The unofficial online home for fans of the Old Dominion University Monarchs. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(07-07-2020 12:38 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:21 PM)Maryland Monarch Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:04 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 11:56 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 11:52 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  There's plenty of evidence and you know this.

There is evidence of unequal outcomes, not unequal opportunity. Tends to have more to do with the family structure than the skin color. Whites coming from broken homes with no father figure don't do so great either.

Uh huh. So that explains why black people receive longer jail sentences for the same crimes as whites.

That sounds like a straw man argument to me. The severity of the sentence is most often proportionate to the severity of the crime, coupled with the record of the criminal. Two people committing the same crime could have different sentences, depending on the criminal record of each. A first-time offender will receive more leniency than a recalcitrant criminal. You would have to look at each case individually before you could validate your assertion.

I hardly see how bringing up disproportionate sentencing based on race to argue that equal protection under the law does not exist in practice can be seen as a straw man argument.

To your other point. Yes, looking at any two people sentenced for the same crime you will have different outcomes for various reasons. Looking at thousands of cases in aggregate though, in a study that accounts for criminal history, completed by the United States Sentencing Commision that found that black males receive a sentence 19% longer than their similarly positioned white counterparts? That seems pretty conclusive.

https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-r...sentencing

Any judge doling out unequal sentences based on race should be disbarred. Make it a law... I am sure it would have something like 80% support. Riots unnecessary.

(07-07-2020 12:38 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:17 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  Would everyone involved in this conversation feel the same if the team came out wearing MAGA gear instead of BLM gear. I would. I am opposed to all of it on the playing field, and I support all of it off the field.

I think the more accurate comparison would be "black lives matter" (the cause, not necessarily the group as you can support the former while not the latter) vs. "support the troops." They're apolitical statements on the surface that can and do function as political statements as well, depending on the context. "Make America Great Again" is the long-established slogan for Trump's presidential campaigns. It's sorta hard for that not to be political.

Huh? BLM is a political organization, and at this point, you cannot extract them from the phrase. Make American Great Again is a political entity, and at this point, you cannot extract them from the phrase.

Support our troops is not a political organization, it is only a phrase.

(07-07-2020 12:40 PM)odu09 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:33 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:30 PM)odu09 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:17 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  Would everyone involved in this conversation feel the same if the team came out wearing MAGA gear instead of BLM gear. I would. I am opposed to all of it on the playing field, and I support all of it off the field.

Sure, if the guys came our with MAGA gear during warmups to express something bigger than football, who am I to judge. It doesn't mean I'm going to stop donating like all these others were threatening to do.

Let me be clear, while I don't support the individual protests, I am not going to stop donating because X player took a knee. I will stop donating when the school gets involved and paints "BLM" or some other left wing or Marxist slogan on helmets or the end zone.

But you are fine if they wear BLM shirts during warmups, do a circle of unity, and send our rainbow fireworks?

Does anyone actually think ODU is going to paint BLM in the endzone?

"Fine with it"... wouldn't say that, but if the university is going the free expression route and it applies equally then I can tolerate it. U of Memphis is painting BLM on helmets and the NBA is talking of painting it on their courts. I don't think ODU would stoop to the that level of virtue signaling, but you never know these days. Maybe spring football is the answer since all this stuff will be forgotten after the election.

(07-07-2020 12:41 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:24 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:23 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:17 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  Would everyone involved in this conversation feel the same if the team came out wearing MAGA gear instead of BLM gear. I would. I am opposed to all of it on the playing field, and I support all of it off the field.

I wouldn't boo them or boycott them if that was their choice.

Do you feel the same about the National Anthem being played before games?

I am not sure I understand your question?

Do you oppose the National Anthem being played before football games?

Of course not. The most recent poll I can find shows 82% support for The National Anthem. It is not a politically divisive issue among the mainstream, therefor it is not a political statement.

(07-07-2020 12:41 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:38 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:21 PM)Maryland Monarch Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:04 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 11:56 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  There is evidence of unequal outcomes, not unequal opportunity. Tends to have more to do with the family structure than the skin color. Whites coming from broken homes with no father figure don't do so great either.

Uh huh. So that explains why black people receive longer jail sentences for the same crimes as whites.

That sounds like a straw man argument to me. The severity of the sentence is most often proportionate to the severity of the crime, coupled with the record of the criminal. Two people committing the same crime could have different sentences, depending on the criminal record of each. A first-time offender will receive more leniency than a recalcitrant criminal. You would have to look at each case individually before you could validate your assertion.

