Goodell institutes "Fan Code of Conduct"

[Fixit]

I think that like most events in public, you should only bring people who are mature enough to handle themselves and the actions of others. Young children and 'sensitive' people don't belong at an NFL game, NHL games, NBA games, or the like. They are not appropriate venues for such people.

So you don't think that people should bring their kids to football games, which is exactly what I said you implied several posts ago. Thanks for wasting everyone's time. As a bonus, I now know that you think kids shouldn't go to any pro sports games at all. Sweet!

On a related note, why do you think that they're "not appropriate venues" in the first place? It's certainly not the actions on the field, because those are no different on TV. Could it be all of the people acting like a-holes, maybe? Once again, attempting to rationalize behavior doesn't make it appropriate behavior.

The only people who truly don't belong at sports events are the knuckleheads who drink too much and act like idiots over grown men playing a kid's game.

Have any kids?


PS Nice edit.

 

[NJPatsfan26]

I think that like most events in public, you should only bring people who are mature enough to handle themselves and the actions of others. Young children and 'sensitive' people don't belong at an NFL game, NHL games, NBA games, or the like, although such decisions are (and should be) up the the parents of the children and the 'sensitive' adults themselves. They are not appropriate venues for such people.

So what are they going to do then....have "Sensitivity Specialists" at the gates to judge who can go in and who cannot?

I would agree that venues like this do not balance correctly with immature people but I am just curious how the commish plans on doing this...

 

[Deus Irae]

On a related note, why do you think that they're "not appropriate venues" in the first place? It's certainly not the actions on the field, because those are no different on TV. Could it be all of the people acting like a-holes, maybe? Once again, attempting to rationalize behavior doesn't make it appropriate behavior.

No, it's because there are events that are for children, events that are for mixed groups, events that are for adults, events that are for men, events that are for women, etc. I personally don't think that young kids should be taken to live events where large adult males are beating the tar out of each other. Unlike you, however, I'm not comfortable with the notion of people being forced to do so or being prevented from doing so by threats.

The only people who truly don't belong at sports events are the knuckleheads who drink too much and act like idiots over grown men playing a kid's game.

Going to the games is about tailgating, drinking, whooping it up with friends, trash talking with 'the enemy', cheering for your team, booing the opposing team and having a raucus good time. You 'sensitive' people who can't handle that, and can't accept that there will always be those who take things a bit too far in such situations should stay home and read some Harlequin Romance novels while taking a bubble bath with nice rose petals.

 

[Deus Irae]

So what are they going to do then....have "Sensitivity Specialists" at the gates to judge who can go in and who cannot?

I would agree that venues like this do not balance correctly with immature people but I am just curious how the commish plans on doing this...

No, the Ommissioner should have stayed out of the fray entirely. If the Eagles want to have a fan base that's so rowdy the stadium has its own police station, that should be up to the Eagles.

You know, people cry and moan that the Patriots games are too quiet. Well, what do you expect is going to happen when you start selling all the seats to suits and families, and start banning all the behavior that leads to a noisy crowd?

 

[Fixit]

No, it's because there are events that are for children, events that are for mixed groups, events that are for adults, events that are for men, events that are for women, etc. I personally don't think that young kids should be taken to live events where large adult males are beating the tar out of each other. Unlike you, however, I'm not comfortable with the notion of people being forced to do so or being prevented from doing so by threats.




Going to the games is about tailgating, drinking, whooping it up with friends, trash talking with 'the enemy', cheering for your team, booing the opposing team and having a raucus good time. You 'sensitive' people who can't handle that, and can't accept that there will always be those who take things a bit too far in such situations should stay home and read some Harlequin Romance novels while taking a bubble bath with nice rose petals.

OMG, LOL!

I've never once been bothered by something that anyone else has said at a game. That's not the point. What I do have a problem with is jerkoffs like you who think however you act is okay because everyone else should either get over it or leave.

I suppose that if you ever went to a movie and people were yammering away on their phones and zipping popcorn around you'd say, "Oh, they paid for a ticket. Who am I to get upset?"

Please.

Your logic is great: wherever, whenever, a bunch of idiots get plastered and lose any semblance of manners, everyone else should just stay away. That's much better than actually curbing the idiotic behavior, I think. Getting rowdy is great; once that line is crossed, and people can't manage to act like adults, they should get run.

