Operating under the auspices of concern for player 'safety', the Chiefs seem to be the driving force of this move to force players to cut the locks that exceed a length which covers their name on the back of their jersey.
The most 'recognizable' players that would be affected by this rule would be guys like Al Harris, Rashean Mathis and Mike McKenzie. Negro players who propagate the Original tradition of wearing flowing and lustrous dread locks.
Certainly, it would seem fair to decry this misguided NFL attempt to squash a practice which promotes Negro cultural awareness. Yet another play by the plantation bosses to ensure that the chattel conform to the bleached expectations of the league owners. A blatant attempt to prevent Negro youths from having role models who openly exhibit valued Negro traditions.
Few would argue these points.
Few would argue these points.
Conversely, sometimes a persecuted people must allow themselves to be oppressed, repressed and suppressed . Sometimes, there is an altogether unrecognized benefit in not fighting a particular battle of righteousness.
We put forth that this is one of those times, and urge Al Harris and the other 'lock sporting Negro players to conform with this policy and trim their manes. For the greater good.
We would only suggest submission to the plantation in instances where the benefit to the Original Man clearly outweighs the demeaning and calculated attempt to govern such things as petty as hair length. We understand that the notion of a bunch of rich old white 'owners' getting together in a meeting and coming out of the board room to collectively order, 'Hey young Negroes, cut your hair so you don't scare our more sensitive white ticket holders...', is the type of thing that should be fought with the most righteous of passion. We do understand that the Original NFL athletes that will be forced to take a scissor to their 'locks will feel a pain and a humiliation.
But, at times, the humiliation of a few individuals for the righteous progress of a Nation is the tax that must be levied.
We would ask that Harris and all others simply cut their 'locks. Cut them before it becomes 'law'. Take away the rush of power the owners will feel when they order you to cut them. Deprive them of their sadistic pleasure. Fortress yourself from the constitutional rape they would force upon you.
For the greater good. Do it for the greater good.
We apologize for shocking you with the above redneckish, grimey and offensive image of Robert Gallery sporting his ridiculously long, straightish hair. However, we offend for effect.
And the most hideous offering:
So, while deferring without a passionate fight to the owners demands might seem to be contradictory to righteous thought; the reality is that it benefits the Nation.
By compliantly shortening your own locks, the rest of the Nation would no longer be subjected to the types of images we were forced to assault you with on this post.
The selfless act of exterminating their Original tresses would, simultaneously, eradicate the offensive and distasteful practice of sporting a mullet.
We understand and agree that the notion of telling players to 'cut their hair' is clearly and unequivocally a racially insensitive and probably even a racially motivated undertaking.
However, let's turn the tables on the 'owners'. Let's force them to poke themselves in the eye.
Let's watch them engage in their very own reenactment of 'The Gift of the Magi', as their beloved linemen (read: white players) are forced to trim the mullets that many hold so dear.
Al Harris, et al:
Your dreads will be remembered for this sacrifice long after Matt Light and all the others mullet'eers have left the game.
Your act of selfless sacrifice will have saved a generation of young, Original fans from the vicious images the NFL would have subjected them to every Sunday.
A grateful Nation thanks you.
21 comments:
Sir,
I understand that the bright light of righteousness shows no favor when it is unleashed on the ugly hypocrisy of the NFL. However, as a wielder of the light, I think you have a responsibility to warn us when your unleash it's power.
It's lunch time in middle America, NOIS, and images of unmasked linemen like Siragusa, Gallery, and Turley are not cool. I understand the point you're trying to make, but damn....that was a little harsh. Maybe a little forwarning in the title next time?
"We understand and agree that the notion of telling players to 'cut their hair' is clearly and unequivocally a racially insensitive and probably even a racially motivated undertaking."
Brilliant! And the NBA dress code is racist as well.
NOISE,
You're wrong again on most every point...
1) The most recognizable FB player with long hair is Troy Polamalu.
2) Have you ever played football? Have you ever been taken down in a horse collar tackle? Imagine being taken down like that by your hair?!? It's dangerous on multiple levels.
3) The owners are OK with the player's hair if it can be tucked inside their helmet when they're out on the field. They shouldn't needlessly cut their hair as you ignorantly propose. You're an idiot to even suggest they do that and a bigger fool to think they'd listen to YOU.
4) The players long hair makes them look more intimidating which makes them fan favorites which helps fill the seats and gets people to watch on TV. Something the owners want more than visible names on a jersey.
Another poorly researched and bigoted blog by a weak minded fool. What a waste of 1s and 0s.
"2) Have you ever played football? Have you ever been taken down in a horse collar tackle? Imagine being taken down like that by your hair?!? It's dangerous on multiple levels."
Sir, yes.
Played plenty.
Played in college.
Back then there was no horse collar rule. We just dusted ourselves off, and went back to the huddle.
Either you have never played at a high level.
Or you're a sissy who doesn't wanna get his hair teased.
Sissy.
"The most recognizable FB player with long hair is Troy Polamalu. "
Sir, agreed.
And his hair is black and kinky.
Excellent point.
Thank you.
"The owners are OK with the player's hair if it can be tucked inside their helmet when they're out on the field."
Sir, that is a laughable proposition.
Laughable.
It's like saying, 'it's ok to be a Negro as long as you can keep your skin from showing'
Laughable.
