NY Times got tape of NFL owner-player anthem meeting

[TSipper 176]

1 minute ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Who is allowed to not stand during the anthem and not face criticism?  I have a buddy that was seriously wounded in Afghanistan while in the Army and harbors deep resentment towards to military and the federal govt.  He's seeking help but will never be physically and mentally the same as before his injury.  At NFL games, he opts to remain seated during the anthem.  Should we, as the crowd, toss him out of the game for being disrespectful to the flag?  Ungrateful thug!

The only people who are allowed to kneel are those people who say things that the mass media wants to hear. So, if you're anti-Trump, anti-police, anti-America, anti-whitey, etc, you can say whatever.

Now, if you're kneeling because you're against gay marriage or because your latino and you think whitey should go back to Europe and blacky should go back to Africa, then nobody likes you and you should be killed at halftime. 

Those are the rules, my friend.

[Chuckie Finster 22978]

7 minutes ago, TSipper said:

The only people who are allowed to kneel are those people who say things that the mass media wants to hear. So, if you're anti-Trump, anti-police, anti-America, anti-whitey, etc, you can say whatever.

Now, if you're kneeling because you're against gay marriage or because your latino and you think whitey should go back to Europe and blacky should go back to Africa, then nobody likes you and you should be killed at halftime. 

 Those are the rules, my friend.

what the fuck are you talking about

[Pam Cummings 9825]

9 minutes ago, TSipper said:

The only people who are allowed to kneel are those people who say things that the mass media wants to hear. So, if you're anti-Trump, anti-police, anti-America, anti-whitey, etc, you can say whatever.

Now, if you're kneeling because you're against gay marriage or because your latino and you think whitey should go back to Europe and blacky should go back to Africa, then nobody likes you and you should be killed at halftime. 

Those are the rules, my friend.

Yes, because those are all the same things. Not wanting unarmed people to be gunned down by police is akin to wanting to ship black people back to Africa.

[Alien Octopus 631]

9 minutes ago, TSipper said:

The only people who are allowed to kneel are those people who say things that the mass media wants to hear. So, if you're anti-Trump, anti-police, anti-America, anti-whitey, etc, you can say whatever.

Now, if you're kneeling because you're against gay marriage or because your latino and you think whitey should go back to Europe and blacky should go back to Africa, then nobody likes you and you should be killed at halftime. 

Those are the rules, my friend.

Wrong forum for politics. The NFL, and this horseshit right here.

[Patrick Bateman 3966]

12 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Who is allowed to not stand during the anthem and not face criticism?  I have a buddy that was seriously wounded in Afghanistan while in the Army and harbors deep resentment towards to military and the federal govt.  He's seeking help but will never be physically and mentally the same as before his injury.  At NFL games, he opts to remain seated during the anthem.  Should we, as the crowd, toss him out of the game for being disrespectful to the flag?  Ungrateful thug!

Uhm.... I don't want to get too far down rabbit hole, but did you hear the President today???  He thinks your friend should leave the country..... Once you start genuflecting on an issue because of fear, your opposition is going to smell blood.

 

[Beau Vine 55826]

15 minutes ago, TSipper said:

 

3) Legalize marijuana for the players ...

These are easy steps that would be supported both by players and the public alike. 

The public is up in arms with players kneeling for the national anthem, and you think these same people are going to be supportive of marijuana legalization??? 

What color is the sky in your world?

[runthebone 8322]

4 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

The public is up in arms with players kneeling for the national anthem, and you think these same people are going to be supportive of marijuana legalization??? 

What color is the sky in your world?

Cheetos orange, maybe?  Mmmm...Cheetos.

[NastyDreams 11]

14 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

Yes, because those are all the same things. Not wanting unarmed people to be gunned down by police is akin to wanting to ship black people back to Africa.

Where's that guy that said I had made the stupidest post in this thread when you need'em.

[ChickenSandwich 9918]

28 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Who is allowed to not stand during the anthem and not face criticism?  I have a buddy that was seriously wounded in Afghanistan while in the Army and harbors deep resentment towards to military and the federal govt.  He's seeking help but will never be physically and mentally the same as before his injury.  At NFL games, he opts to remain seated during the anthem.  Should we, as the crowd, toss him out of the game for being disrespectful to the flag?  Ungrateful thug!

You are right. Asking them to be professional representatives for the 5 hours of game day on Sundays is criminal for their employer and atheir paying customers. They are not forcing them to participate in the Anthem nor are they stopping any protests on their own time. 

Its just that simple. Anyone who has a problem with this has some internal shit going on they should deal with themselves. 

 

How about an attorney before a jury trial takes two mins and his stage to deliver his protest?  I’m sure his client would appreciate that. I mean free speech right?  

