Roger Goodell is more concerned about deflated footballs than addressing Colin Kaepernick
In 1970, when Roger Goodell was 11, his father took a stand against the Vietnam War. Charles Goodell was a Republican U.S. senator at the time, and his brave opposition to his own party leadership arguably cost him reelection and his political career.
“Senator Goodell is rare also,” went a supportive letter in the New York Review of Books, “in that he raises questions not only about the war, but about the kind of country that would allow such a war to continue.”
According to the New York Times, a framed copy of Sen. Goodell’s anti-war bill hangs on the wall of the NFL commissioner’s office.
“As far as my father knew,” Roger Goodell told the paper, “it was the right thing to do, and it did have some serious consequences to his political career. And I think he knew that.”
Forty-six years after his father’s failed reelection bid, the NFL commissioner responded to another kind of dissent: 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s decision not to stand for the national anthem.
“I don’t necessarily agree with what he is doing,” Goodell told Barry Wilner of the Associated Press on Wednesday. “I support our players when they want to see change in society, and we don’t live in a perfect society. On the other hand, we believe very strongly in patriotism in the NFL. I personally believe very strongly in that.”
Patriotism, as defined by Merriam-Webster, is “love for or devotion to one’s country.” Charles Goodell, as a public servant, surely showed that. His patriotism was not negated by a view that offended many in the military. In fact, it could easily be argued that standing up against the direction of his nation was highly patriotic.
Kaepernick is a quarterback, not a public servant. Still, his decision not to stand was done, at least in his own mind, as a way to push for a more perfect union. He sees a problem in his country – specifically the way he perceives black people and other racial minorities are treated by police and how police officers are protected by the justice system – and he wants to take steps to improve it. He has already pledged $1 million to this end, and on Wednesday he promised his proceeds of jersey sales will also go to communities. That is a version of “active citizenry,” in the words of President Obama, which sounds fairly patriotic coming from a commander-in-chief.
President Obama said over the weekend he’d “rather have young people who are engaged in the argument than people who are just sitting on the sidelines and not paying attention at all.”
Commissioner Goodell, who has made his legacy on law and order but has failed to meaningfully raise the standards of rehabilitation, should be far more responsive of a player who is engaged in the topic of societal change.
Disagreeing with the argument is one thing. Disagreeing with the method is another. Both are understandable. But employing patriotism as a rebuttal is quite nervy for the commissioner of a league that took hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money for paid military tributes until two current Republican senators – John McCain and Jeff Flake – sounded off about it last year.
“Americans deserve the ability to assume that tributes for our men and women in military uniform are genuine displays of national pride,” the senators wrote, “which many are, rather than taxpayer-funded [Department of Defense] marketing gimmicks.”
Even beyond that, steering this particular argument toward patriotism is a form of punting. And that’s a shame, as a thoughtful reply to Kaepernick’s specific concerns could be far more valuable to his league than, say, an unending crusade against deflated footballs.
The commissioner went on, speaking to the AP about how to best use the NFL’s platform.
“We have to choose respectful ways of doing that so that we can achieve the outcomes we ultimately want and do it with the values and ideals that make our country great,” he said.
Some of the “values and ideals that make our country great” include ensuring that all Americans have an equal opportunity to succeed and thrive. Many in America don’t feel that equal opportunity, whether because of poverty, education, mass incarceration, the inconsistencies of the justice system, or police treatment. That’s the “oppression” Kaepernick wants to discuss, and it’s felt by some families in the NFL community and many fans as well. There are people who are worried about getting pulled over simply because they are black. That worry does not vanish when they are driving to a football game.
Yet there’s no acknowledgement of that in Goodell’s comments. Nor has there been in any league statement in the nearly two weeks since Kaepernick’s own statement.
By swatting away Kaepernick’s protest in the guise of “patriotism,” Goodell wastes an opportunity to steer this national conversation in a helpful direction. Guns are a problem in our society, and a problem in the NFL. Domestic violence is a problem in our society, and a problem in the NFL. Mental health is a problem in our society, and a problem in the NFL. All of these topics are important to discuss, as they affect minority communities and majority communities. They also affect the community of veterans, and the community of police officers.
Kaepernick himself brought up the statistic that an average of 22 veterans per day take their own lives. Goodell could have taken the baton on any of these crucial topics “to achieve the outcomes we ultimately want” but instead, he dismissed the chance as if bothered by the inconvenience of being asked. We are made no better as a society by trumping up a nebulous definition of patriotism. We are made better as a society by participating in a discussion about how to make our streets and communities safer – for responsible citizens and responsible police officers.
“I think it’s important to have respect for our country,” Goodell said, “for our flag, for the people who make our country better; for law enforcement; and for our military who are out fighting for our freedoms and our ideals.”
That’s a good preamble to a larger point, and instead Goodell uses it as a conclusion. It’s apparently good enough for him to point to the flag as the rightful place where discussion stops instead of starts. It’s a missed chance to address not only Kaepernick but the paying customers who are suddenly buying Kaepernick’s jersey in high volume.
A lot of people needed Sen. Charles Goodell to speak up, even if many in power didn’t want to hear it. Although the Senator’s son does not agree with Colin Kaepernick, the same kind of engagement and leadership would be helpful here. A little bit of active citizenry from a public figure can go a long way.
More NFL on Yahoo Sports
