Hello, and welcome back to the week Side Podcast. I'm Jenny Frentis. I am here with Connor Or today. We have a little bit of a mail bag episode. We've got a lot of wonderful letters emails. Well, I guess they're all emails since they're electronic, but you know what I mean, And we're going to get to a few of those at the second half of the show. We'll start out. On Friday night, we had another statement from Roger Goodell. This statement was much better than his original statement. While it had the one major failing of not mentioning Colin Kaepernick by name, not apologizing to Colin Kaepernick, which was definitely a drawback, he did express support for players who had spoken up in a video earlier that week. He said, we were wrong for not listening to players earlier. We encourage all to speak out and peacefully protest, which was notable, and we the National Football League believed black lives matter. So really he came out an offered a measure of support that the league had not to this point. And um, yeah, not perfect statement, but definitely a shift. Curious your thoughts on at Connor, Yeah, Um, I think it's notable. In that UM, you know, it does put him at odds um with the President, which is something that he's been previously unwilling to do. I think there was just an enormous amount of tiptoeing around, UM, the president's rhetoric and staying out of the way of his fan base for the better part of four years. And I think that this statement, at least UH finally manages to put him on one side of the line, um, which is something that is notable certainly UM. And I also think it's notable because I don't think that this happens without a lot of the powerful messages relayed by some of the NFL's biggest players. And you know, I read a good take somewhere that I thought it was really that Patrick Mahomes um kind of pushing it over the edge a little bit. Because if you have of the league's most transcendent superstar player, the superstar m v P of the league, UM, you know, saying this, you've you're kind of left as a league with no choice but to back him and to get behind him. And so I think it's UM, it's an interesting situation where I still don't know and I questioned the genuine nature of everything that the league does. But I think that it's a credit to the players that they've put this league in a position where they have to back their players, and I think that that's it's better than nothing, right, It's it's certainly better than we've had for the last four years. Absolutely, Connor, and I think you're right. They basically put the league in a position where they can't afford not to back their players, which is strange thing to say, right, because the players are what makes the league. But to this point, the owners have and the league by extension, have aligned themselves with these mysterious business interests that they say would have tanked had they supported Colin Kappernuck or the rights of the players to peacefully protests. So it's definitely an important shift. But I think what's going to be interesting in the months to come, Connor, is how the owners react and how the owners respond. We heard a lot from unnamed friends of Goodell over the weekend saying that this was closer to Goodell's actual beliefs and that he finally had the fortitude to stand up to the owners after two successful c bias. He knew he was on solid ground. I thought that was sort of a flawed argument, because if this was really what your beliefs are and you're in this leadership role, then you should have espoused those sooner. But it reflects the influence that the owners have on the NFL in the direction of the NFL, and I thought it was notable. You know, comments resurface this week. I read an article from February Saints owner Gayle Benson. She had recently a couple of months ago, talked about the her displeasure with players and kneeling for the anthem, and the Town and Country magazine piece it says when San Francisco forty Niners quarterback Colin Kaepernick set off a firestorm by kneeling during the national anthem during games, and other players followed suit, Gail, representing an ailing tom in twenty sixteen, cornered NFL commissioner Roger Goodell. We were getting ready to start the meeting, she recalls, I said, Roger, you need to tell these owners that their players will not kneel. That's all you have to do. So I think her viewpoint is one that's pretty representative league wide. You know, it's why Colin Kaepernick wasn't signed and It's why the peaceful protests during the anthem became more about the act of kneeling than about what they were actually protesting against police brutality, against racial injustice. The owners are the ones who choose whether or not to hire players. The owners are the ones that picked head coaches, they picked headerl pick general managers. So the players have really forced the issue, and they're the ones make the league. But the owners are the ones that control the financial strings and control a lot of the direction of the league on some of these issues. And so I think it will be interesting to see if there will be a shift at the ownership level, which I think is really important. Yeah, and there's no running and hiding this year. Um. You know, I think that we um have recalled in the past, notably that a lot of these owners were political donors, UM, and they would always kind of couch these things as well. You know, I have business interests. I often donate to both parties and blah blah blah, and you know, but I think that more clearly, if these owners aren't going to be willing to communicate with their players, um, beyond that, you know, whatever, that general statement that they're all going to release. At one point or another, they have released. What they're going to have to do is face the decisions from an economic level, do you still donate to the you know, the r n C or you know, any of the superpacks that support the president, which are clearly at odds with UM. You know what your players, a majority of your players are are fighting against. And so I think it's going to be fascinating because now more than ever, there's not going to be away for them to both sides this, and owners, like you said, are kind of that nebulous top level of all of this and have been able to put a lot of the pressure that should be coming on them onto everybody else, on to Goodell, onto the league, on to the president, onto the economy, whatever it is. UM. But I think that they're finally going to feel that on a personal level, and it's going to be interesting to see what they end up doing with this increase in spotlight and attention whatever you want to call it. Absolutely, and this is going to be an especially interesting confluence of a lot of different things that once obviously and it's an election year heading into the season, we're going to see players hopefully feel more comfortable demonstrating and peacefully protesting and you know, picking up issues that they had seen Colin Kaepernick get pushed out of the league for in the past. Hopefully that this has open the way to allow players to have the feel more freedom to do what they want. But yes, it's also going to be a big test for the owners, because if you're donating money to President Trump to support his reelection, you can't do that on one hand and then also say that you're anti racist or that you're supporting your players as they protest racial injustice and work to change these systemic structures in our country that have allowed