Also, every athlete for the past 30 years has created their own charities or contributed as SOP for taxes. Still, good for him. 

Do your job if you want a paycheck, or don’t get paid and knee in the parking lot. The excuses here for these spoiled millionaires are priceless. 

[Beau Vine 55826]

9 minutes ago, NastyDreams said:

Where's that guy that said I had made the stupidest post in this thread when you need'em.

Right here.  You're still in the lead.

[NastyDreams 11]

22 minutes ago, Patrick Bateman said:

Uhm.... I don't want to get too far down rabbit hole, but did you hear the President today???  He thinks your friend should leave the country..... Once you start genuflecting on an issue because of fear, your opposition is going to smell blood.

 

uhm, you missed the part where he quoted his friend was in the stands.  The President pointed the comment to the ingrates in the NFL.

 

[TSipper 176]

30 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

what the fuck are you talking about

That the media supports protests that it agrees with. If a player on the sideline took and a knee and held up a picture of an aborted fetus because America allows abortion, how would that be received by the same people who believe the players have the right to kneel today?

[Chuckie Finster 22978]

2 minutes ago, TSipper said:

That the media supports protests that it agrees with. If a player on the sideline took and a knee and held up a picture of an aborted fetus because America allows abortion, how would that be received by the same people who believe the players have the right to kneel today?

They can kneel for whatever the hell they want.  And your abortion analogy would only hold water if these players were holding up images of, like, Tamir Rice's lifeless body.  And as far as I know, they aren't.

[TSipper 176]

14 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

They can kneel for whatever the hell they want.  And your abortion analogy would only hold water if these players were holding up images of, like, Tamir Rice's lifeless body.  And as far as I know, they aren't.

You think every NFL play supports abortion? Seriously? So, what if you had a person who also held up a sign saying, "Adam and Eve, no Adam and Steve", would the media be so quick to support a person taking a knee for that reason? Do you think NFL locker rooms are a bastion of liberal, progressive gay acceptance? LOL

[Chuckie Finster 22978]

1 minute ago, TSipper said:

You think every NFL play supports abortion? Seriously? So, what if you had a person who also held up a sign saying, "Adam and Eve, no Adam and Steve", would the media be so quick to support a person taking a knee for that reason? Do you think NFL locker rooms are a bastion of liberal, progressive gay acceptance? LOL

What?  Why are we talking about holding up signs?  All I'm saying is that the analogy does not make sense because holding up an actual distressing image is not an equal comparison to what is happening now.

[TSipper 176]

7 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

What?  Why are we talking about holding up signs?  All I'm saying is that the analogy does not make sense because holding up an actual distressing image is not an equal comparison to what is happening now.

You don't think this image has certain connotations simply b/c it's not a sign?

Edited May 24, 2018 by TSipper

[Chuckie Finster 22978]

5 minutes ago, TSipper said:

You don't think this image has certain connotations simply b/c it's not a sign?

Nobody is saying any of this.  

You claimed that holding up pictures of dead fetuses was a comparable act to kneeling and I disagreed because it obviously isn't.  Stop being obtuse.

Edited May 24, 2018 by Chuckie Finster

[Newy25 7894]

Was there a single thing in that recorded meeeting that you did not expect to hear?

 

[Machinator 32102]

 

[TSipper 176]

4 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Nobody is saying any of this.  

You claimed that holding up pictures of dead fetuses was a comparable act to kneeling and I disagreed because it obviously isn't.  Stop being obtuse.

You don't think it's comparable because you don't support the speech being said. That's my fucking point. It's easy to support speech you agree with, which is what the players are doing. Well, what happens when they don't? How quick will you be to support them then? Or will you want Roger Goodell to be the Hammer of God and put a stop to it? 

This is why the NFL has to get the players off the field entirely for the anthem. This current solution is not a good one, just get them off the field and play football because eventually, one of them is going to endorse a position in which the liberal media doesn't approve.

[golfclap 6903]

What connotations? What EXACTLY was/is wrong with this? 

[TSipper 176]

8 minutes ago, golfclap said:

What connotations? What EXACTLY was/is wrong with this? 

That was 1968 America by non-paid athletes at a time when Americans were being drafted to fight a war nobody wanted.

Does any of that describe this?

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, golfclap said:

What connotations? What EXACTLY was/is wrong with this? 

That's what little buttercup whispered in Kap's ear.

 

Do this and you'll be this generation's John Carlos and Tommie Smith.

 

Not quite though... and times are a shit-ton different now.

Edited May 24, 2018 by slorch

[golfclap 6903]

2 minutes ago, TSipper said:

That was 1968 America by non-paid athletes at a time when Americans were being drafted to fight a war nobody wanted.

