quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Reading this thread proves to me that Nike accomplished it's goal of the ad campaign. Supporters like myself now feel a strong attachment to the brand and detractors are grasping at straws - finding any miniscule detail that isn't exactly correct ("he didn't lose everything - he still has some money"). The main point is that everyone is talking about it and detractors are spending a lot time THINKING about Nike. Kudos to them. LOL reading this thread I'm surprised there wasn't some public hub-bub when they released 'Just Do It'. Technically it doesn't say what 'it' is - or how to do it. Therefore the campaign is bullshit. LOL.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

Nike is paying Kaepernick, therefore it has not cost him everything.

I think the way Yary has captured this is correct. CK was at work, in his company's work uniform, pushing his social agenda while on then clock in a way knowing it would agitate people. This ain't Tommy Smith and the '68 Olympics.

The NFL has every right to ask folks to not do that. Where they have dropped the ball is by not picking up the issue that CK was bringing to light.

If i was in people's face at work about my political views, there would be consequences.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

Nike is paying Kaepernick, therefore it has not cost him everything.

I think the way Yary has captured this is correct. CK was at work, in his company's work uniform, pushing his social agenda while on then clock in a way knowing it would agitate people. This ain't Tommy Smith and the '68 Olympics.

The NFL has every right to ask folks to not do that. Where they have dropped the ball is by not picking up the issue that CK was bringing to light.

If i was in people's face at work about my political views, there would be consequences.

False premise.

How so?

If I did the equivalent, there would be consequences.

He's not in peoples' faces and you could easily do something like wear a MAGA hat and you would suffer no consequences from your employer. You're framing the debate in a 'rich, entitled guy vs. Everyday Joes' setting.

If I wore a MAGA hat around at work, there would be consequences. People are VERY passionate about political issues and would voice their issues.

You think some kid could wear a MAGA pin on his shirt working at a BK in Boston?

False premise again. To be equivalent the kid would have to be blackballed from all restaurants. Also the kid (or you with a MAGA hat) would only be requesting to wear it for two minutes before your shift starts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Reading this thread proves to me that Nike accomplished it's goal of the ad campaign. Supporters like myself now feel a strong attachment to the brand and detractors are grasping at straws - finding any miniscule detail that isn't exactly correct ("he didn't lose everything - he still has some money"). The main point is that everyone is talking about it and detractors are spending a lot time THINKING about Nike. Kudos to them. LOL reading this thread I'm surprised there wasn't some public hub-bub when they released 'Just Do It'. Technically it doesn't say what 'it' is - or how to do it. Therefore the campaign is bullshit. LOL.

IOWs, it was all about money.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Reading this thread proves to me that Nike accomplished it's goal of the ad campaign. Supporters like myself now feel a strong attachment to the brand and detractors are grasping at straws - finding any miniscule detail that isn't exactly correct ("he didn't lose everything - he still has some money"). The main point is that everyone is talking about it and detractors are spending a lot time THINKING about Nike. Kudos to them. LOL reading this thread I'm surprised there wasn't some public hub-bub when they released 'Just Do It'. Technically it doesn't say what 'it' is - or how to do it. Therefore the campaign is bullshit. LOL.

Funny thing is....it has no impact on how I feel about Nike at all. They are about making money. CK is the vehicle today.

I personally liked the "I am not a role model" controversy much more.

I didn't say it changed anyone's mind - I said everyone it thinking about it and many are talking about it.

Also - from now on if I'm ever looking at a rack of Nike shirts and a rack of Under Armor shirts, and the price is the same or close - I'm buying the Nike every time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

Nike is paying Kaepernick, therefore it has not cost him everything.

I think the way Yary has captured this is correct. CK was at work, in his company's work uniform, pushing his social agenda while on then clock in a way knowing it would agitate people. This ain't Tommy Smith and the '68 Olympics.

The NFL has every right to ask folks to not do that. Where they have dropped the ball is by not picking up the issue that CK was bringing to light.