racism to persist. So it's really going to be a put up or shut up year. And I think one of the things we're seeing now too is that people are so frustrated and tired of the way things have been in the lack of change, that they're willing to call people out more. And I think that if we see owners acting in hypocritical ways, we're going to hear more from players speaking out against the the people who own the team that they play for. Yeah. Yeah, there's no um. There's no more running and hiding, there's no more both sizing it and you know, you hate to ever say, you know, a good thing that came from something, and I'm not couching it that way, but I think that the current events, the energy of what has happened, has eliminated that ability for so many of the people to just stand in the middle and sort of feed off the energy of both sides of the crowd, which you know, if you go back to some of the biggest civil rights leaders of our times would often note that these are the most dangerous people anyway. Right. It's not the people, um that are you know, whatever on on one side or the other. It's the ones that stay quiet and sort of just line their pockets. And that's not going to be possible anymore. So I'm fascinated to see where where we end up with that. Absolutely we've seen through the course of history that social change comes and fits and starts. And you know, for the NFL commissioner to be, you know, saying uh in a video in his basement, which was a little shaky, by the way, Connor was it even just on your right, It was a little a little lot fuzzy there, um, But in any event, for the NFL commissioner to be saying black lives matter. The fact that that alone is significant is sad in a way. I mean, the league is seventy black players. You would hope that it's it would be just accept you know, accepted or obvious that black lives matter. But the fact that the commissioner said that is is meaningful for where we're at in our country right now. So I think we'll dive into the questions. Thanks to all who wrote in at week side pot at gmail dot com. You can keep the letters and emails coming, and we picked three this week that we thought were really good and really made us think and a lot to discuss here. So do you want to hit the first one? Connor? Definitely. This is a letter from Steven uh and he gave us permission to to read it on air, and UM, you know, kind of more of a letter to the editor than a tradition a question, but we just you know, we want to let everybody know that, you know, we want to hear from you, regardless of whether or not it's a question, if it's a comment, if it's something that you would like amplified. You know, UM, I think we're more than happy to provide that platform. Um. Two voices like this. So, um, yeah, thank you Stephen for the letter. So I'll just read um what he sent us. Uh. It pains me to speak out against a fellow boiler Maker. However, this was a thought I had this morning. Um, I had more time to think about white privilege and how Drew Brees is definitely a recipient of that, no doubt right. However, considering the fact that he has a six to eight million dollar deals at broadcaster with NBC once he officially retires, he has a deal locked in to do the job he doesn't have the skills for and has not had to prove those skills on a lower level of football prior to getting elevated to the highest level of football in the NFL due to the success of Tony Romo. Drew has provided this opportunity and the network because hedge its bets. When has an African American ever been been offered a job that they have not been trained for based upon the performance of another member of their race. This is a This is the definition of privilege, and the discussions that we um and Stephen is an African American man are not included in. So I think that was a great letter by Stephen. A great point. It's just one of those things that even me, I mean subconsciously, when you go through and you start analyzing the process, like the flurry of news when Tony Romo was coming out and then all of a sudden we were talking about Jake Cutler, and you know, the immediate pivot there. If I was sitting there about to write like a quick column on this was okay, that networks are interested in former quarterbacks, and that's great and blah blah blah. But they're not right. They're interested in a certain kind of former quarterback, a quarterback that they believe is more presentable whatever it is, um, you know, and they're leaving out a vast, a vast underrepresented portion of the entire experience here. I mean, you know, when has the success of Randi Barber or Charles Davis or any of these guys change the calculus in a booth And the answer is it hasn't. So I think that was a great point by Stephen in a great, great letter. Yeah. I think it was a really important perspective to think about, too, Like for any of us who are in a workplace where you're talking about hiring practices, and people always tap on the shoulder, you know, people that they know for jobs, and that's generally people that are in your network. And oftentimes people that are in your network are people that look like you or you know, we type cast for certain roles and that this is a really great point, like Tony Romo, then Drew Brees, I'll ball of Peyton Manning, J Cutler. So it's always kind of the white quarterback that we say, well, they'll be they'll be great for this, right, And um, I think if you look at in those that perspective and that idea that that, as Steven wrote, is the definition of white privilege. And that is a discussion that black men and women are often excluded from and they're not part of and they're not thought of in these conversations because they're not part of somebody's network. And we see that through hiring across the NFL head coach hiring, GM hiring it. It all stems from that same problem that we need to work to correct. So I think it was a really really good example and really elucidated and I think it's something that Drew Brees doesn't realize. And I know he's given a couple of statements now, and he seemed to make progress through those statements, and each one seems to be a little bit better and show a better degree of understanding. But I still think it's jarring Connor to think that Drew Brees has towards the end of his career. He's had a full career in a league that black, and yet he didn't have a real understanding of what his black teammates and competitors were demonstrating for what they were protesting. Again, he clearly never took the time to hear their perspectives to understand it. And I think so while he's made progress, and while we can say it's good that he's educating himself and learning and getting, you know, to a more enlightened place, uh, it's so frustrating I think to wonder why it took so long to get there. Yeah, And to Steven's point, I just thought about this. Do you remember last year when Deshaun Watson went on a streak after games of UM taking time to legitimately explain to reporters, you know, questions about certain coverages, you know, why teams were doing certain things. How many people at that moment, and these clips went viral. You know, they weren't all over the internet. And you know, Deshaun Watson wasn't being dismissive. Um, he was sharing the knowledge that he has. How many people at that point were linking him to broadcast jobs, right, There was nobody talking about that, right, It was just like, oh, we're surprised at how you know congenial he is, which is such a perfect