 

[NJPatsfan26]

No, the Ommissioner should have stayed out of the fray entirely. If the Eagles want to have a fan base that's so rowdy the stadium has its own police station, that should be up to the Eagles.

You know, people cry and moan that the Patriots games are too quiet. Well, what do you expect is going to happen when you start selling all the seats to suits and families, and start banning all the behavior that leads to a noisy crowd?

Yeah I am not sure what the commish was thinking on this one....then again....i dont think any one does....

 

[Fixit]

...and start banning all the behavior that leads to a noisy crowd?

-- Behavior that is unruly, disruptive, or illegal.

-- Drunkenness and signs of alcohol impairment that result in irresponsible behavior.

-- Foul or abusive language or obscene gestures.

-- Interference with the progress of the game, including throwing objects onto the field.

-- Failing to follow instructions of stadium personnel.

-- Verbal or physical harassment of fans from the opposing team.

Exactly which ones do you have a problem with? Because I've been to plenty of sporting events that blew the roof off without any of this. Grow the hell up.

 

[Deus Irae]

OMG, LOL!

I've never once been bothered by something that anyone else has said at a game. That's not the point. What I do have a problem with is jerkoffs like you who think however you act is okay because everyone else should either get over it or leave.

I suppose that if you ever went to a movie and people were yammering away on their phones and zipping popcorn around you'd say, "Oh, they paid for a ticket. Who am I to get upset?"

Please.

Your logic is great: wherever, whenever, a bunch of idiots get plastered and lose any semblance of manners, everyone else should just stay away. That's much better than actually curbing the idiotic behavior, I think. Getting rowdy is great; once that line is crossed, and people can't manage to act like adults, they should get run.

Look, slick, I don't go to games and cuss and the like. I've never been drunk in my life. I'm just not stupid enough to think that this sort of event needs to be moderated as if it's a wine and cheese event.

You, on the other hand, have been usinjg foul or abusive language towards me in pretty much every post, all the while defending the barring of "foul or abusive language". I don't mind that you're a hypocrite. I mind that you're acting like a stupid hypocrite.

 

[Fixit]

Look, slick, I don't go to games and cuss and the like. I've never been drunk in my life. I'm just not stupid enough to think that this sort of event needs to be moderated as if it's a wine and cheese event.

You, on the other hand, have foul or abusive language me in pretty much every post, all the while defending the barring of "foul or abusive language". I don't mind that you're a hypocrite. I mind that you're acting like a stupid hypocrite.

I said, "You've got to be s******* me" and called you a jerkoff after you said I was "sensitive" and should stay at home reading romance novels. You're not innocent here, so please don't act the part of the injured party, especially seeing some of your past posting history.

Then again, maybe you're not tough enough to be here, Mary. I should be able to do and say whatever I want, right?

PS The wine and cheese comparison was silly, because you should know that's not even close to what I'm saying.

 

[Fixit]

I'm really not interested in continuing this any further, so blast me and let's call it a day.

 

[Deus Irae]

I said, "You've got to be s******* me" and called you a jerkoff after you said I was "sensitive" and should stay at home reading romance novels. You're not innocent here, so please don't act the part of the injured party, especially seeing some of your past posting history.

But I'm not the one claiming to be an innocent. You are. I grasp the concept of "time and place", which is something you seem to be either missing or deliberately ignoring.

Then again, maybe you're not tough enough to be here, Mary. I should be able to do and say whatever I want, right?

Within the confines of the rules of the owner of whatever property you might be 'on', yes. That's pretty much my point. I really don't give a rat's ass whether you smoke, drink, chase women, cuss at sporting events or the like, and I expect you to mind your own damned business as well.

PS The wine and cheese comparison was silly, because you should know that's not even close to what I'm saying.

No, that's pretty much the level you were at, other than the hypocrisy part of course.

 

[Funktopus]

Can anyone explain why the need to explicitly ban illegal behavior? Seems a little silly, like the laws established in the US aren't good enough until they're bolstered by the NFL code of conduct. There's just something about it that makes me think the commish is an ego-maniac.

 

[Sivy]

So you don't think that people should bring their kids to football games, which is exactly what I said you implied several posts ago. Thanks for wasting everyone's time. As a bonus, I now know that you think kids shouldn't go to any pro sports games at all. Sweet!