If i was in people's face at work about my political views, there would be consequences.

How is kneeling during the anthem the same as getting in people's faces?

Its kind of the opposite. He wasn't pushing anything, he wasn't telling people how to act. He was doing a quiet thing that literally needed to be pointed out by the media for people to get offended.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

Nike is paying Kaepernick, therefore it has not cost him everything.

I think the way Yary has captured this is correct. CK was at work, in his company's work uniform, pushing his social agenda while on then clock in a way knowing it would agitate people. This ain't Tommy Smith and the '68 Olympics.

The NFL has every right to ask folks to not do that. Where they have dropped the ball is by not picking up the issue that CK was bringing to light.

If i was in people's face at work about my political views, there would be consequences.

False premise.

How so?

If I did the equivalent, there would be consequences.

He's not in peoples' faces and you could easily do something like wear a MAGA hat and you would suffer no consequences from your employer. You're framing the debate in a 'rich, entitled guy vs. Everyday Joes' setting.

If I wore a MAGA hat around at work, there would be consequences. People are VERY passionate about political issues and would voice their issues.

You think some kid could wear a MAGA pin on his shirt working at a BK in Boston?

False premise again. To be equivalent the kid would have to be blackballed from all restaurants. Also the kid (or you with a MAGA hat) would only be requesting to wear it for two minutes before your shift starts.

And for those 2 minutes, the kid is on national TV...

Look...if the NFL has blackballed this kid, they need to pay. THAT is not the solution and the NFL has stepped in it big time here.

I think what CK did was with the right intentions. He and the NFL should have found a productive way to deal with it after that. NFL screwed the pooch.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

Reading this thread proves to me that Nike accomplished it's goal of the ad campaign. Supporters like myself now feel a strong attachment to the brand and detractors are grasping at straws - finding any miniscule detail that isn't exactly correct ("he didn't lose everything - he still has some money"). The main point is that everyone is talking about it and detractors are spending a lot time THINKING about Nike. Kudos to them. LOL reading this thread I'm surprised there wasn't some public hub-bub when they released 'Just Do It'. Technically it doesn't say what 'it' is - or how to do it. Therefore the campaign is bullshit. LOL.

IOWs, it was all about money.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

Nike is paying Kaepernick, therefore it has not cost him everything.

I think the way Yary has captured this is correct. CK was at work, in his company's work uniform, pushing his social agenda while on then clock in a way knowing it would agitate people. This ain't Tommy Smith and the '68 Olympics.

The NFL has every right to ask folks to not do that. Where they have dropped the ball is by not picking up the issue that CK was bringing to light.

If i was in people's face at work about my political views, there would be consequences.

False premise.

How so?

If I did the equivalent, there would be consequences.

He's not in peoples' faces and you could easily do something like wear a MAGA hat and you would suffer no consequences from your employer. You're framing the debate in a 'rich, entitled guy vs. Everyday Joes' setting.

If I wore a MAGA hat around at work, there would be consequences. People are VERY passionate about political issues and would voice their issues.

You think some kid could wear a MAGA pin on his shirt working at a BK in Boston?

False premise again. To be equivalent the kid would have to be blackballed from all restaurants. Also the kid (or you with a MAGA hat) would only be requesting to wear it for two minutes before your shift starts.

And for those 2 minutes, the kid is on national TV...

Look...if the NFL has blackballed this kid, they need to pay. THAT is not the solution and the NFL has stepped in it big time here.

I think what CK did was with the right intentions. He and the NFL should have found a productive way to deal with it after that. NFL screwed the pooch.

If? The dude got blackballed. That's not even up for debate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

Nike is paying Kaepernick, therefore it has not cost him everything.

I think the way Yary has captured this is correct. CK was at work, in his company's work uniform, pushing his social agenda while on then clock in a way knowing it would agitate people. This ain't Tommy Smith and the '68 Olympics.

The NFL has every right to ask folks to not do that. Where they have dropped the ball is by not picking up the issue that CK was bringing to light.