I hardly see how bringing up disproportionate sentencing based on race to argue that equal protection under the law does not exist in practice can be seen as a straw man argument.

To your other point. Yes, looking at any two people sentenced for the same crime you will have different outcomes for various reasons. Looking at thousands of cases in aggregate though, in a study that accounts for criminal history, completed by the United States Sentencing Commision that found that black males receive a sentence 19% longer than their similarly positioned white counterparts? That seems pretty conclusive.

https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-r...sentencing

Any judge doling out unequal sentences based on race should be disbarred. Make it a law... I am sure it would have something like 80% support. Riots unnecessary.

Wouldn't have too many judges left. I can show you similar studies showing discipline in schools show the same trend. Policing disparities as well. That's the thing about systemic racism, it's not based on overt racism and the people perpetrating it don't see themselves as racists. Racial bias runs deep in this country though and blacks bare the brunt of it. Riots aren't necessary but change is and if it doesn't come then there will be more riots and protests. I'm not saying it's justice or even justified but you'd be stupid to think it's not expected. Almost 30 year since Rodney King and only 60 since blacks were legally considered second classed citizens. Denying systemic racism is being willfully ignorant.

(07-07-2020 12:41 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:24 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:23 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:17 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  Would everyone involved in this conversation feel the same if the team came out wearing MAGA gear instead of BLM gear. I would. I am opposed to all of it on the playing field, and I support all of it off the field.

I wouldn't boo them or boycott them if that was their choice.

Do you feel the same about the National Anthem being played before games?

I am not sure I understand your question?

Do you oppose the National Anthem being played before football games?

I'd punt the national anthem before games, but for entirely non-political reasons. It's an important song that should be saved for important occasions, not to be sung by a random glee club at a late June Pirates-Padres game or played off a well-worn CD at a high school volleyball match. It lessens its impact and turns it into a pregame Take Me Out To The Ballgame. It deserves better.

(07-07-2020 12:48 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:41 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:24 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:23 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:17 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  Would everyone involved in this conversation feel the same if the team came out wearing MAGA gear instead of BLM gear. I would. I am opposed to all of it on the playing field, and I support all of it off the field.

I wouldn't boo them or boycott them if that was their choice.

Do you feel the same about the National Anthem being played before games?

I am not sure I understand your question?

Do you oppose the National Anthem being played before football games?

Of course not. The most recent poll I can find shows 82% support for The National Anthem. It is not a politically divisive issue among the mainstream, therefor it is not a political statement.

Oh.....is mainstream thinking all it takes to consider an issue nonpolitical? I'm pretty sure over on the Covid thread you were waxing philosophical about evils of swallowing the mainstream narrative.


edited for wording

(07-07-2020 12:44 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:38 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:17 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  Would everyone involved in this conversation feel the same if the team came out wearing MAGA gear instead of BLM gear. I would. I am opposed to all of it on the playing field, and I support all of it off the field.

I think the more accurate comparison would be "black lives matter" (the cause, not necessarily the group as you can support the former while not the latter) vs. "support the troops." They're apolitical statements on the surface that can and do function as political statements as well, depending on the context. "Make America Great Again" is the long-established slogan for Trump's presidential campaigns. It's sorta hard for that not to be political.

Huh? BLM is a political organization, and at this point, you cannot extract them from the phrase. Make American Great Again is a political entity, and at this point, you cannot extract them from the phrase.

Support our troops is not a political organization, it is only a phrase.

BLM is both a phrase and an organization. It's a phrase because of the organization, but the two aren't inexorably tied; you can absolutely say that black lives matter without simultaneously pledging allegiance to the movement's political aims (police reform/defunding, criminal justice reform, economic justice issues, etc.) regardless of whether you believe in them.

Make America Great Again, in 2020, can really only mean one thing.

(07-07-2020 12:50 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:41 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:38 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:21 PM)Maryland Monarch Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:04 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  Uh huh. So that explains why black people receive longer jail sentences for the same crimes as whites.

That sounds like a straw man argument to me. The severity of the sentence is most often proportionate to the severity of the crime, coupled with the record of the criminal. Two people committing the same crime could have different sentences, depending on the criminal record of each. A first-time offender will receive more leniency than a recalcitrant criminal. You would have to look at each case individually before you could validate your assertion.