"The players long hair makes them look more intimidating which makes them fan favorites which helps fill the seats and gets people to watch on TV. Something the owners want more than visible names on a jersey."
Sir, didn't you previously say that the players I mentioned weren't among the most recognizable? Wouldn't that mean they aren't fan favorites?
I should just let you prove yourself wrong instead of bothering to point out the ineptness of your debate and the contradiction of your 'points'.
"Another poorly researched and bigoted blog by a weak minded fool. "
Sir, it takes no strength to lift a feather.
Your argument is a feather.
"Played in college"
Oh come on, you're embellishing quite a bit now... being one of those male cheerleaders does not mean that you were 'on the football team'.
Sir, didn't you previously say that the players I mentioned weren't among the most recognizable? Wouldn't that mean they aren't fan favorites?
Nope, I didn't say that. Reading comprehension is something you should have picked up in college... But as a male cheerleader you probably got to take all the easy classes with the rest of the "football team".
"It takes no strength to lift a feather."
Speaking of feathers... You remind me of a black chicken little... Always proclaiming that the sky is falling, when in fact it's nothing more than an acorn dropping on your head.
You continue to take the most benign issues and try to twist them into racism. I'm here to tell you that white people just don't think about black people that much. I'm sure you'd like to think they do... That there's some massive conspiracy to explain why your race can't get out of what you perceive as the gutter. But it just isn't so.
It's pretty clear you have some personal issues you need to deal with and should stop trying to blame 'the white devil' for all your ills. You're transferring your problems onto something that can't be fixed, thus furthering your desire to fight the cause even more. You're in a downward spiral.
If even half your posts were reasonably sound and on topics that merit some investigation, then you might get some traction. But instead, you're so far off the deep end on just about every post, people often come to your site thinking this is racial satire. You're sabotaging your own cause which actually allows you to continue it.
You should take a good look inside yourself and examine what has created all this anger and animosity towards the people of another race and deal with THAT instead. You're not going to get anywhere with your cause using these tactics.
Now I'm being serious here... I'm really trying to help you. I've had fun poking fun at you as of late, but in all seriousness, there's a more effective strategy to reach your goals than spinning the news like you do in this blog.
You CAN raise awareness and help fix the racism that's in America, but as I said above, I don't think that's why you're doing this. If you were, you would go about it in a much more effective way. That brings us back to your personal issues... What triggered this cause? Was there an event in your life that initiated the decision to start this crusade?
"people often come to your site thinking this is racial satire"
only an idiot would think that!
Gentlemen, perhaps us black supremacists ought to bond with our brethren white supremacists in united hatred of the Jew.
http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/?p=1606#comments
It would all work out a lot better that way
"perhaps us black supremacists ought to bond with our brethren white supremacists"
Chappelle did it the best:
http://www.jibjab.com/view/130488
I would find the tackle argument far more compelling if it had happened more than one time - Polamalu at the hands of Larry Johnson - and it was an actual epidemic.
I ask those who worry about the tackle - do you understand the degree of difficulty in grabbing the flowing locks of the ball-carrier, holding on, and pulling him down? It would seem to me to be possibly the most inefficient and high risk form of tackling. Attacking the body will yield much better results.
Even in the case of LJ and Polamalu, the penalty occurs because Johnson holds onto the hair and pulls him up by the hair after the play. If you take the time to actually view the play, Troy is 100% fine after the tackle and even the pulling incident. Hardly indicative of a serious health risk.
Once again, the NFL shows disdain for the players that make the league rich.
Is this really that big of a deal that everyone is making it out to be or is it just a slow news week and no one has anything else to get all riled up about?
So what if they need to tuck their hair under their helmets. They don't have to cut their hair, period. And then telling them they SHOULD cut their hair before the rule goes into effect... wow, talk about a misguided attempt. I think the Black Chicken Little is the one that's trying to squash Negro cultural awareness!
When the players come off the field (sidelines/locker room/on the street/etc), everyone can still see them in their full glory. During interviews / signing autographs is probably the best time to see these players and identify with them because you can see their face, hear them interact w/ people, etc and they don't need to keep their hair tucked in then.
Using the argument that it's part of their cultural identity on the field is ridiculous. That's not what the football field is for. You can't see their face... but you can still their skin color, so you know they're black or white or whatever. Next you'll be complaining that face masks and colored visors are just another way to hide the identity of the players and keep them opressed.
Come on now, you guys can do better than the hair argument can't you? There are a LOT bigger oppression issues going on in the world than this, right?
Or maybe there isn't... and that's the whole point!
Bro,
You imply several times in your blog that this rule is racist in its origins, and I can see why you would think so. And although I'm against it as well (mainly because I don't want to see my boy Marion Barber's sick dreads go away) I must inform you that the rule is being proposed by the Kansas City Chiefs organization and its head coach, Herm Edwards, who is himself black. So the racist argument doesn't really fly.
But yeah I think the "safety" argument is bullshit.
"I must inform you that the rule is being proposed by the Kansas City Chiefs organization and its head coach, Herm Edwards, who is himself black. So the racist argument doesn't really fly."
Sir, please do some research.
The rule is actually the brainchild of Edwards boss, GM Carl Peterson.
Edwards is being pushed as the face of the issue...because his face is black.
I've heard that many of those NFL players use to use viagra online to get strongest medications to play, that's the reason they're so big.
Post a Comment