The NFL, unlike the NBA, has traditionally never been a place to discuss real world issues. At least not ones that are seen as ‘politically divisive’. The league had never been vocal in support of these issues and, as a result, has made player protests and open conversation a futile effort. Over the past four years, players have tried. When Colin Kaepernick kneeled in 2016 and broader political winds changed, football players began leveraging their platform. It didn’t work. Instead, the league was mired in political controversy and, in an attempt to escape PR hell, decided to set an example. Kaepernick was blacklisted for peacefully protesting. Roger Goodell, commissioner of the NFL, took a hard stance on kneeling as unpatriotic, creating a significant wedge among players and fans. The issue made its way all the way to the top, and soon it was a question asked of every politician running for office: “do you support kneeling?” Even entire political careers were catapulted on this issue. But beyond starting a national conversation, these protests did little to achieve immediate results. Black people continued to be murdered — Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, George Floyd and countless more. So when Jacob Blake was shot seven times in the back and paralyzed in an all-too-familiar incident of police brutality last week, and the Milwaukee Bucks decided to boycott Game Five of their first round playoff in the NBA, NFL players once again tried to reignite the conversation as nine teams cancelled practices because, as Matt Patricia, head coach of the Detroit Lions (whose decision to walk out of practice actually preceded the Bucks action), said, “If there’s any chance that we got everybody to maybe stop and think for a minute, that’s really great.” Practice cancellations around Jacob Blake’s incident have created a litmus test for the league. Will these social justice movements have a partner in the league and ownership, or will it continue to be hamstrung by them? Kaepernick may have started the conversation but recent events have worn patience thin and pushed the conversation back into a referendum on values.
These Jacob Blake protests are the continuation of a paradigm shift within the league. Since Kaepernick, Goodell has publicly apologized for his comments on kneeling for the anthem, created a $250m social justice fund, and launched a $250,000 player donation match for social justice efforts. The league has come a long way since 2016. But there’s still room for improvement and that’s why players continue to protest. Said Rodney McLeod of the Eagles, “The challenge is now on these owners,” Eagles safety Rodney McLeod said Thursday. “We want them to speak out on a lot of these issues that exist, for their players. Just as much as we’re held accountable and we represent each organization a certain way when we leave this building, we expect them to now stand up and speak out on these issues to protect us as Black men. And I think that is the message that we as players should really enforce is that these owners come together and not only support us privately but step up and support us publicly as well.” In this day and age, it isn’t enough for owners to tacitly allow social justice efforts. They need to pick a side.
What we’re seeing across sports, but the NFL specifically, is a reflection of our unculture. Before George Floyd’s death rocked the world and public opinion polling on BLM began to unify, Goodell and the owners were following a clear signal from society: players need to shut up and dribble. What they’re receiving now is a cacophony of differing voices. The path forward for these players is uncertain and if owners don’t work in lockstep with players, all efforts will be futile. The best case scenario is for the NFL to finally catch up with the NBA, with teams openly acknowledging and supporting these social justice efforts. The worst case scenario is a reversion to the pre-2016 NFL, fueled by complacency, waffling, and empty words. The actual outcome will likely fall somewhere in this wide spectrum and that uncertainty makes these Jacob Blake protests such a pivotal one as players draw a line in the sand during this ‘protest season’.
Not only has Goodell’s messaging and stance on protests in the league drastically changed since 2016, the rest of the league office has made it clear they stand by his new rhetoric. The NFL Executive VP of Football Operations, Troy Vincent, said of NBA-style boycotts, “If we’re not expecting this is going to happen, then we’re not living in reality…We saw the young men in Detroit and Seattle and today in Washington. … We’ve just got so much work to do.” Dan Graziano at ESPN very succinctly offers the significance of these comments:
“The emotion in Vincent’s voice was a striking reminder of the irrelevance of the old rules and boundaries that used to surround our sports. Vincent is a powerful league executive with a vested interest in making sure the NFL season is as smooth and successful as possible, but he’s also a worried Black father who spoke about trying to prevent his three sons from “being hunted.” The significance of the latter role has pushed the former one well to the side.”
