Jenkins wants the message to be about racial inequality, not whether the field is the right place to protestJOHN CLARK
Eagles S Malcolm Jenkins, DE Michael Bennett and CB De'Vante Bausby "did not take the field during the anthem" at Gillette Stadium Thursday before a preseason game against the Patriots, according to Zack Rosenlatt of the Newark STAR-LEDGER. Jenkins and Bausby "remained in the visitor's tunnel" Thursday after they "took the field and raised their fists during the anthem" before last week's game against the Steelers. Bennett "remained in the locker room and came out onto the field following the anthem." Jenkins prior to the game "wore a shirt with the message 'You aren't listening,' following up on" shirts he wore last week which featured a message about mass incarceration which ties into "what the protest has been about from the beginning" (NJ.com, 8/16). Jenkins said changing his approach was "just about where we want the focus to be." He said that he "wants the message to be about racial inequality" and not about 'whether or not the football field is the right place and time to (protest)'" (PHILLY.com, 8/16). In Allentown, Nick Fierro noted Jenkins "has no idea what kind of agreement, if any, the owners and players might reach on the ability to protest during the anthem." However, he "did admit to reporters that staying in the tunnel was to 'see what you write about it'" (Allentown MORNING CALL, 8/17).
RELUCTANT LEADER: In Philadelphia, Dave Zangaro wrote Jenkins is "uncomfortable with being the face" of the current movement because there are "so many others committed to the fight" against racial injustice and police brutality in the U.S. However, he realized that he has become the "face of a movement." Jenkins said, "We've actually accomplished a ton in two years. So I often have to remind myself about that and who's counting on not only me but us. And when I think about those things, it helps block out or ignore all that other stuff." Jenkins last summer "pondered ending his demonstration for fear that the story would become more about him and less about the issues." He ultimately decided there is "simply no better way to reach his audience than demonstrating during the anthem" (NBCSPORTSPHILADELPHIA.com, 8/16).
NOTHING ON THE HORIZON: NBCSN's Mike Florio notes the anthem issue “continues to be newsworthy until the NFL and the NFL Players Association work out anthem policy 3.0, and there's no indication that there is a deadline or any real movement toward making that happen” (“PFT,” NBCSN, 8/17). USA TODAY's Jarrett Bell writes the NFL "doesn't need a new policy" for the anthem. It instead needs to "better support its players," more than 70% of which are African-American, and "better acknowledge why many have been moved to protest in the first place." While it is "hardly the sole responsibility of NFL players to spark national dialogue," the protests and debate "surely underscore the power of a platform that comes with the nation's most popular sport." That is why many players must "weigh the decision of whether to protest" (USA TODAY, 8/17).
BLAME GAME: In Oklahoma City, Berry Tramel writes there are "no winners" with the NFL's anthem issues. While "everyone deserves some blame," the "brunt should fall" on the NFLPA. If the NFL "had a strong union, no way would it allow the players to be bullied by ownership." Protesting around the flag or anthem "only inflames millions of Americans," which is true "whether Donald Trump is president or not." A strong NFLPA "would have known that and instructed Kaepernick to protest in other ways" (OKLAHOMAN, 8/17). Meanwhile, USA TODAY's Brent Schrotenboer wrote the solution for NFL leaders is "really rather simple." Schrotenboer: "Ignore the president's tweets, as some NFL players recently have suggested. ... Rise above it and let the players and the fans -- and even other owners -- do what they want individually during the song" (USATODAY.com, 8/16).