If i was in people's face at work about my political views, there would be consequences.

How is kneeling during the anthem the same as getting in people's faces?

Its kind of the opposite. He wasn't pushing anything, he wasn't telling people how to act. He was doing a quiet thing that literally needed to be pointed out by the media for people to get offended.

If it was not in perople's faces, then why do so many see it as inflamatory?

What if he stood there and did a Nazi salute? Or grabbed his nuts? It's only for 2 minutes....he didn't say anything....

If it was no big deal, we wouldn't be talking about it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

Which is exactly my point. He chose to protest and raise awareness at the expense of his own career.

My guess is he did on a grandiose whim, not really aware of the potential blowback.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

Nike is paying Kaepernick, therefore it has not cost him everything.

I think the way Yary has captured this is correct. CK was at work, in his company's work uniform, pushing his social agenda while on then clock in a way knowing it would agitate people. This ain't Tommy Smith and the '68 Olympics.

The NFL has every right to ask folks to not do that. Where they have dropped the ball is by not picking up the issue that CK was bringing to light.

If i was in people's face at work about my political views, there would be consequences.

How is kneeling during the anthem the same as getting in people's faces?

Its kind of the opposite. He wasn't pushing anything, he wasn't telling people how to act. He was doing a quiet thing that literally needed to be pointed out by the media for people to get offended.

If it was not in perople's faces, then why do so many see it as inflamatory?

What if he stood there and did a Nazi salute? Or grabbed his nuts? It's only for 2 minutes....he didn't say anything....

If it was no big deal, we wouldn't be talking about it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

Nike is paying Kaepernick, therefore it has not cost him everything.

I think the way Yary has captured this is correct. CK was at work, in his company's work uniform, pushing his social agenda while on then clock in a way knowing it would agitate people. This ain't Tommy Smith and the '68 Olympics.

The NFL has every right to ask folks to not do that. Where they have dropped the ball is by not picking up the issue that CK was bringing to light.

If i was in people's face at work about my political views, there would be consequences.

How is kneeling during the anthem the same as getting in people's faces?

Its kind of the opposite. He wasn't pushing anything, he wasn't telling people how to act. He was doing a quiet thing that literally needed to be pointed out by the media for people to get offended.

If it was not in perople's faces, then why do so many see it as inflamatory?

What if he stood there and did a Nazi salute? Or grabbed his nuts? It's only for 2 minutes....he didn't say anything....

If it was no big deal, we wouldn't be talking about it.

He didn't. Why do you keep trying to re-frame this debate in a way that vilifies CK?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

And again, the irony is an expensive ad campaign....how is that losing everything?

Look - I appreciate the guy's desire here and think it is very noble. I am just not surprised there were ramifications and expected that. He and the NFL should have had a pow-wow and come up with a powerful campaign together to go after this issue. IMHO, the big cowards are the NFL.

That argument might have merit if Kaepernick had a crystal ball and new that a couple of years later Nike would make him the center of an ad campaign. What he DID know, was that he pissing off the powers that be in the NFL. He assumed the risk without knowledge of a payoff down the road.

I disagree, but that's cool.

I'm pretty sure he thought the NFL would do the right thing, or he would find something like what he has in Nike now, although not knowing what it was.

Dude is not, nor will be, as poor as I've been at times in my life.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

Nike is paying Kaepernick, therefore it has not cost him everything.

I think the way Yary has captured this is correct. CK was at work, in his company's work uniform, pushing his social agenda while on then clock in a way knowing it would agitate people. This ain't Tommy Smith and the '68 Olympics.

The NFL has every right to ask folks to not do that. Where they have dropped the ball is by not picking up the issue that CK was bringing to light.

If i was in people's face at work about my political views, there would be consequences.

How is kneeling during the anthem the same as getting in people's faces?

Its kind of the opposite. He wasn't pushing anything, he wasn't telling people how to act. He was doing a quiet thing that literally needed to be pointed out by the media for people to get offended.

If it was not in perople's faces, then why do so many see it as inflamatory?