Never before has the NFL seen such powerful executives make such powerful statements, but here we are. Beyond the apparatus of the league, however, is the existing tension between players, the league, and ownership. Said Vincent, “Many [owners are on board], Key, and I must say in full transparency, many are not, because they think it’s a disruption of the business…we’re not asking — the players, we as Black men — we’re not asking for anything that you’re not looking for for your children, your families. It can’t be any clearer. When you watch the video of eight minutes and 46 seconds of a knee on somebody’s neck who’s handcuffed, that should not be a dispute.” Vincent’s precise and critical stance on ownership echoes McLeod’s statements and, ultimately, is the center of the NFL’s crisis of moral leadership. Players can only do so much and, as Vincent says, owners can bridge the gap between sports and politics, leading conversations with district attorneys and elected officials. While players are recognizable, owners represent some of the wealthiest individuals in the country with the connections and leverage to force difficult conversations, and more importantly, actual policy change. The players need their owners to step up. The good news is owners also need their players to play. It’s why a player strike can be so useful to force partnership. To be clear, a strike would be terrible for both sides — the median salary for all NFL players is just $860,000 and even a couple missed paychecks can be a significant loss. Owners’ wealth is directly tied to things like ticket sales and television deals, and the last thing they want is a work stoppage. But even the threat of a strike should hopefully get everyone to the negotiating table. However it resolves itself, if the player/owner relationship is not symbiotic, this whole movement will forever be a shell of its true potential.
Most NFL coaches are fully on-board with the player movement for justice, even if they might have different views on tactics. At least one coach believes the players could pursue more beneficial means to make real change. Tampa Bay Buccaneers head coach Bruce Arians said of the practice cancellation, “Protesting doesn’t do crap, in my opinion…I’ve been seeing it since 1968,” instead imploring players to take action. This caught the ire of DeMaurice Smith, the NFLPA executive director, who called Arians “woefully misinformed about the history of protest both within sports and in America.” To be fair, Arians was present during the race riots in 1968 and, at Virginia Tech, was the first white player to room with a Black teammate, James Barber. He said as much in his response, noting, “Yeah, I have a history…it might be a little bit longer than his.” As the only current NFL coach with a Black offensive coordinator, defensive coordinator, special teams coordinator, and assistant head coach, he is seemingly walking the walk. But, his insistence on a higher standard could bring tension to these discussions anyway. A lack of defined, unified goals and action steps is often a criticism of the Black Lives Matter movement and a push to go beyond just protesting could cause internal strife.
A more defined reverberation of the recent player protests is the reexamining of all-time greats like Brian Urlacher. Urlacher has been long revered and admired among football players; after his Hall of Fame induction in 2018, multiple Pro Bowl tight end and another well-regarded player in the league, Greg Olsen, said of Urlacher, “I think the best thing I can say about Brian is that he treated everybody in that organization — from the star quarterback all the way down to the ticket guy — the exact same. He made everybody feel important, he made everybody feel special. He was the ultimate leader. I can’t say enough about what he did for me personally and so many other guys.” Since that 2018 induction, Urlacher’s reputation has taken a heel-turn. After defending Donald Trump’s comments on George Floyd and liking an Instagram post calling for Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17 year old charged with a double homicide in the Kenosha protests, to be freed, he faced a vocal backlash from the football world. From beloved Bears running back Matt Forte to Sherrick McManis, the only current Bear to have played with Urlacher, sharp rebukes of Urlacher’s comments have created a divide between current players and some of the past legends of the game.
Retired players are often considered part of the “NFL family”, with current players helping negotiate better healthcare and pensions for past players out of respect and appreciation that they will one day be in those hung-up shoes. Former players are often invited to visit practices and speak to the team — a lot of the NFL culture revolves around tradition and remembrance. Comments like these from Urlacher (and even legendary player-coach Mike Ditka) can start chipping away at that relationship. In a sign of the severity of the divide, the Bears organization has publicly distanced itself from Urlacher’s social media comments. As we continue this process of reckoning within the league, the relationship between former and current players faces a divergence that could alter the very culture that the league has been built upon.
The NFL will forever be impacted by the actions of Colin Kaepernick in 2016. It remains one of the most pivotal moments in the long history of the league, maybe in all of sports. But the actions that arose from Kaepernick’s protest sought to suppress his voice, not amplify it. This time around, players are making it clear that this censorship won’t fly. We are observing a face down in the league between players and their gatekeepers. A line has been drawn, the glass has been shattered, and, today, the NFL is charged with choosing a side. It won’t be without hiccups and will require tearing down some long-held traditions and beliefs. But the players are demanding change and, by all accounts, are willing to do what they must to ensure the rest of the league changes with them.
If you enjoyed reading this piece, please consider subscribing to our Substack newsletter. You’ll get to read our stuff, hot off the presses, each time we publish.
