One idea discussed was to clear the field of all football personnel while the anthem is playedGETTY IMAGES
NFL owners have approved a new national anthem policy that gives each team the "authority to set their own anthem-related rules and would permit players to remain in the locker room during the playing of the anthem," according to Mark Maske of the WASHINGTON POST. The plan would allow each team to "set an anthem policy and decide whether to discipline a player for any protest during the national anthem." The new policy would "eliminate the current requirement for a player to be on the field for the playing of the anthem" and let players "remain in the locker room" during the song. A source said that a decision was "likely" to come later today as owners concluded their two-day spring meeting in Atlanta. There did not appear to be "sufficient support among the owners for a league-wide requirement that players stand for the anthem" (WASHINGTONPOST.com, 5/23). Maske cites a source that said that the new policy is "expected to contain a provision that the league can fine a team for any protests by players who choose to be on the sideline." That means a team can "permit players to protest if it chooses, but would have to be willing to pay a potential fine" (TWITTER.com, 5/23). THE MMQB's Albert Breer reported one early idea being discussed would have given the home team the choice as to whether "both teams come out of the locker room for the anthem, and, should teams come out, 15-yard penalties could be assessed for kneeling." Sources said that the owners also discussed how to "move forward its partnership with the players and finalized the terms of the deal" (SI.com, 5/22).
MEET IN THE MIDDLE? Sporting News' Michael McCarthy tweeted of the new policy, "NFL is going to try to split the baby. Good luck with that." Pro Football Talk: "NFL owners find an anthem 'compromise' that the players may not regard as a 'compromise.'" Yahoo Sports' Shalise Manza Young: "It's not a compromise." USA Today's Lindsay Jones: "A compromise implies there were negotiations and the sides met in the middle. That might be the case among owners, but leaving players out of protest policy discussion is a major mistake." Bleacher Report's Mike Freeman: "If the league can fine teams for players peacefully protesting during the anthem, you are effectively banning such protests. Let's not kid ourselves. No player will want to be responsible for a team getting fined." NFL Media's Jim Trotter: "The only significant change under the proposed new anthem policy is that players no longer will be subject to discipline from THE LEAGUE if they demonstrate. That decision now rests with the team."
OWNERS SPEAK OUT: Cowboys Owner Jerry Jones yesterday questioned whether there was "enough support to require players to stand." He said, "We've got a lot of things that we're trying to balance. We have the interest in every constituency that's involved here, and the issues that are involved, and we recognize that with our visibility and the interest itself, it's taken a life of its own." Jones added, "The No. 1 thing here is our fans. And I know our fans want us to zero in on the game, zero in on football. They want to come to the game and get away from a lot of the other issues that are out there. ... We've got to make sure that whatever we decide here, it's oriented toward getting their minds on what's going on on the football field" (ESPN.com, 5/22). Falcons Owner Arthur Blank yesterday reiterated that players "should stand for the anthem." Blank: "The NFL will make it clear that (standing for the anthem) is their desire, and the reason I would feel strongly about that on this club, and I would feel very disappointed (if a player protested), is we’re working together on a lot of stuff to address the issues. The issues haven’t been resolved, but the goal has been achieved and that’s to work together to find solutions. But it will take time" (ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, 5/23). FS1's Shannon Sharpe said, "The majority of owners don't care about this issue. They just want this PR problem to go away. They don't give a damn about this issue, because they are unaffected by it” ("Undisputed," FS1, 5/23).
STILL NO CONSENSUS: USA TODAY's Mike Jones cites a source as saying that NFL owners "remain divided on how to handle the protests." Some owners "support the players and remain in favor of allowing them to exercise their rights of free speech." Others want the "protests to end because they believe the demonstrations risk alienating fans and hurting the league's bottom line" (USA TODAY, 5/23). PRO FOOTBALL TALK's Mike Florio wrote there is "simply no easy path out of this maze for the NFL, but owners who are used to getting their way whenever and wherever and however they want it seem to think they can find one." Florio: "They can’t. The sooner they accept this, the better off everyone will be." And they "only have themselves to blame." By making the players "props in the effort to wrap The Shield in The Flag nearly a decade ago, the league made this mess by creating a right to protest." Whatever the next step, the NFL will be "putting its big toe on a land mine" (PROFOOTBALLTALK.com, 5/22). WFAN's Mike Francesa tweeted, "The NFL continues to look scared and ridiculous in dealing with national anthem issue." TheFootballGirl.com's Melissa Jacobs: "Don’t forget, current anthem conundrum is rooted in the NFL taking $$ from the DoD." ESPN's Howard Bryant: "While it appears the NFL is sending a message to the Kaepernick/Reid-minded player, its real message is to the union. One of DeMaurice Smith’s very first defenses of Kaepernick’s kneeling in the preseason of 2016 was it occurred outside of the field of play, hence no discipline." Sportswriter Jane McManus: "Five NFL owners, Snyder, McNair, Kroenke, Kraft, Khan and Johnson, donated $1M each to Trump's inauguration. Trump blasted the league over players kneeling. A policy on the anthem is inherently political, and it's about appeasement" (TWITTER.com, 5/22).