Does any of that describe this?

Oh, I see so an unpaid athlete ACTUALLY REPRESENTING THE UNITED STATES --- DURING A TIME OF WAR makes a protest and that is more acceptable than the picture you posted. 

So the biggest problem you have is that these guys are paid employees? Is that it?  Because I gotta tell you of these two, one is a much bigger deal and is much more radical and it's not Colin Fucking Kaepernick in a Malcolm X hat. 

 

 

Quote

Not quite though... and times are a shit-ton different now.

And yet, here we are. 

[golfclap 6903]

My guess is that you grew up in an era with the iconography of the Harris/Carlos photograph and so it's reached an "acceptable" protest in your opinions, while the current protests are just a bunch of whiny millionaires (read: uppity) crying over nothing, right? 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

How many people here with jobs are allowed to pontificate about politics with customers?  I am a lawyer.  I have partners.  There is no way any of us would preach politics to our clients.  Period.  And we certainly wouldn't let our employees preach their political views to our clients.

What freaking world do you people live in?

The NFL's major mistake was not cutting this bullshit off as soon as it happened.  Like the NBA did with Chris Jackson.

Edited May 24, 2018 by Johnny Sack

[golfclap 6903]

2 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

How many people here with jobs are allowed to pontificate about politics with customers?  I am a lawyer.  I have partners.  There is no way any of us would preach politics to our clients.  Period.  And we certainly wouldn't let our employees preach their political views to our clients.

Your job and your reality is not their job or reality. At all. Apples to anvils. 

I didn't make the rules but athletes, musicians, writers, actors and now youtubers/gamers/other media personalities -- people listen to them. They have a platform and you don't. No one gives a fuck what you think about any of this but a 16 year old Fortnite gamer on Twitch? Fuck yes they do. 

You don't have to like it, but it's a fact. NFL players are entertainers as well as athletes. So no - you can't pontificate about politics with customers but they sure as fuck can and will and the NFL can't do shit about it and in trying they only look foolish and give these guys more reason to be pontificating assholes, right or wrong is irrelevant. 

[Chuckie Finster 22978]

You don't think it's comparable because you don't support the speech being said. That's my fucking point. It's easy to support speech you agree with, which is what the players are doing. Well, what happens when they don't? How quick will you be to support them then? Or will you want Roger Goodell to be the Hammer of God and put a stop to it? 

This is why the NFL has to get the players off the field entirely for the anthem. This current solution is not a good one, just get them off the field and play football because eventually, one of them is going to endorse a position in which the liberal media doesn't approve.

 

How fucking dense can you be? How many different ways do I have to say that I wouldn't give a fuck if an athlete silently protested abortions or gay marriage or the goddamn War on Christmas.

 

My issue in this stupid conversation was your insinuation that holding up a picture of an aborted fetus was comparable. It isn't, and I would have similar issues with comparably distressing images on "liberal" issues, i.e. a picture of dead Tamir Rice. I don't understand why this is so hard for you to grasp.

[Machinator 32102]

 

[Dahobbs 18192]

15 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

How many people here with jobs are allowed to pontificate about politics with customers?  I am a lawyer.  I have partners.  There is no way any of us would preach politics to our clients.  Period.  And we certainly wouldn't let our employees preach their political views to our clients.

What freaking world do you people live in?

The NFL's major mistake was not cutting this bullshit off as soon as it happened.  Like the NBA did with Chris Jackson.

There are several distinct issues that need to be clarified:

(1) I agree the NFL as a non-governmental entity is legally allowed to make rules regarding the behavior of its employers (let's set aside the agreement with the players' union), and to fine or terminate individuals in violation;

(2) The players have a legal right to free speech that the government should not disturb;

(3) The players, like all of us, have a civic duty (duty might be a bit of strong word) to address societal woes, and I believe that duty is amplified by their celebrity and their relatively greater ability to spread their message. I think responsible civil discussion and even civil disobedience, if necessary, is something we are all charged with as members of society.

(4) The players exercising their civic duty and legal right to free speech may run afoul of the NFL rules, in which case the NFL can legally enforce whatever infractions exist under (1);

 

Here is the point, I don't understand your apparent moral disapproval of the players' actions. I think that #3 means that we shouldn't disapprove of the players expressing beliefs. If you disagree with the message, attack the message. If you think the NFL should fire the players, then make that argument. But if you're trying to tell me that the players shouldn't (prescriptive) act upon (2) or (3)--that doing so is somehow morally blameworthy, I think you are being about as un-american as possible. 

[PencilPusher 454]

21 minutes ago, golfclap said:

 

I didn't make the rules but athletes, musicians, writers, actors and now youtubers/gamers/other media personalities -- people listen to them. 

