The NFL commissioner, owners and players coming together and having “productive” discussions was an excellent example of how policy making works in this country, even within a private organization. Several sides came together in early October to discuss the ongoing and ever-escalating debate engulfing NFL players that take a knee during the national anthem. The act of silent protest has spurred up a heated debate, but over the past several months the focus of that debate had moved off of what players initially protested for and onto the players themselves. With calls from the president to “...fire the sons of bitches...” who knelt and a growing distaste fans have with commentators’ political takes, players, executives and owners have all needed to act quickly to address this issue.

​

It was at this time last year when Colin Kaepernick first sat down in protest during the national anthem, he would later begin to kneel in hopes of maintaining respect for our service members while still drawing attention to his cause. The quarterback chose this silent protest to utilize his platform and give voice to the seemingly voiceless in this country. Kaepernick’s main concern, and the concerns of a growing number of citizens, lies in the systematic racism people of color face on a daily basis, even more specifically, the rampant overextension of police brutality against black men in this country. In an industry that is predominately made up of men of color, it is easy to see why this is an issue for the many NFL players.

       

What started as a decision by Kaepernick has spiraled into an extremely volatile public debate with multiple sides of different coins. There have been a litany of debates morphed into this one specific debate, and the focus of the protest has been forced to shift recently. Instead of addressing the issues that Kaepernick and his fellow NFL players were standing up, or kneeling, for, the public and the president himself have shifted the debate to patriotism. Those who kneel cannot be patriots while they disrespect our flag, but those who denounce silent protest also damn themselves from their own highly regarded patriotism. It’s a catch twenty-two that leaves anyone who attempts to add constructive dialogue into the mix frustrated. With protests lighting up Twitter feeds every Sunday for the past several weeks and a resulting decline of viewership, the NFL was forced to take action.

       

In early October, when players owners and executives from the NFL met in New York City, the meeting had one specific goal--to address players’ specific social concerns and find common ground on those issues moving forward. Coming out of the meeting, Roger Goodell held a short press briefing where he answered questions about the meeting. When asked if the commissioner would force players to stand during the anthem he replied, “We did not ask for that.” It seems this prompted an inevitable showdown between the commissioner of the NFL and President Trump, who has remained vocal in his distaste for the protests and the protestors themselves. However,  the NFL is looking to distance itself from the president and did so by starting to work with players personally.

       

In essence, the NFL has already began to show a change in tone by having this meeting in the first place. An institution known for its traditional values and exuberant displays of patriotism, who has bullied its way to the top and holds its position with a stoic facade, has finally come down from the mountain top to find common ground with players and citizens. Although the debate continues to this day, the hope remains that this will be the launching point from which the NFL and players begin to actively address this issue across the country and in their local communities.

       

Did the NFL do this simply to quell the public’s distaste? Does it really intend to address this issue? Or was this all just a ploy to bring viewers back. As the debate has ingrained itself with the NFL, a noticeable downturn in viewership has protruded. As some football fans will say, “I really didn’t turn on football to get schooled in politics.” While this seems reasonable enough, it’s also reasonable to assume that Trayvon Martin was not looking for a lesson in Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law when he went out for candy either.