What if he stood there and did a Nazi salute? Or grabbed his nuts? It's only for 2 minutes....he didn't say anything....

If it was no big deal, we wouldn't be talking about it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

And again, the irony is an expensive ad campaign....how is that losing everything?

Look - I appreciate the guy's desire here and think it is very noble. I am just not surprised there were ramifications and expected that. He and the NFL should have had a pow-wow and come up with a powerful campaign together to go after this issue. IMHO, the big cowards are the NFL.

That argument might have merit if Kaepernick had a crystal ball and new that a couple of years later Nike would make him the center of an ad campaign. What he DID know, was that he pissing off the powers that be in the NFL. He assumed the risk without knowledge of a payoff down the road.

I disagree, but that's cool.

I'm pretty sure he thought the NFL would do the right thing, or he would find something like what he has in Nike now, although not knowing what it was.

Dude is not, nor will be, as poor as I've been at times in my life.

Nor will you ever know the life experiences that he has lived that led him to that point. And again, how much he had already earned to that point is irrelevant. Your theory seems to be that he knew that if he jumped a net would appear. I'm not buying it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

Nike is paying Kaepernick, therefore it has not cost him everything.

I think the way Yary has captured this is correct. CK was at work, in his company's work uniform, pushing his social agenda while on then clock in a way knowing it would agitate people. This ain't Tommy Smith and the '68 Olympics.

The NFL has every right to ask folks to not do that. Where they have dropped the ball is by not picking up the issue that CK was bringing to light.

If i was in people's face at work about my political views, there would be consequences.

How is kneeling during the anthem the same as getting in people's faces?

Its kind of the opposite. He wasn't pushing anything, he wasn't telling people how to act. He was doing a quiet thing that literally needed to be pointed out by the media for people to get offended.

If it was not in perople's faces, then why do so many see it as inflamatory?

What if he stood there and did a Nazi salute? Or grabbed his nuts? It's only for 2 minutes....he didn't say anything....

If it was no big deal, we wouldn't be talking about it.

He didn't. Why do you keep trying to re-frame this debate in a way that vilifies CK?

Because people try to act like what he did should not have gotten people upset..."it was no big deal"..."not in anyone's face"....

I personally think what he did should NOT be in the workplace (where he was) and the timing was disrespectful.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

Nike is paying Kaepernick, therefore it has not cost him everything.

I think the way Yary has captured this is correct. CK was at work, in his company's work uniform, pushing his social agenda while on then clock in a way knowing it would agitate people. This ain't Tommy Smith and the '68 Olympics.

The NFL has every right to ask folks to not do that. Where they have dropped the ball is by not picking up the issue that CK was bringing to light.

If i was in people's face at work about my political views, there would be consequences.

How is kneeling during the anthem the same as getting in people's faces?

Its kind of the opposite. He wasn't pushing anything, he wasn't telling people how to act. He was doing a quiet thing that literally needed to be pointed out by the media for people to get offended.

If it was not in perople's faces, then why do so many see it as inflamatory?

What if he stood there and did a Nazi salute? Or grabbed his nuts? It's only for 2 minutes....he didn't say anything....

If it was no big deal, we wouldn't be talking about it.

He didn't. Why do you keep trying to re-frame this debate in a way that vilifies CK?

Because people try to act like what he did should not have gotten people upset..."it was no big deal"..."not in anyone's face"....

I personally think what he did should NOT be in the workplace (where he was) and the timing was disrespectful.

I personally think he picked the ideal time and place.

What's the point of a peaceful protest if no one sees it?

What's the point of a peaceful protest if it doesn't make people at least a little uncomfortable?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: TJSweens

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

And again, the irony is an expensive ad campaign....how is that losing everything?

Look - I appreciate the guy's desire here and think it is very noble. I am just not surprised there were ramifications and expected that. He and the NFL should have had a pow-wow and come up with a powerful campaign together to go after this issue. IMHO, the big cowards are the NFL.