depiction. I think of what Stevens Letter illustrates. Whereas you know, if Josh Allen did that, you know, who knows, maybe CBS would already be signing him to a futures deal ten years down the road or however long Josh Allen's gonna be playing in the NFL. For great point, I didn't see anyone making that point, and so I think it's important to check yourself to the next time you say, oh, this person they'll be a broadcaster when they're playing career is done. Why are you saying that? Is it because they look like another broadcaster you've seen, Is because they fits the mold of what you think a broadcaster should be or are you actually considering everybody that seems to have the skills for this role or could be good at it if people thought a little bit differently. So another smart point, Connor, all right, we'll move into topic number two. We heard from Chris who lives in London or sister lives also London night. All right, Chris says, I live in the UK and follow football soccer. I guess although that hurts to say, Okay, we have the same problem and under representation and coaching roles in ownership. One thing I've always thought was weird is that the NFL rewards teams who lose players to other teams via comp pics. This encourages the team to focus on draft and develop. Why is there not the same for coaches boarding teams who have continuity and develop coaches that progress. Well, that doesn't fix the issue. Surely, combined with the new role rules about not blocking, it should encourage moves. Also, why is there not a Rooney rule equivalent for new owners? Surely the NFL should be forced to positively consider minority owners. Apologize for the essay. No apologies necessary, Chris, We appreciate the essay, and yes, you're right. The the idea of some kind of compensatory pick for developing coaches or developing executives that was part of the latest proposal In terms of I guess uh, let's reading from it here. I just want to make sure get the picks right at minority candidates who are hired away as a head coach or GM, their former team would get a comp third rounder, and to a coordinator position, their former team would get a camp fifth rounder. So that, as you mentioned, twins nicely with the idea that you can't be blocked for interviewing for these jobs. So many times we've seen talented black coaches and executives get stuck in their current roles because as a function of being too good at their jobs right, their head coach or their general manager doesn't want to lose them, and so they block them. So these that the not blocking role prevents it. And also the additional incentive of saying, if you work to develop somebody and not just developed them, but if you work to build their network. Right, So, if you're a head coach and you have a talented black coach and your staff, are you introducing them to other teams around the league? Are you promoting them? Are you making calls on their behalf? All of those things factor in it. You can play an active role in them getting hired away. And I think the idea of pairing a draft pick with that, I think that one made sense. Um. There was definitely a lot of conversation about the incentives, but I think the cop pick type incentive one, UM was was one part that I think a lot of people could get on board with. The second part of yours your question is the Rooney rule equivalent for new owners, And I think this is a pretty good idea. Connor. I love this idea, UM, And I think the main reason I love it is because it changes the calculus a little bit. And you know, so much of conversation at the league level, right is where all all the players and everybody on the ground floor, um, and they're just shouting up right, and owners don't have to respond because they can just disappear and hide behind the commissioner. But I think getting owners in front of somebody that they're more likely to listen to. And I'm not saying that's right, I'm just acknowledging the truth of the moment um, getting someone in front of them that they're more likely to listen to, and getting someone who can have those conversations on a ground on that level instead of just the owners kind of picking and choosing what they want to respond to. I think is incredibly valuable. I mean, more black ownership in the NFL, more minority ownership in the NFL would be a tremendous gift, and I think it would bring the league to a point where, you know, I'm not gonna And again, it was not good um in the thirties, forties and fifties because there was no minority ownership back then. And you know, I think things were certainly troubling for different reasons back then, But I think there were people of different backgrounds, of different levels of business success, of football lifers and non football lifers, and I think some of the best things that happened in the NFL came out of these legitimate conversations between people who didn't see things the same way. And right now that is not the case in NFL ownership circles. Everybody is kind of in an a silent agreement that we're all patting our pockets here. This is a business investment and we got to do what we can to protect it. And they've allowed themselves to skirt a lot of good that they could be doing by you know, kind of all pushing and going in that same direction. Yeah, and when we see a new owner selected, I think thinking of David Tepper of the Panthers, and it's always billed as like new owner invited into the club, and it makes me cringe every time because it's a club that's largely old white men who generally are picking another old white man to join their club. And so that's why I like this idea because you're kind of similar to what you're doing with the head coaching general manager positions. You're forcing them to forcing the owners to consider people outside of their own network. And we mentioned at the top of the show the influence that owners have about the direction of the league and how decisions are handled. You know, it was because of the team owners that Kaepernick is unemployed. That was a choice that they made, and they it was a choice that the owners made to make the conversation about not respecting the flag supposedly about the act of kneeling during the anthem, rather than the issues that the players were trying to raise awareness to. Those were things that were because of the ways the owners approached the issue handled it because of their actions, and so I think to get change in the NFL, you need a change at the ownership level, whether that's current owners examining their own behaviors or re you know, I don't know, educating themselves and recognizing where they failed, um, but also expanding that club and hopefully getting different voices and different perspectives would make the league so much stronger. Yeah, um, you know, and we've seen you know, we Shad Con was certainly someone who you know, built his way, um and had that kind of classic American story whatever you want to call that. UM. But that's not enough, right, I mean, that's not nearly enough, um to change the way that these guys think, um, you know in a lot of ways, you know, bringing in an even just opening up that process, forcing them to sit next to someone, like you said, who people who they wouldn't pick to be in their club, right, um, but that people of a similar status to them. Unfortunately, Uh, that's sometimes what owners see people as, right, is a net worth or a figure and to see um, you know, uh, an entrepreneur of color, someone with um, their level