is at least open to discussion, if not entirely appropriate. After all, there are many more John Q publics than pro athletes. I will agree that the vast majority of athletes get a bad rep. But when the few bad apples screw up, they really screw up, and its guilt by association. But you know what? "guilt by association" is a common thing in the world. I think half the point is, prosports is relatively more forgiving of the talented, but troubled athlete, whereas in a lot of other walks of life, you simply can't do those kinds of things and still have a job, let alone an elite one.

I see your point, but the flip side of that is that when you work for an employer (and nfl players do), like it or lump it, you do have to conform to their rules of behavior

My issue is with the out-of-touch NFL Goodell Boys is that they choose to take the ignorant and fear driven tact to punish players who don’t look and act as they want their world to look and act. Not unlike decades ago when a professional sports organization that didn’t allow those who were different than they to play. Then Jackie Robinson came along. I know, it’s a dramatic leap.

I agree to some measure on this. But I do think it is a bit of a leap. Most people at work don't have the luxury of showing of their tats, wearing visible piercings in non-traditional places, wild hairstyles, etc. You can be disciplined in almost any job for that if they see fit, and most employers do have a dress code, behavior code, and a code of "professionalism." And honestly, it doesn't really have to be directly related to the line of work either. Tons of people work in offices where they have to wear jackets and ties, although they don't encounter clients from the outside, and in theory it wouldn't matter, unless the work gets done.


So rather than take the time to develop programs to educate players on the making better decisions, the close-minded Goodell Boys would rather take the easy time-tested punitive approach. We’ll take away their best shot at a better life. That’ll teach ‘em! Meanwhile, that tact can actually cause more damage than any good that can come of it. (Theoretically some young kid may identify with a Pacman type and may watch the way he is treated and give up on a game that could have forced him to pay attention in school, learn the discipline it takes to play an organized team sport, and grow to respect others on some level. This kid, who may not have the options the Goodell Boys kids all had, may then end up never becoming a productive member of society. Or they can see how Pacman, with the help of his employers, overcame his demons and grew to be a person to be emulated. Which scenario would you rather have?)

Honestly, I don't think this is the NFL's responsibility at all, outside of deciding standards of professionalism, and the fact that it is their product. It's kind of late when you are an adult. I think a big part of this problem is that through an athletes developmental cycle, he has been socially coddled, as the high school coach wants to win, the college coach wants to win, and the hangers-on want the meal ticket. So no one tells them no, they get out of trouble when perhaps it would have been better for them to actually be punished and learn from it.

People watch football to watch football, not to see nice wholesome boys playing a respectful game of football. That goes against the very essence of this beautiful and brutal game. Let them look at they are, it’s really not that scary. It’s just longhair, or tattoos. It’s not like they are out there abusing Vicodin or anything. Oh wait, that would have been Bret Favre, poster boy for all that is good in football.

I'm aware of that. They don't have to be wholesome, but there is a difference between not being wholesome and some of the stuff that goes down. Honestly, if it weren't for Vick and Pacman, we wouldn't be having this discussion. (Well that, and the utterly stupid comments that came from some players on the heels of that). But we are having the discussion, and the NFL does have a problem. But, at least David Stern called his dress code for what it is. Goodell is couching it as a safety issue, which is dumb. And long hair doesn't bug me anyway. Plus, isn't Troy's polynesian? Isn't that kind of hair part of their culture? (I could be getting something confused here)

I will agree, that Favre stuff is ridiculous. He took the drugs at first to get on the field, but everyone conveniently forgets he admitted to taking them for other reasons too after a while, and getting addicted. But it doesn't count because its prescription? please. I do think that obviously there is a racist element to this discussion. But be that as it may, racism doesn't always account for the fact that yes, you broke the law, screwed up, whatever.
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.
eaglesrule
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2843
Joined: 3 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Re: NFL trying to ban long hair

Postby SLAMLLC » Fri Mar 28, 2008 8:51 am

I don't see what the issue is here. When you work for an employer they can mandate a dress code. Simple. What is the big deal. Yes it is an image thing. Just like when traveling they want players dressed in suits. It promotes professionalism and maturity.

Look at the NY Yankees. They do not allow shoulder length hair or beards. Jonny Damon came to play in NY and he was told before you step on the property shave the beard and cut the hair. That's it the employer has the say in the image he wants to project.