That argument might have merit if Kaepernick had a crystal ball and new that a couple of years later Nike would make him the center of an ad campaign. What he DID know, was that he pissing off the powers that be in the NFL. He assumed the risk without knowledge of a payoff down the road.

I disagree, but that's cool.

I'm pretty sure he thought the NFL would do the right thing, or he would find something like what he has in Nike now, although not knowing what it was.

Dude is not, nor will be, as poor as I've been at times in my life.

Nor will you ever know the life experiences that he has lived that led him to that point. And again, how much he had already earned to that point is irrelevant. Your theory seems to be that he knew that if he jumped a net would appear. I'm not buying it.

Nope - I have never walked a step in his shoes.

But I think he is a fool if he didn't think there would be an impact.

And I also think he knew some net would appear. That is just me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

Nike is paying Kaepernick, therefore it has not cost him everything.

I think the way Yary has captured this is correct. CK was at work, in his company's work uniform, pushing his social agenda while on then clock in a way knowing it would agitate people. This ain't Tommy Smith and the '68 Olympics.

The NFL has every right to ask folks to not do that. Where they have dropped the ball is by not picking up the issue that CK was bringing to light.

If i was in people's face at work about my political views, there would be consequences.

False premise.

How so?

If I did the equivalent, there would be consequences.

He's not in peoples' faces and you could easily do something like wear a MAGA hat and you would suffer no consequences from your employer. You're framing the debate in a 'rich, entitled guy vs. Everyday Joes' setting.

If I wore a MAGA hat around at work, there would be consequences. People are VERY passionate about political issues and would voice their issues.

You think some kid could wear a MAGA pin on his shirt working at a BK in Boston?

False premise again. To be equivalent the kid would have to be blackballed from all restaurants. Also the kid (or you with a MAGA hat) would only be requesting to wear it for two minutes before your shift starts.

And for those 2 minutes, the kid is on national TV...

Look...if the NFL has blackballed this kid, they need to pay. THAT is not the solution and the NFL has stepped in it big time here.

I think what CK did was with the right intentions. He and the NFL should have found a productive way to deal with it after that. NFL screwed the pooch.

If? The dude got blackballed. That's not even up for debate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lars

Nike is paying Kaepernick, therefore it has not cost him everything.

I think the way Yary has captured this is correct. CK was at work, in his company's work uniform, pushing his social agenda while on then clock in a way knowing it would agitate people. This ain't Tommy Smith and the '68 Olympics.

The NFL has every right to ask folks to not do that. Where they have dropped the ball is by not picking up the issue that CK was bringing to light.

If i was in people's face at work about my political views, there would be consequences.

How is kneeling during the anthem the same as getting in people's faces?

Its kind of the opposite. He wasn't pushing anything, he wasn't telling people how to act. He was doing a quiet thing that literally needed to be pointed out by the media for people to get offended.

If it was not in perople's faces, then why do so many see it as inflamatory?

What if he stood there and did a Nazi salute? Or grabbed his nuts? It's only for 2 minutes....he didn't say anything....

If it was no big deal, we wouldn't be talking about it.

He didn't. Why do you keep trying to re-frame this debate in a way that vilifies CK?

Because people try to act like what he did should not have gotten people upset..."it was no big deal"..."not in anyone's face"....

I personally think what he did should NOT be in the workplace (where he was) and the timing was disrespectful.

I personally think he picked the ideal time and place.

What's the point of a peaceful protest if no one sees it?

What's the point of a peaceful protest if it doesn't make people at least a little uncomfortable?

No problem with that. But if he thought there would be no price for doubling down on it, he is a fool. He was at work.

He made lots of cash. Start a foundation. Take out a full page ad in every paper. Whatever...

Now Nike is making money off him just like NFL did.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine


And the message is getting out there to more people. And more people are talking/fighting about it. Way more than if he started a foundation or ran an ad.

Change doesn't happen without making a lot of people uncomfortable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

And yeah, it's all about money, same as with the Nike (built on the back of sweatshops oh the irony) thing.