of wealth. I think might I don't know, change the calculus a little bit and at least force them to see someone on their level instead of what they're doing now, which is just it's not working. I mean, and we've known that, we've known that for a long time. Yeah. Absolutely, all right, Connor, you want to hit the third question, All right, let's do it. Uh. Our third question comes to us from Chase. I don't know where Chase lives, maybe in London. Maybe maybe forgot to include that. I'm not sure. Um, but Chase asked, do you believe that Bill's fifth round rookie QB. Jake from will serve any punishment pertaining to the leaked text messages that came out Thursday afternoon? And if so, what do you think they would be? And for our listeners who haven't heard the Jake From story, Um, some text messages were leaked from I believe last year where From said that only quote elite white people should own guns, thus making them uh. I believe the crux of the conversation was to make them so expensive that only elite white people can own guns. He has apologized for those comments. I believe the Bill said that he addressed the team. Uh. Most of the Bill's power players have talked about this. UM. Jake From himself said that that was not Uh. He was part of kind of a joke, although that was kind of hard to tell from the context of the conversation. But um, I I think that you had a good take on this. When we're talking about an off air, I think that the best thing that could possibly come of this is maybe not like you know, suspend him for a game or suspending for two games, but to actually go through a legitimate process where he realizes why what he said was so harmful and probably is upsetting to a vast majority of his teammates and fellow players around the league. Yeah. I got this idea from a friend of mine. I mentioned her on a previous show. Her name is Jenfry and she runs anti racist trainings for college athletic programs across the country, also businesses, etcetera. And the idea of what happens if someone uses a racial slur? You know, we saw this comp with Clemson and another uh you know, or what if a teammate says it? Or how do you address situations uh, where someone says something that's harmful and inappropriate? What's the correct punishment? And we often see things like suspensions, We often see things like absolutely no action that seems to be the most common thing a forced public apology and then the issue kind of fades to the background. But her idea was to give the player an assignment or an education task that they have to complete before they can return to the team, or the same maybe for a coach or whoever we're talking about here. And I really like that idea. I don't know exactly how the specifics of how it works would work, but basically forcing the player to actually confront the deep seated reasons behind why they said what they did, forcing them to correct their behavior, confront their own biases, ask themselves what is at the root of the hurtful comment that they made, would ultimately be more helpful. Because if you just are suspended it spend some time away from the team, or you just issue uh public apology that's not really an apology, that doesn't really do a lot to correct behavior. Yeah, yeah, it's um it's interesting. I mean, you know, this is one of the first test cases uh in in the new reality. And you know when I say that, that is not meant to dismiss um you anything that's happened in the past. But I think that it's um hard to argue that there's such a momentum now um and such an unshakable momentum that maybe we haven't felt in the past. And and that's from the sector of allies, right, the people who are not dealing with this on a regular basis, I think, who are sort of joining this and making it um into something that can't be ignored. And this is an early test case in that. So it'll be fascinating to see where the bills go. And they have a good opportunity here to uh to teach someone a valuable lesson and to teach all workplaces really how to take the lead on this stuff and to do the right thing. Yeah, when we're seeing a lot more public callouts of people, and so I think that will be interesting. As we mentioned at the top of the show, for owners, you know, when owners continue to donate money or aren't supportive of players through their actions and public callouts for players. I mean this came up by someone who was offended by his words a year ago and decided now, uh that this that they're complicit if they're not pointing it out and not drawing attention to it and asking this person to confront the behaviors. And so I think it's definitely a time where we're going to see a lot more correcting of these underlying behaviors that have allowed to persist kind of quietly for for too long. Um. I did want to so full disclosure to everybody. We recorded the show once before and I had a computer microphone issue, so we're doing it for a second time and our first recording of the show. Connor, in response to Steven's question, you brought up an excellent column that was written by one of our former colleagues that Sports illustrated Deonte Prince, and I wanted to make sure we got that in because I think it's really relevant to today's discussion and I think it'd be great for listeners to give that a read. Yeah. Um, it reminded me of, you know, just everything that Stephen had said in that letter made me think of the column, and um, you know, I'll just read one's tweet because I think, while, uh, what what is Twitter up to now? Characters? Is that we get now something like that? Yeah, well that's probably you know, not enough. Uh, you know, I think he contextualized it beautifully here in the in the column is so well written, and he just said when Drew Brees used the flag to virtue signal he ignored black contributions to the military and systemic reasons many don't know their family lineage. I wrote about the erasia of black history and what I recently learned about my own family. So I urge anyone who um was moved by Stephen's letter, as we were moved enough to you know, want to read that on the podcast to u to also check out Deonte's column, which was really well done. Yeah, definitely, and thanks again to everyone who wrote in. It's weak side pot at gmail dot com as our email address, and we really like sharing the perspectives and questions of listeners. You guys are smarter than we are. It's nice to talk about your thoughts and you know, are different things on our show, so please keep reading in. If we didn't get to your question this week, we have plenty of weeks ahead in the summer. Will definitely cover as many as we can and hopefully, you know, make this a little bit of a weekly dialogue. I think it's it's great to hear from everybody and have the chance to have your thoughts spark our discussion. So definitely all right, Well, thanks for joining this week. The mm QB week Side podcast is Me, Jenny Rerentis, and Connor Or. We are produced by Shelby Royston. Size Executive producer of podcasts is Scott Brody. Ben Eagle is Director of Editorial Projects and Product. Mark Murravic is a meritus Executive director of the mm QB. Keep up with our entire lineup of podcasts five days a week by subscribing to the mm QB NFL Podcasts for free on Apple Podcasts, and while you're there, please do us a favor and leave a rating and review. It really does help other people find the show, which is also available on Spotify, Radio dot com, stitcher side dot com, and wherever else who listen to podcasts

Hello, and welcome back to the week Side Podcast. I'm Jenny Frentis. I am here with Connor Or today. We have a little bit of a mail bag episode. We've got a lot of wonderful letters emails. Well, I guess they're all emails since they're electronic, but you know what I mean, And we're going to get to a few of those at the second half of the show. We'll start out. On Friday night, we had another statement from Roger Goodell. This statement was much better than his original statement. While it had the one major failing of not mentioning Colin Kaepernick by name, not apologizing to Colin Kaepernick, which was definitely a drawback, he did express support for players who had spoken up in a video earlier that week. He said, we were wrong for not listening to players earlier. We encourage all to speak out and peacefully protest, which was notable, and we the National Football League believed black lives matter. So really he came out an offered a measure of support that the league had not to this point. And um, yeah, not perfect statement, but definitely a shift. Curious your thoughts on at Connor, Yeah, Um, I think it's notable. In that UM, you know, it does put him at odds um with the President, which is something that he's been previously unwilling to do. I think there was just an enormous amount of tiptoeing around, UM, the president's rhetoric and staying out of the way of his fan base for the better part of four years. And I think that this statement, at least UH finally manages to put him on one side of the line, um, which is something that is notable certainly UM. And I also think it's notable because I don't think that this happens without a lot of the powerful messages relayed by some of the NFL's biggest players. And you know, I read a good take somewhere that I thought it was really that Patrick Mahomes um kind of pushing it over the edge a little bit. Because if you have of the league's most transcendent superstar player, the superstar m v P of the league, UM, you know, saying this, you've you're kind of left as a league with no choice but to back him and to get behind him. And so I think it's UM, it's an interesting situation where I still don't know and I questioned the genuine nature of everything that the league does. But I think that it's a credit to the players that they've put this league in a position where they have to back their players, and I think that that's it's better than nothing, right, It's it's certainly better than we've had for the last four years. Absolutely, Connor, and I think you're right. They basically put the league in a position where they can't afford not to back their players, which is strange thing to say, right, because the players are what makes the league. But to this point, the owners have and the league by extension, have aligned themselves with these mysterious business interests that they say would have tanked had they supported Colin Kappernuck or the rights of the players to peacefully protests. So it's definitely an important shift. But I think what's going to be interesting in the months to come, Connor, is how the owners react and how the owners respond. We heard a lot from unnamed friends of Goodell over the weekend saying that this was closer to Goodell's actual beliefs and that he finally had the fortitude to stand up to the owners after two successful c bias. He knew he was on solid ground. I thought that was sort of a flawed argument, because if this was really what your beliefs are and you're in this leadership role, then you should have espoused those sooner. But it reflects the influence that the owners have on the NFL in the direction of the NFL, and I thought it was notable. You know, comments resurface this week. I read an article from February Saints owner Gayle Benson. She had recently a couple of months ago, talked about the her displeasure with players and kneeling for the anthem, and the Town and Country magazine piece it says when San Francisco forty Niners quarterback Colin Kaepernick set off a firestorm by kneeling during the national anthem during games, and other players followed suit, Gail, representing an ailing tom in twenty sixteen, cornered NFL commissioner Roger Goodell. We were getting ready to start the meeting, she recalls, I said, Roger, you need to tell these owners that their players will not kneel. That's all you have to do. So I think her viewpoint is one that's pretty representative league wide. You know, it's why Colin Kaepernick wasn't signed and It's why the peaceful protests during the anthem became more about the act of kneeling than about what they were actually protesting against police brutality, against racial injustice. The owners are the ones who choose whether or not to hire players. The owners are the ones that picked head coaches, they picked headerl pick general managers. So the players have really forced the issue, and they're the ones make the league. But the owners are the ones that control the financial strings and control a lot of the direction of the league on some of these issues. And so I think it will be interesting to see if there will be a shift at the ownership level, which I think is really important. Yeah, and there's no running and hiding this year. Um. You know, I think that we um have recalled in the past, notably that a lot of these owners were political donors, UM, and they would always kind of couch these things as well. You know, I have business interests. I often donate to both parties and blah blah blah, and you know, but I think that more clearly, if these owners aren't going to be willing to communicate with their players, um, beyond that, you know, whatever, that general statement that they're all going to release. At one point or another, they have released. What they're going to have to do is face the decisions from an economic level, do you still donate to the you know, the r n C or you know, any of the superpacks that support the president, which are clearly at odds with UM. You know what your players, a majority of your players are are fighting against. And so I think it's going to be fascinating because now more than ever, there's not going to be away for them to both sides this, and owners, like you said, are kind of that nebulous top level of all of this and have been able to put a lot of the pressure that should be coming on them onto everybody else, on to Goodell, onto the league, on to the president, onto the economy, whatever it is. UM. But I think that they're finally going to feel that on a personal level, and it's going to be interesting to see what they end up doing with this increase in spotlight and attention whatever you want to call it. Absolutely, and this is going to be an especially interesting confluence of a lot of different things that once obviously and it's an election year heading into the season, we're going to see players hopefully feel more comfortable demonstrating and peacefully protesting and you know, picking up issues that they had seen Colin Kaepernick get pushed out of the league for in the past. Hopefully that this has open the way to allow players to have the feel more freedom to do what they want. But yes, it's also going to be a big test for the owners, because if you're donating money to President Trump to support his reelection, you can't do that on one hand and then also say that you're anti racist or that you're supporting your players as they protest racial injustice and work to change these systemic structures in our country that have allowed