So what I am saying is if the NFL wants to implement the policy just go ahead and do it. What is the big deal. If you don't want to work there and you want to keep your long hair then quit. Just like any one of you can do at your jobs that implement a dress code.
SLAMLLC Beginner
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant


Posts: 353
Joined: 9 Apr 2007
Home Cafe: Football

Re: NFL trying to ban long hair

Postby moochman » Fri Mar 28, 2008 9:08 am

I do watch the news. The only time I hear of someone making it rain, getting a DUI, reckless driving, speeding, having troubles with drugs, or beating their women is when it is a celebrity. Yet I know firsthand of many cases where people destroyed their lives and it never made the news. All the examples you cite are of a celebrity nature. Employers can set codes of conducts and appearance in real life. They have the right because the potential employee has the right to choose his long hair or this job. In the NFL, there is no such choice. They see marketable talent, draft them and now want to modify their behavior. This is ambiguous, methinks, because your employer hires you knowing of your appearance and of the high risk behaviors you may exhibit. Then the Goodell Boys come along and want to act as behavioral police. Unlike in an office where a tie may be required, the appearance of professionalism helping to make the environment more productive, the NFL is totally ambiguous here as well. They want to keep the hair in so players look more presentable in their eyes, while there is no evidence that sales have been negatively affected. A wholesome appearance is what they want. Nice and safe for the grumpy old men, yet they parade around a bunch of scantily clad dancers who are but a stripper pole from being banned in some of the cities where they do their dancing. But long hair and a player going to an honest strip club is aberrant behavior. The NFL is being totally hypocritical again, hiding under safety after all the injuries caused by someone getting their hair pulled. How many has that been? But they are perfectly fine with allowing a player who openly admits he will risk another players career to make a tackle. Ban the braids, but do nothing about Roy Williams?

Aw heck, eaglesrule, I am just ranting about the Goodell Boys trying to slowly change football into ballet. I never ask that anyone agree with my thoughts, just that they are considered. Thanks for your thoughtful consideration.

I do believe Troy’s hair is a cultural thing. There is no racist element to the Goodell Boys moralities. They don’t care what color you are just as long as you don’t offend them by not acting like a white choirboy.
Image


I think, therefore I am. I think fantasy, therefore I am unreal?
moochman
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterSurvival Of The Fittest WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 16300
(Past Year: 80)
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Living in the shame only a Lions fan knows

Re: NFL trying to ban long hair

Postby eaglesrule » Fri Mar 28, 2008 1:24 pm

I don't think any regular joe has the money to "make it rain" much less carry it on their person.

i think the rule is dumb nonetheless. I just don't think it is a crime to want representatives of your product to be unprofessional. Being law abiding is the bare minimum behavior required of society. Simply abiding the law doesn't mean you are "Good" in my eyes.

Although, again, I don't think it is a good rule. And I think it is a crock that someone who acted as amorally as he did with the Patriots (his only concern was obviously with league image) to be getting his knickers in a knot over long hair is pretty dumb.

And yes, worrying about that, and not suspending Roy Williams (although to be fair most of that was under Taglibue's watch) is pretty dumb too. That dude is dirty.
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.
eaglesrule
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2843
Joined: 3 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Re: NFL trying to ban long hair

Postby moochman » Tue Apr 01, 2008 3:49 pm

It appears to be a moot point as the league has cut short their hair length initiative.
Image


I think, therefore I am. I think fantasy, therefore I am unreal?
moochman
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterSurvival Of The Fittest WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 16300
(Past Year: 80)
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Living in the shame only a Lions fan knows

Re: NFL trying to ban long hair

Postby steelerfan513 » Tue Apr 01, 2008 7:50 pm

moochman wrote:It appears to be a moot point as the league has cut short their hair length initiative.


Not exactly; they postponed voting on it until May.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3323895

Hair length proposal delayed until May; defensive helmet radios approved

By John Clayton
ESPN.com
(Archive)
Updated: April 1, 2008, 5:03 PM ET

PALM BEACH, Fla. -- The Kansas City Chiefs' proposal calling for all players to tuck or cut long hair so it doesn't hang below the nameplate on their uniform was tabled until the next NFL owners meeting in May.

In delaying any vote on the hair issue, the NFL will have time to listen to feedback from the players association.

"We had a pretty good feeling it was going to get tabled," Chiefs coach Herm Edwards said at the NFL owners meetings. "We have to take it to the union to consider. That's OK. I think as long as the players know they can discuss it. Basically what we're looking at is a discussion. In our opinion, it's a violation of the dress code."
Image
Image
Kudos to Leber for the amazing sig and to Metroid for the userbar and making them both fit
2008 and 2009 Defunct Dynasty League Champion
steelerfan513
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeMatchup Meltdown Survivor
Posts: 11906
Joined: 15 Sep 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Re: NFL trying to ban long hair

Postby joelamosobadiah » Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:29 pm

I say let them play with it long. It poses no advantage in the world for the player wearing the hair and it is a disadvantage to them. If enough guys get their necks snapped around by getting tackled then they will tuck it up in their helmets.
Image
joelamosobadiah
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerGraphics ExpertMock(ing) DrafterGolden Eagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 16386
Joined: 4 Sep 2006
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Gun control is hitting what you aim at.

PreviousNext

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 19:08 hours
(and 39 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact