So they lack intellectual curiosity by not appreciating the means of the protest as opposed to the cause of the protest? I'm curious, does the NBA's rule requiring players, coaches, and staff to stand during the national anthem mean they lack intellectual curiosity as well?Globetrotter wrote:I believe that they are taking advantage of a large part of our population by preying on their lack of intellectual curiosity.vwfalcon wrote:So let me get this straight, you believe this is a politically motivated decision? You believe that this league is being used as a "weapon" of sorts to further a political agenda? I don't know what else to say. That's rather shallow thinking.Globetrotter wrote:How dare we think that the man running the league who runs the wwe and who's wife is in Trump's cabinet would use this league as a tool to instigate the worst of us. It's not October 2016 any more. We have to get used to this.vwfalcon wrote:I believe this has less to do with the politics some of you so badly seem to want it to be and more to do with the reaction from the 30 for 30 ESPN. That production was received well enough that Vince probably thought it was worth another shot if he was more conservative on the product and focused more on the football rather than the sideshow. If you truly believe this decision was made due in large part to the anthem protest, I don't know what to tell you. You don't sell $100M worth of stock in your main company over a political action. This has everything to do with wanting to fix a blemish on Vince's resume.
Claiming the league is formed preying on that audience is ignorant.