racism to persist. So it's really going to be a put up or shut up year. And I think one of the things we're seeing now too is that people are so frustrated and tired of the way things have been in the lack of change, that they're willing to call people out more. And I think that if we see owners acting in hypocritical ways, we're going to hear more from players speaking out against the the people who own the team that they play for. Yeah. Yeah, there's no um. There's no more running and hiding, there's no more both sizing it and you know, you hate to ever say, you know, a good thing that came from something, and I'm not couching it that way, but I think that the current events, the energy of what has happened, has eliminated that ability for so many of the people to just stand in the middle and sort of feed off the energy of both sides of the crowd, which you know, if you go back to some of the biggest civil rights leaders of our times would often note that these are the most dangerous people anyway. Right. It's not the people, um that are you know, whatever on on one side or the other. It's the ones that stay quiet and sort of just line their pockets. And that's not going to be possible anymore. So I'm fascinated to see where where we end up with that. Absolutely we've seen through the course of history that social change comes and fits and starts. And you know, for the NFL commissioner to be, you know, saying uh in a video in his basement, which was a little shaky, by the way, Connor was it even just on your right, It was a little a little lot fuzzy there, um, But in any event, for the NFL commissioner to be saying black lives matter. The fact that that alone is significant is sad in a way. I mean, the league is seventy black players. You would hope that it's it would be just accept you know, accepted or obvious that black lives matter. But the fact that the commissioner said that is is meaningful for where we're at in our country right now. So I think we'll dive into the questions. Thanks to all who wrote in at week side pot at gmail dot com. You can keep the letters and emails coming, and we picked three this week that we thought were really good and really made us think and a lot to discuss here. So do you want to hit the first one? Connor? Definitely. This is a letter from Steven uh and he gave us permission to to read it on air, and UM, you know, kind of more of a letter to the editor than a tradition a question, but we just you know, we want to let everybody know that, you know, we want to hear from you, regardless of whether or not it's a question, if it's a comment, if it's something that you would like amplified. You know, UM, I think we're more than happy to provide that platform. Um. Two voices like this. So, um, yeah, thank you Stephen for the letter. So I'll just read um what he sent us. Uh. It pains me to speak out against a fellow boiler Maker. However, this was a thought I had this morning. Um, I had more time to think about white privilege and how Drew Brees is definitely a recipient of that, no doubt right. However, considering the fact that he has a six to eight million dollar deals at broadcaster with NBC once he officially retires, he has a deal locked in to do the job he doesn't have the skills for and has not had to prove those skills on a lower level of football prior to getting elevated to the highest level of football in the NFL due to the success of Tony Romo. Drew has provided this opportunity and the network because hedge its bets. When has an African American ever been been offered a job that they have not been trained for based upon the performance of another member of their race. This is a This is the definition of privilege, and the discussions that we um and Stephen is an African American man are not included in. So I think that was a great letter by Stephen. A great point. It's just one of those things that even me, I mean subconsciously, when you go through and you start analyzing the process, like the flurry of news when Tony Romo was coming out and then all of a sudden we were talking about Jake Cutler, and you know, the immediate pivot there. If I was sitting there about to write like a quick column on this was okay, that networks are interested in former quarterbacks, and that's great and blah blah blah. But they're not right. They're interested in a certain kind of former quarterback, a quarterback that they believe is more presentable whatever it is, um, you know, and they're leaving out a vast, a vast underrepresented portion of the entire experience here. I mean, you know, when has the success of Randi Barber or Charles Davis or any of these guys change the calculus in a booth And the answer is it hasn't. So I think that was a great point by Stephen in a great, great letter. Yeah. I think it was a really important perspective to think about, too, Like for any of us who are in a workplace where you're talking about hiring practices, and people always tap on the shoulder, you know, people that they know for jobs, and that's generally people that are in your network. And oftentimes people that are in your network are people that look like you or you know, we type cast for certain roles and that this is a really great point, like Tony Romo, then Drew Brees, I'll ball of Peyton Manning, J Cutler. So it's always kind of the white quarterback that we say, well, they'll be they'll be great for this, right, And um, I think if you look at in those that perspective and that idea that that, as Steven wrote, is the definition of white privilege. And that is a discussion that black men and women are often excluded from and they're not part of and they're not thought of in these conversations because they're not part of somebody's network. And we see that through hiring across the NFL head coach hiring, GM hiring it. It all stems from that same problem that we need to work to correct. So I think it was a really really good example and really elucidated and I think it's something that Drew Brees doesn't realize. And I know he's given a couple of statements now, and he seemed to make progress through those statements, and each one seems to be a little bit better and show a better degree of understanding. But I still think it's jarring Connor to think that Drew Brees has towards the end of his career. He's had a full career in a league that black, and yet he didn't have a real understanding of what his black teammates and competitors were demonstrating for what they were protesting. Again, he clearly never took the time to hear their perspectives to understand it. And I think so while he's made progress, and while we can say it's good that he's educating himself and learning and getting, you know, to a more enlightened place, uh, it's so frustrating I think to wonder why it took so long to get there. Yeah, And to Steven's point, I just thought about this. Do you remember last year when Deshaun Watson went on a streak after games of UM taking time to legitimately explain to reporters, you know, questions about certain coverages, you know, why teams were doing certain things. How many people at that moment, and these clips went viral. You know, they weren't all over the internet. And you know, Deshaun Watson wasn't being dismissive. Um, he was sharing the knowledge that he has. How many people at that point were linking him to broadcast jobs, right, There was nobody talking about that, right, It was just like, oh, we're surprised at how you know congenial he is, which is such a perfect