By:
Advanced search…

Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Sit, stand, kneel, or do whatever you like for the National Anthem

Gulo Blue said:
I don't think that's the worst of it. Apparently, Michigan lets his accountants exercise tax write off shenanigans with these donations.
Click to expand...

If by "Michigan," you mean the legal entity established by the state to collect and regulate state income taxes, Ross is a resident of New York and Florida; I don't think he's subject to taxes by the State of Michigan.

Neither the State of Michigan nor the University of Michigan has any business worrying about what Ross's accountants do regarding his own federal taxes nor state income taxes in the states in which he's subject to taxation by the state(s). That's the business of the IRS and the state(s).
 
Gulo Blue said:
kBBuKon.jpg



Luke-warm take: NFL has every right to try to stop protests through penalizing players or teams, but whatever backlash they in terms of people's reactions (both positive and negative)is also fair game. Similarly, players have every right to protest, but they also have to live with these penalties and whatever reactions (positive or negative) the public voices. What protests are acceptable or go over the line and what penalties are ok or too much is entirely subjective and depends on the thing being protested and how. I think the NFL looks stupid trying to stop the kneeling, but I also wonder if they don't really give a crap and are just trying to stay in the news.
Click to expand...

The players can still boycott attending the anthem without being subject to penalty. They're not being required to stand up for anything.
 
tinselwolverine said:
If by "Michigan," you mean the legal entity established by the state to collect and regulate state income taxes, Ross is a resident of New York and Florida; I don't think he's subject to taxes by the State of Michigan.

Neither the State of Michigan nor the University of Michigan has any business worrying about what Ross's accountants do regarding his own federal taxes nor state income taxes in the states in which he's subject to taxation by the state(s). That's the business of the IRS and the state(s).
Click to expand...


I don't remember the details, and I don't think there's any legal trouble for Michigan, but somewhere in one of the articles it says something about one of the signals that not everything was above board was that Michigan didn't follow their usual procedures in accepting this gift.
 
yes, the NFL is a private entity that can regulate speech however they want... they just first have to pay back all the public money they suck up to build their infrastructure, including paying back all the tax breaks they get, and not broadcasting their games on publicly licensed airwaves.

kinda ironic that it's tough to get as fabuously wealthy and profitable as they are without government help...
 
Gulo Blue said:
I don't remember the details, and I don't think there's any legal trouble for Michigan, but somewhere in one of the articles it says something about one of the signals that not everything was above board was that Michigan didn't follow their usual procedures in accepting this gift.
Click to expand...

Is this what you're talking about?

As part of the agreement with RERI, university officials also agreed not to sell the stake for at least two years. That meant U-M didn't need to file a government form that would have alerted the IRS to how much RERI originally paid, according to legal experts.

?Is it a common practice of the university to allow donors of non-cash assets to decide the timing of sale?? asked IRS lawyer Travis Vance III.

?It?s uncommon,? Gordon Beeman, then U-M associate general counsel in charge of vetting charitable gifts, answered at his deposition.

It's about 2/3 of the way down the Freep article Tomdalton posted, just below a picture of the Ross Academic Center.
 
michchamp said:
yes, the NFL is a private entity that can regulate speech however they want... they just first have to pay back all the public money they suck up to build their infrastructure, including paying back all the tax breaks they get, and not broadcasting their games on publicly licensed airwaves.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this isn't gonna happen.

Besides that the NFlL doesn't get public money to build infrastructure, the owners and the developers do, and it's municipal money, decisions made at the local government level; and the NFL doesn't broadcast their games; private networks pay the NFL for the right to do that.

That aside, there's no authority that's going to enforce what you just posted; but I'm pretty sure you were being sarcastic.

Fans who didn't like the protests boycotted NFL games over the last two seasons.

Fans who don't like the new rule can just boycott the NFL games themselves.

That's gonna really put a dent into their pocketbooks.
 
tinselwolverine said:
Is this what you're talking about?

As part of the agreement with RERI, university officials also agreed not to sell the stake for at least two years. That meant U-M didn't need to file a government form that would have alerted the IRS to how much RERI originally paid, according to legal experts.

“Is it a common practice of the university to allow donors of non-cash assets to decide the timing of sale?” asked IRS lawyer Travis Vance III.

“It’s uncommon,” Gordon Beeman, then U-M associate general counsel in charge of vetting charitable gifts, answered at his deposition.

It's about 2/3 of the way down the Freep article Tomdalton posted, just below a picture of the Ross Academic Center.
Click to expand...


I guess we don't know the details, that could be it, but this is also in the freep.



In his ruling last month, the tax judge didn't directly address the role of U-M officials. But according to the IRS, the University of Michigan also failed to follow some of its own policies and procedures in accepting and reselling the non-cash gift in Ross’ name.
Critics say those were warning signs that the deal was problematic, and U-M officials may have succumbed to pressure from a wealthy donor.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
tinselwolverine said:
Yeah, this isn't gonna happen.

Besides that the NFlL doesn't get public money to build infrastructure, the owners and the developers do, and it's municipal money, decisions made at the local government level; and the NFL doesn't broadcast their games; private networks pay the NFL for the right to do that.

That aside, there's no authority that's going to enforce what you just posted; but I'm pretty sure you were being sarcastic.

Fans who didn't like the protests boycotted NFL games over the last two seasons.

Fans who don't like the new rule can just boycott the NFL games themselves.

That's gonna really put a dent into their pocketbooks.
Click to expand...