I hardly see how bringing up disproportionate sentencing based on race to argue that equal protection under the law does not exist in practice can be seen as a straw man argument.

To your other point. Yes, looking at any two people sentenced for the same crime you will have different outcomes for various reasons. Looking at thousands of cases in aggregate though, in a study that accounts for criminal history, completed by the United States Sentencing Commision that found that black males receive a sentence 19% longer than their similarly positioned white counterparts? That seems pretty conclusive.

https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-r...sentencing

Any judge doling out unequal sentences based on race should be disbarred. Make it a law... I am sure it would have something like 80% support. Riots unnecessary.

Wouldn't have too many judges left. I can show you similar studies showing discipline in schools show the same trend. Policing disparities as well. That's the thing about systemic racism, it's not based on overt racism and the people perpetrating it don't see themselves as racists. Racial bias runs deep in this country though and blacks bare the brunt of it. Riots aren't necessary but change is and if it doesn't come then there will be more riots and protests. I'm not saying it's justice or even justified but you'd be stupid to think it's not expected. Almost 30 year since Rodney King and only 60 since blacks were legally considered second classed citizens. Denying systemic racism is being willfully ignorant.

Sounds like individual prejudice to me. The constitution demands equal protection under the law. That is the opposite of systemic racism. The system requires equality. Individuals may or may not execute unequally. I'm going to hold off on accepting or denying the study until I can take the time to read it. Would like to see a study on individual judges to ensure we aren't comparing rulings from a San Francisco district court and some hard arse law and order guy from rural Alabama.

(07-07-2020 12:57 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:50 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:41 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:38 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:21 PM)Maryland Monarch Wrote:  That sounds like a straw man argument to me. The severity of the sentence is most often proportionate to the severity of the crime, coupled with the record of the criminal. Two people committing the same crime could have different sentences, depending on the criminal record of each. A first-time offender will receive more leniency than a recalcitrant criminal. You would have to look at each case individually before you could validate your assertion.

I hardly see how bringing up disproportionate sentencing based on race to argue that equal protection under the law does not exist in practice can be seen as a straw man argument.

To your other point. Yes, looking at any two people sentenced for the same crime you will have different outcomes for various reasons. Looking at thousands of cases in aggregate though, in a study that accounts for criminal history, completed by the United States Sentencing Commision that found that black males receive a sentence 19% longer than their similarly positioned white counterparts? That seems pretty conclusive.

https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-r...sentencing

Any judge doling out unequal sentences based on race should be disbarred. Make it a law... I am sure it would have something like 80% support. Riots unnecessary.

Wouldn't have too many judges left. I can show you similar studies showing discipline in schools show the same trend. Policing disparities as well. That's the thing about systemic racism, it's not based on overt racism and the people perpetrating it don't see themselves as racists. Racial bias runs deep in this country though and blacks bare the brunt of it. Riots aren't necessary but change is and if it doesn't come then there will be more riots and protests. I'm not saying it's justice or even justified but you'd be stupid to think it's not expected. Almost 30 year since Rodney King and only 60 since blacks were legally considered second classed citizens. Denying systemic racism is being willfully ignorant.

Sounds like individual prejudice to me. The constitution demands equal protection under the law. That is the opposite of systemic racism. The system requires equality. Individuals may or may not execute unequally. I'm going to hold off on accepting or denying the study until I can take the time to read it. Would like to see a study on individual judges to ensure we aren't comparing rulings from a San Francisco district court and some hard arse law and order guy from rural Alabama.

For about 70 years "separate but equal" was considered equal protection under the law according to the SCOTUS' interpretation of the constitution. Would you say that systemic racism didn't exist during that period?

(07-07-2020 01:07 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:57 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:50 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:41 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:38 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  I hardly see how bringing up disproportionate sentencing based on race to argue that equal protection under the law does not exist in practice can be seen as a straw man argument.

To your other point. Yes, looking at any two people sentenced for the same crime you will have different outcomes for various reasons. Looking at thousands of cases in aggregate though, in a study that accounts for criminal history, completed by the United States Sentencing Commision that found that black males receive a sentence 19% longer than their similarly positioned white counterparts? That seems pretty conclusive.

https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-r...sentencing

Any judge doling out unequal sentences based on race should be disbarred. Make it a law... I am sure it would have something like 80% support. Riots unnecessary.