depiction. I think of what Stevens Letter illustrates. Whereas you know, if Josh Allen did that, you know, who knows, maybe CBS would already be signing him to a futures deal ten years down the road or however long Josh Allen's gonna be playing in the NFL. For great point, I didn't see anyone making that point, and so I think it's important to check yourself to the next time you say, oh, this person they'll be a broadcaster when they're playing career is done. Why are you saying that? Is it because they look like another broadcaster you've seen, Is because they fits the mold of what you think a broadcaster should be or are you actually considering everybody that seems to have the skills for this role or could be good at it if people thought a little bit differently. So another smart point, Connor, all right, we'll move into topic number two. We heard from Chris who lives in London or sister lives also London night. All right, Chris says, I live in the UK and follow football soccer. I guess although that hurts to say, Okay, we have the same problem and under representation and coaching roles in ownership. One thing I've always thought was weird is that the NFL rewards teams who lose players to other teams via comp pics. This encourages the team to focus on draft and develop. Why is there not the same for coaches boarding teams who have continuity and develop coaches that progress. Well, that doesn't fix the issue. Surely, combined with the new role rules about not blocking, it should encourage moves. Also, why is there not a Rooney rule equivalent for new owners? Surely the NFL should be forced to positively consider minority owners. Apologize for the essay. No apologies necessary, Chris, We appreciate the essay, and yes, you're right. The the idea of some kind of compensatory pick for developing coaches or developing executives that was part of the latest proposal In terms of I guess uh, let's reading from it here. I just want to make sure get the picks right at minority candidates who are hired away as a head coach or GM, their former team would get a comp third rounder, and to a coordinator position, their former team would get a camp fifth rounder. So that, as you mentioned, twins nicely with the idea that you can't be blocked for interviewing for these jobs. So many times we've seen talented black coaches and executives get stuck in their current roles because as a function of being too good at their jobs right, their head coach or their general manager doesn't want to lose them, and so they block them. So these that the not blocking role prevents it. And also the additional incentive of saying, if you work to develop somebody and not just developed them, but if you work to build their network. Right, So, if you're a head coach and you have a talented black coach and your staff, are you introducing them to other teams around the league? Are you promoting them? Are you making calls on their behalf? All of those things factor in it. You can play an active role in them getting hired away. And I think the idea of pairing a draft pick with that, I think that one made sense. Um. There was definitely a lot of conversation about the incentives, but I think the cop pick type incentive one, UM was was one part that I think a lot of people could get on board with. The second part of yours your question is the Rooney rule equivalent for new owners, And I think this is a pretty good idea. Connor. I love this idea, UM, And I think the main reason I love it is because it changes the calculus a little bit. And you know, so much of conversation at the league level, right is where all all the players and everybody on the ground floor, um, and they're just shouting up right, and owners don't have to respond because they can just disappear and hide behind the commissioner. But I think getting owners in front of somebody that they're more likely to listen to. And I'm not saying that's right, I'm just acknowledging the truth of the moment um, getting someone in front of them that they're more likely to listen to, and getting someone who can have those conversations on a ground on that level instead of just the owners kind of picking and choosing what they want to respond to. I think is incredibly valuable. I mean, more black ownership in the NFL, more minority ownership in the NFL would be a tremendous gift, and I think it would bring the league to a point where, you know, I'm not gonna And again, it was not good um in the thirties, forties and fifties because there was no minority ownership back then. And you know, I think things were certainly troubling for different reasons back then, But I think there were people of different backgrounds, of different levels of business success, of football lifers and non football lifers, and I think some of the best things that happened in the NFL came out of these legitimate conversations between people who didn't see things the same way. And right now that is not the case in NFL ownership circles. Everybody is kind of in an a silent agreement that we're all patting our pockets here. This is a business investment and we got to do what we can to protect it. And they've allowed themselves to skirt a lot of good that they could be doing by you know, kind of all pushing and going in that same direction. Yeah, and when we see a new owner selected, I think thinking of David Tepper of the Panthers, and it's always billed as like new owner invited into the club, and it makes me cringe every time because it's a club that's largely old white men who generally are picking another old white man to join their club. And so that's why I like this idea because you're kind of similar to what you're doing with the head coaching general manager positions. You're forcing them to forcing the owners to consider people outside of their own network. And we mentioned at the top of the show the influence that owners have about the direction of the league and how decisions are handled. You know, it was because of the team owners that Kaepernick is unemployed. That was a choice that they made, and they it was a choice that the owners made to make the conversation about not respecting the flag supposedly about the act of kneeling during the anthem, rather than the issues that the players were trying to raise awareness to. Those were things that were because of the ways the owners approached the issue handled it because of their actions, and so I think to get change in the NFL, you need a change at the ownership level, whether that's current owners examining their own behaviors or re you know, I don't know, educating themselves and recognizing where they failed, um, but also expanding that club and hopefully getting different voices and different perspectives would make the league so much stronger. Yeah, um, you know, and we've seen you know, we Shad Con was certainly someone who you know, built his way, um and had that kind of classic American story whatever you want to call that. UM. But that's not enough, right, I mean, that's not nearly enough, um to change the way that these guys think, um, you know in a lot of ways, you know, bringing in an even just opening up that process, forcing them to sit next to someone, like you said, who people who they wouldn't pick to be in their club, right, um, but that people of a similar status to them. Unfortunately, Uh, that's sometimes what owners see people as, right, is a net worth or a figure and to see um, you know, uh, an entrepreneur of color, someone with um, their level