On a related note, why do you think that they're "not appropriate venues" in the first place? It's certainly not the actions on the field, because those are no different on TV. Could it be all of the people acting like a-holes, maybe? Once again, attempting to rationalize behavior doesn't make it appropriate behavior.

The only people who truly don't belong at sports events are the knuckleheads who drink too much and act like idiots over grown men playing a kid's game.

Have any kids?


PS Nice edit.

I dont have any kids, I dont even like Kids, but I agree with you.

 

[Joker]

Can anyone explain why the need to explicitly ban illegal behavior? Seems a little silly, like the laws established in the US aren't good enough until they're bolstered by the NFL code of conduct. There's just something about it that makes me think the commish is an ego-maniac.

EGGS-ACKLEY

what next from this walking ,breathing comatose mongoloid?...Jet-Rat-Dell MUST be removed in the interest and for the benefit of the game...openly known league wide as Commissioner Clousseau is the WORST possible thing that has happened to this league in SIXTY YEARS. He's a New Yawk shill, an openly Pro-Rat lifelong fan and ex-employee and has the common sense of an amoeba.

The stadium rules were just fine without his ice pick to the frontal lobe "edict". Imagine,a dyam sports commissioner who wants to be known as a law enforcement officer, like he's a dyamed Supreme Court Justice/ FBI Chief all rolled into one. He HAS to be removed from ANY position of authority within the NFL and brought before a Senate Committee convened to investigate league wide collusion and HIS part in the moronic witch hunt to damage the reputation AND business interests of the New England Patriots Football Club. Period.

All the rest of this arguing about how one should behave, who should behave etc etc, is BESIDE THE POINT. The POINT is, this completely powermad, sub 80 IQ rhinocerous brained lunkhead is RUNNING AMOK in the NFL, drunk with power.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Yeah I am not sure what the commish was thinking on this one....then again....i dont think any one does....

Two years down, three to go on his contract. Let's see if he gets renewed....I wouldn't bet on it..............

 

[Koma]

I don't think this is a bad idea, I'm just not sure if Goodell is going about it the right way.

The article doesn't mention how this "code of conduct" will be implemented. I assume that the NFL will send their list of expectations to each team and it will then reach the correct people in stadium management. But after that, how is the league going to monitor this? Is Goodell going to dispatch his elite operatives from the Office of Strategic Security to each game? If so, what authority will they have, if any? And what will happen if a team is not adequately enforcing the code of conduct?

Maybe the commissioner has considered all of this and this implementation will encounter only a few, minor hiccups. If that is the case, I'll be pleasantly surprised.

 

[neuronet]

This is because of the behavior of the Jets fans at home games. I'm surprised he didn't mention anything about 'sexual' behavior or sexual harassment. The Jets troglodyte fans are beyond hope, though.

 

[patchick]

You know, people cry and moan that the Patriots games are too quiet. Well, what do you expect is going to happen when you start selling all the seats to suits and families, and start banning all the behavior that leads to a noisy crowd?

Look, slick, I don't go to games and cuss and the like. I've never been drunk in my life.

OK, I'm trying to sort this out. According to these two statements:

- Drinking and cussing are the behaviors that make fans desirably loud;

- You don't drink and cuss.

It logically follows that you are very quiet at football games, and thus an undesirable fan to have at Gillette. So you're actually arguing selflessly, for the good of the team, to keep people like yourself out of the stadium. Very admirable!

 

[Deus Irae]

OK, I'm trying to sort this out. According to these two statements:

- Drinking and cussing are the behaviors that make fans desirably loud;

- You don't drink and cuss.

It logically follows that you are very quiet at football games, and thus an undesirable fan to have at Gillette. So you're actually arguing selflessly, for the good of the team, to keep people like yourself out of the stadium. Very admirable!

I don't go to many games, especially now that I live in Florida. However "never been drunk" is not the same as "never have a drink or two". Also, I do cuss, just not at games. My personal choice is always to try not to cuss in front of strangers, unless I'm cussing at them. I don't oppose the Ommissioner's interference because it will impact me. I oppose it because it's not his place.

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

Welcome to the "Nanny State"

I guess Goodell has never heard of that pesky little First Amendment.

Surely you can eject anyone you want for drunkeness, fighting, obscene antics. But I would love to see the lawsuit of the guy who gets booted due to his language! I'm sure that all those miniature lawyers, who write that crap on the back of your game ticket, are re-writing there legalease as we speak.