Wouldn't have too many judges left. I can show you similar studies showing discipline in schools show the same trend. Policing disparities as well. That's the thing about systemic racism, it's not based on overt racism and the people perpetrating it don't see themselves as racists. Racial bias runs deep in this country though and blacks bare the brunt of it. Riots aren't necessary but change is and if it doesn't come then there will be more riots and protests. I'm not saying it's justice or even justified but you'd be stupid to think it's not expected. Almost 30 year since Rodney King and only 60 since blacks were legally considered second classed citizens. Denying systemic racism is being willfully ignorant.

Sounds like individual prejudice to me. The constitution demands equal protection under the law. That is the opposite of systemic racism. The system requires equality. Individuals may or may not execute unequally. I'm going to hold off on accepting or denying the study until I can take the time to read it. Would like to see a study on individual judges to ensure we aren't comparing rulings from a San Francisco district court and some hard arse law and order guy from rural Alabama.

For about 70 years "separate but equal" was considered equal protection under the law according to the SCOTUS' interpretation of the constitution. Would you say that systemic racism didn't exist during that period?

That was struck down. We no longer live under that paradigm. If there is a current paradigm that needs to be looked at, I would support that. One example might be online k-12 public education, if it ultimately comes to that. Not sure if it amounts to "systemic racism", but it doesn't take a genius to foreshadow what will be disastrous outcomes for minorities and lower class whites.

(07-07-2020 12:53 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:48 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:41 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:24 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:23 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  I wouldn't boo them or boycott them if that was their choice.

Do you feel the same about the National Anthem being played before games?

I am not sure I understand your question?

Do you oppose the National Anthem being played before football games?

Of course not. The most recent poll I can find shows 82% support for The National Anthem. It is not a politically divisive issue among the mainstream, therefor it is not a political statement.

Oh.....is mainstream thinking all it takes to consider an issue nonpolitical? I'm pretty sure over on the Covid thread you were waxing philosophical about evils of swallowing the mainstream narrative.


edited for wording

I am not talking about narratives. I am talking about the fact that the population respects, and based on that percentage even reveres, The National Anthem. That is a fact, not a narrative spun by networks and social media activists that is, in reality, not supported by the facts.

(07-07-2020 01:37 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:53 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:48 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:41 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:24 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  I am not sure I understand your question?

Do you oppose the National Anthem being played before football games?

Of course not. The most recent poll I can find shows 82% support for The National Anthem. It is not a politically divisive issue among the mainstream, therefor it is not a political statement.

Oh.....is mainstream thinking all it takes to consider an issue nonpolitical? I'm pretty sure over on the Covid thread you were waxing philosophical about evils of swallowing the mainstream narrative.


edited for wording

I am not talking about narratives. I am talking about the fact that the population respects, and based on that percentage even reveres, The National Anthem. That is a fact, not a narrative spun by networks and social media activists that is, in reality, not supported by the facts.

Polls showed similar support to the lockdown measures/

(07-07-2020 01:18 PM)smudge12 Wrote:  We can't ignore the fact that black communities built wealth for this nation yet were never able to accumulate generational wealth for almost 400 years. They've dealt with slavery, segregation, and racially charged policies post-segregation (ex. redlining, predatory loans, higher interest rates, war on drugs, voter suppression).

Economics is the main driver for social issues; this is true anywhere among any race. In America, black people have taken the brunt of the economic inequalities.

We can't simply tell black people to "get your house in order" (as someone implied earlier) when they own so little - if any - of the house. The ramifications of an entire section of society having to "catch up" (after centuries nonetheless) is a few textbooks of socio-economics in itself.

Believing we're all on equal footing is either a complete misunderstanding of history, or a willful ignorance of it.

This is what it all comes down to. It's hard to imagine equality until there is a measure of equity.

(07-07-2020 01:18 PM)smudge12 Wrote:  We can't ignore the fact that black communities built wealth for this nation yet were never able to accumulate generational wealth for almost 400 years. They've dealt with slavery, segregation, and racially charged policies post-segregation (ex. redlining, predatory loans, higher interest rates, war on drugs, voter suppression).

Economics is the main driver for social issues; this is true anywhere among any race. In America, black people have taken the brunt of the economic inequalities.

We can't simply tell black people to "get your house in order" (as someone implied earlier) when they own so little - if any - of the house. The ramifications of an entire section of society having to "catch up" (after centuries nonetheless) is a few textbooks of socio-economics in itself.