of wealth. I think might I don't know, change the calculus a little bit and at least force them to see someone on their level instead of what they're doing now, which is just it's not working. I mean, and we've known that, we've known that for a long time. Yeah. Absolutely, all right, Connor, you want to hit the third question, All right, let's do it. Uh. Our third question comes to us from Chase. I don't know where Chase lives, maybe in London. Maybe maybe forgot to include that. I'm not sure. Um, but Chase asked, do you believe that Bill's fifth round rookie QB. Jake from will serve any punishment pertaining to the leaked text messages that came out Thursday afternoon? And if so, what do you think they would be? And for our listeners who haven't heard the Jake From story, Um, some text messages were leaked from I believe last year where From said that only quote elite white people should own guns, thus making them uh. I believe the crux of the conversation was to make them so expensive that only elite white people can own guns. He has apologized for those comments. I believe the Bill said that he addressed the team. Uh. Most of the Bill's power players have talked about this. UM. Jake From himself said that that was not Uh. He was part of kind of a joke, although that was kind of hard to tell from the context of the conversation. But um, I I think that you had a good take on this. When we're talking about an off air, I think that the best thing that could possibly come of this is maybe not like you know, suspend him for a game or suspending for two games, but to actually go through a legitimate process where he realizes why what he said was so harmful and probably is upsetting to a vast majority of his teammates and fellow players around the league. Yeah. I got this idea from a friend of mine. I mentioned her on a previous show. Her name is Jenfry and she runs anti racist trainings for college athletic programs across the country, also businesses, etcetera. And the idea of what happens if someone uses a racial slur? You know, we saw this comp with Clemson and another uh you know, or what if a teammate says it? Or how do you address situations uh, where someone says something that's harmful and inappropriate? What's the correct punishment? And we often see things like suspensions, We often see things like absolutely no action that seems to be the most common thing a forced public apology and then the issue kind of fades to the background. But her idea was to give the player an assignment or an education task that they have to complete before they can return to the team, or the same maybe for a coach or whoever we're talking about here. And I really like that idea. I don't know exactly how the specifics of how it works would work, but basically forcing the player to actually confront the deep seated reasons behind why they said what they did, forcing them to correct their behavior, confront their own biases, ask themselves what is at the root of the hurtful comment that they made, would ultimately be more helpful. Because if you just are suspended it spend some time away from the team, or you just issue uh public apology that's not really an apology, that doesn't really do a lot to correct behavior. Yeah, yeah, it's um it's interesting. I mean, you know, this is one of the first test cases uh in in the new reality. And you know when I say that, that is not meant to dismiss um you anything that's happened in the past. But I think that it's um hard to argue that there's such a momentum now um and such an unshakable momentum that maybe we haven't felt in the past. And and that's from the sector of allies, right, the people who are not dealing with this on a regular basis, I think, who are sort of joining this and making it um into something that can't be ignored. And this is an early test case in that. So it'll be fascinating to see where the bills go. And they have a good opportunity here to uh to teach someone a valuable lesson and to teach all workplaces really how to take the lead on this stuff and to do the right thing. Yeah, when we're seeing a lot more public callouts of people, and so I think that will be interesting. As we mentioned at the top of the show, for owners, you know, when owners continue to donate money or aren't supportive of players through their actions and public callouts for players. I mean this came up by someone who was offended by his words a year ago and decided now, uh that this that they're complicit if they're not pointing it out and not drawing attention to it and asking this person to confront the behaviors. And so I think it's definitely a time where we're going to see a lot more correcting of these underlying behaviors that have allowed to persist kind of quietly for for too long. Um. I did want to so full disclosure to everybody. We recorded the show once before and I had a computer microphone issue, so we're doing it for a second time and our first recording of the show. Connor, in response to Steven's question, you brought up an excellent column that was written by one of our former colleagues that Sports illustrated Deonte Prince, and I wanted to make sure we got that in because I think it's really relevant to today's discussion and I think it'd be great for listeners to give that a read. Yeah. Um, it reminded me of, you know, just everything that Stephen had said in that letter made me think of the column, and um, you know, I'll just read one's tweet because I think, while, uh, what what is Twitter up to now? Characters? Is that we get now something like that? Yeah, well that's probably you know, not enough. Uh, you know, I think he contextualized it beautifully here in the in the column is so well written, and he just said when Drew Brees used the flag to virtue signal he ignored black contributions to the military and systemic reasons many don't know their family lineage. I wrote about the erasia of black history and what I recently learned about my own family. So I urge anyone who um was moved by Stephen's letter, as we were moved enough to you know, want to read that on the podcast to u to also check out Deonte's column, which was really well done. Yeah, definitely, and thanks again to everyone who wrote in. It's weak side pot at gmail dot com as our email address, and we really like sharing the perspectives and questions of listeners. You guys are smarter than we are. It's nice to talk about your thoughts and you know, are different things on our show, so please keep reading in. If we didn't get to your question this week, we have plenty of weeks ahead in the summer. Will definitely cover as many as we can and hopefully, you know, make this a little bit of a weekly dialogue. I think it's it's great to hear from everybody and have the chance to have your thoughts spark our discussion. So definitely all right, Well, thanks for joining this week. The mm QB week Side podcast is Me, Jenny Rerentis, and Connor Or. We are produced by Shelby Royston. Size Executive producer of podcasts is Scott Brody. Ben Eagle is Director of Editorial Projects and Product. Mark Murravic is a meritus Executive director of the mm QB. Keep up with our entire lineup of podcasts five days a week by subscribing to the mm QB NFL Podcasts for free on Apple Podcasts, and while you're there, please do us a favor and leave a rating and review. It really does help other people find the show, which is also available on Spotify, Radio dot com, stitcher side dot com, and wherever else who listen to podcasts