I'm just shooting from the hip here, and there's a whole fact-based analysis in every case, but courts have held that when private entities provide a public forum (e.g. a shopping mall) their rights to control that forum are not absolute.

also, when private entities accept government money, they're subject to applicable laws... that's the whole basis for challenging prayer in public schools.

So I'm only being sort-of sarcastic here.

I'm not sure how the fact that the speech is coming from paid athletes factors into it... NFL owners would have a harder time banning fans who refuse to stand for the national anthem.
 
michchamp said:
I'm not sure how the fact that the speech is coming from paid athletes factors into it... NFL owners would have a harder time banning fans who refuse to stand for the national anthem.
Click to expand...


Yeah. Have there's been any cases where an employer had to allow employees to protest while on the job?


I don't think it's impossible. Like maybe employees wanted to wear some button that didn't interfere with their job somewhere. I might be open to the right argument, but I can't think of one.
 
The NFL took taxpayer money to sell the military to the fans before football games. The sport constantly draws comparisons between itself and military/warfare. I plan to spend the national anthem before Broncos games on the concourse or in the bathroom and will go to my seat after its over.
 
TheVictors said:
The NFL took taxpayer money to sell the military to the fans before football games. The sport constantly draws comparisons between itself and military/warfare. I plan to spend the national anthem before Broncos games on the concourse or in the bathroom and will go to my seat after its over.
Click to expand...

are you upset with the NFL or the government/military for the marketing program? If it's the NFL, buying tickets and attending the games isn't sending any kind of message regardless of where you sit/stand for the anthem.
 
Formal vote before passing NFL's anthem policy not taken, league says

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/23593960/nfl-hold-formal-anthem-policy-vote

The NFL did not take a formal roll-call vote when it passed its new national anthem resolution that will take effect this season, league spokesman Brian McCarthy confirmed Thursday.

Instead, the league called for a show of owners' hands to test support of the new policy -- an unofficial process that is often used, McCarthy said. There were zero nays, he said.

"That was considered a vote," McCarthy said.

Sources told ESPN's Seth Wickersham that league officials wanted to make sure that the resolution would not fail, and so after hours of debate they called for the show of hands. The informal nature of it surprised some in the room. Not taking an official tally is atypical for a major resolution.

Later Thursday, Oakland Raiders owner Mark Davis confirmed what Wickersham reported earlier -- that he abstained from the vote. Davis would not comment further about why he abstained, saying he wanted to speak with his players first before going public with his rationale.

"I haven't changed my mind," Davis told ESPN's Paul Gutierrez, referring to his feelings on the matter.
Click to expand...
 
TheVictors said:
The NFL took taxpayer money to sell the military to the fans before football games. The sport constantly draws comparisons between itself and military/warfare. I plan to spend the national anthem before Broncos games on the concourse or in the bathroom and will go to my seat after its over.
Click to expand...

If it was me, and I felt this way, I would make sure that I purchased enough additional $18 beers at the stadium before the anthem ceremony - 5, 6, or 7; however many - to be sure that my bladder was full enough that I would have to hold onto my own penis and piss into the urinal throughout the entire duration of the anthem - or maybe even longer.

That would be stickin' it to the Man.
 
tinselwolverine said:
If it was me, and I felt this way, I would make sure that I purchased enough additional $18 beers at the stadium before the anthem ceremony - 5, 6, or 7; however many - to be sure that my bladder was full enough that I would have to hold onto my own penis and piss into the urinal throughout the entire duration of the anthem - or maybe even longer.

That would be stickin' it to the Man.
Click to expand...

I?m not trying to stick it to anybody and as I?ve posted before, my brother doesn?t stand for the anthem and hasn?t for years and years. Suddenly last season some dickwad behind us made it into a something (snowflake tough drunk guy) so I?d rather just not.
 
TheVictors said:
I?m not trying to stick it to anybody and as I?ve posted before, my brother doesn?t stand for the anthem and hasn?t for years and years. Suddenly last season some dickwad behind us made it into a something (snowflake tough drunk guy) so I?d rather just not.
Click to expand...

Except for a couple small venue amateur boxing events with fighters from my gym, the last sporting event I attended was the Michigan bowl game in AZ when I met up with you and GoBlueBigJohn.

When I used to go to sports events from time to time I think I would typically stand for the anthem though.

I would never bother myself to worry about what another spectator did or didn't do; unless I witnessed another spectator committing a crime during the anthem.

I would go to security if that happened, or if someone was posing a clear and present danger I would intercede.

Wouldn't have anything to do with the anthem though.
 
yeah I never gave it much thought. I remember one time at a M game vs ND I was talking on my cell phone (they were a new thing then) when the anthem started and my buddy nudged me and I did feel rude. But the NFL is so over the top with the patriotic bullshit and catering to the average dumbass.
 
Our anthem is great and if you can hit the high note without raising your voice or sounding like a wuss, you should probably sing it. Singing in groups is good for people and most anthems suck, but our doesn't. Don't belt it out or be fancy or do anything to draw attention to the way you sing it. Just sing it loud enough so anyone 2 seats to your right or left will also feel encouraged to sing. If you sing, and you hear someone else start up a line or two after you did, you just improved that person's experience and you should feel good about that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

About Us

Founded in 2011, Detroit Sports Forum is a community of fanatics dedicated to teams like the Lions, Tigers, Pistons, Red Wings, Wolverines, and more. We live and breathe Detroit sports!

Stay Connected

Forum statistics

Threads
32,906
Messages
1,109,155
Members
942
Latest member
Proud Pheasant

Affiliates

    Discussion Hub
Back
Top