Believing we're all on equal footing is either a complete misunderstanding of history, or a willful ignorance of it.

That is really well stated. Based on your post, I think we have common ground on what has gone wrong, but we differ on how we, as a nation, can make improvement. I wish these kinds of discussions happened more in this country, because if you and I were working together to make policy, I have no doubt that we could find an intersection between what I think would help erase that very real gap, and what you think would help. We, I am sure, are miles apart on solutions, but if we at least can start from a common place, then compromise can happen, and real change can be made. Unfortunately, the climate in the country at this time is such that those types of give and take conversations cannot exist, and finding a common place to start is becoming nearly impossible.

(07-07-2020 12:17 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  Would everyone involved in this conversation feel the same if the team came out wearing MAGA gear instead of BLM gear. I would. I am opposed to all of it on the playing field, and I support all of it off the field.

I am sure there are players on the team that would like to do so, and if they choose to do it, they are allowed, in my book. But again, we are talking about individual rights to express ourselves. I doubt there is a university or even a team wide initiative to support BLM or MAGA or anything else.

(07-07-2020 12:40 PM)odu09 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:33 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:30 PM)odu09 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:17 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  Would everyone involved in this conversation feel the same if the team came out wearing MAGA gear instead of BLM gear. I would. I am opposed to all of it on the playing field, and I support all of it off the field.

Sure, if the guys came our with MAGA gear during warmups to express something bigger than football, who am I to judge. It doesn't mean I'm going to stop donating like all these others were threatening to do.

Let me be clear, while I don't support the individual protests, I am not going to stop donating because X player took a knee. I will stop donating when the school gets involved and paints "BLM" or some other left wing or Marxist slogan on helmets or the end zone.

But you are fine if they wear BLM shirts during warmups, do a circle of unity, and send our rainbow fireworks?

Does anyone actually think ODU is going to paint BLM in the endzone?

The University overtly supports social or political things all the time. So is it just BLM that ruffles your feathers?

(07-07-2020 12:48 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:41 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:24 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:23 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:17 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  Would everyone involved in this conversation feel the same if the team came out wearing MAGA gear instead of BLM gear. I would. I am opposed to all of it on the playing field, and I support all of it off the field.

I wouldn't boo them or boycott them if that was their choice.

Do you feel the same about the National Anthem being played before games?

I am not sure I understand your question?

Do you oppose the National Anthem being played before football games?

Of course not. The most recent poll I can find shows 82% support for The National Anthem. It is not a politically divisive issue among the mainstream, therefor it is not a political statement.

Playing the National Anthem prior to athletic events has not been ubiquitous in sports, up until WWII the national anthem was not performed at all, except at the Olympic Games.

(07-07-2020 02:24 PM)BigBlueMonarch Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:48 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:41 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:24 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:23 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  I wouldn't boo them or boycott them if that was their choice.

Do you feel the same about the National Anthem being played before games?

I am not sure I understand your question?

Do you oppose the National Anthem being played before football games?

Of course not. The most recent poll I can find shows 82% support for The National Anthem. It is not a politically divisive issue among the mainstream, therefor it is not a political statement.

Playing the National Anthem prior to athletic events has not been ubiquitous in sports, up until WWII the national anthem was not performed at all, except at the Olympic Games.

Gotcha, so it has only been ubiquitous for 80 years.

(07-07-2020 02:20 PM)BigBlueMonarch Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:40 PM)odu09 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:33 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:30 PM)odu09 Wrote:  

(07-07-2020 12:17 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  Would everyone involved in this conversation feel the same if the team came out wearing MAGA gear instead of BLM gear. I would. I am opposed to all of it on the playing field, and I support all of it off the field.

Sure, if the guys came our with MAGA gear during warmups to express something bigger than football, who am I to judge. It doesn't mean I'm going to stop donating like all these others were threatening to do.

Let me be clear, while I don't support the individual protests, I am not going to stop donating because X player took a knee. I will stop donating when the school gets involved and paints "BLM" or some other left wing or Marxist slogan on helmets or the end zone.

But you are fine if they wear BLM shirts during warmups, do a circle of unity, and send our rainbow fireworks?

Does anyone actually think ODU is going to paint BLM in the endzone?

The University overtly supports social or political things all the time. So is it just BLM that ruffles your feathers?

Just things that fox news declares evil. Also not sure if you meant to respond to me, I'm fine with players expressing their beliefs on the field before games like they have been.