100% of what is wrong with America today..............

 

/end semi-old guy rant/

[TSipper 176]

How fucking dense can you be? How many different ways do I have to say that I wouldn't give a fuck if an athlete silently protested abortions or gay marriage or the goddamn War on Christmas.

Nobody is talking about you, that you don't care simply means you don't care. But the same mouth breathers on the right that get all hot and bothered about the kneeling during the anthem would be the same mouth breathers on the left that would get all hot and bothered by a player holding up an aborted fetus picture. That's why the NFL had to put a stop to this, the opportunity for this to go even further off the rails than it already has was too great.

My issue in this stupid conversation was your insinuation that holding up a picture of an aborted fetus was comparable. It isn't, and I would have similar issues with comparably distressing images on "liberal" issues, i.e. a picture of dead Tamir Rice. I don't understand why this is so hard for you to grasp.

People who are anti-abortion hold up pictures of aborted fetuses all the time to piss of the left. Doing it during the anthem would illicit an immediate reaction that would have drastic consequences to the league, which is what they are trying to avoid.

[elfenix 34658]

45 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

There are several distinct issues that need to be clarified:

(1) I agree the NFL as a non-governmental entity is legally allowed to make rules regarding the behavior of its employers (let's set aside the agreement with the players' union), and to fine or terminate individuals in violation;

(2) The players have a legal right to free speech that the government should not disturb;

(3) The players, like all of us, have a civic duty (duty might be a bit of strong word) to address societal woes, and I believe that duty is amplified by their celebrity and their relatively greater ability to spread their message. I think responsible civil discussion and even civil disobedience, if necessary, is something we are all charged with as members of society.

(4) The players exercising their civic duty and legal right to free speech may run afoul of the NFL rules, in which case the NFL can legally enforce whatever infractions exist under (1);

 

Here is the point, I don't understand your apparent moral disapproval of the players' actions. I think that #3 means that we shouldn't disapprove of the players expressing beliefs. If you disagree with the message, attack the message. If you think the NFL should fire the players, then make that argument. But if you're trying to tell me that the players shouldn't (prescriptive) act upon (2) or (3)--that doing so is somehow morally blameworthy, I think you are being about as un-american as possible. 

(5) the president of the united states has been using his bully pulpit to badger the NFL/players on the issue of kneeling during the anthem

(6) the NFL had been taking DoD ad money to get the players out on the sideline during the anthem (long time nfl beat writer john mcclain again stated this morning that they weren't out on the sideline prior to 2009).

to me, those two things muddy the waters quite a bit wrt 1st amendment 

 

(to me, taking the DoD money to have an anthem ceremony seems far worse than a couple of players kneeling)

Edited May 24, 2018 by elfenix

[Dahobbs 18192]

Just now, elfenix said:

(5) the president of the united states has been using his bully pulpit to badger the NFL/players

(6) the NFL had been taking DoD ad money to get the players out on the sideline during the anthem (long time nfl beat writer john mcclain again stated this morning that they weren't out on the sideline prior to 2009).

to me, those two things muddy the waters quite a bit wrt 1st amendment 

Oh, I agree, at least as to #5. I think the President using his position to essentially force a private entity to stamp down on political speech is a violation of the 1st amendment, or at least the principle of it (I haven't done a full legal analysis as to whether it would legally be a violation). 

[elfenix 34658]

6 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Oh, I agree, at least as to #5. I think the President using his position to essentially force a private entity to stamp down on political speech is a violation of the 1st amendment, or at least the principle of it (I haven't done a full legal analysis as to whether it would legally be a violation). 

i think without that i'd be in full agreement with johnny sack, especially since (i suspect) the players are getting a cut of the DoD ad money through the CBA as part of 'other revenues' (though i could be wrong)

Edited May 24, 2018 by elfenix

[Dahobbs 18192]

5 minutes ago, elfenix said:

i think without that i'd be in full agreement with johnny sack, especially since (i suspect) the players are getting a cut of the DoD ad money through the CBA as part of 'other revenues' (though i could be wrong)

I don't think that changes my #3. I have no problem with someone arguing the NFL should fire them and I absolutely agree that it can (again, ignoring the players' agreement). But arguing that the players shouldn't take up their civic duty is crazy to me. If they want to incur the penalties, good for them. Braver folk than me. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13708]

For anyone that doesn’t believe that employees make political statements, you haven’t worked much with newer companies like Facebook. Google, etc.    

of course many think that the national anthem before every game is a weak attempt at displays of patriotism.   I pay money to watch a game not waste time on singing a song.  If you think that everyone wants to sing the anthem move the national anthem 30 minutes before kickoff.  Then we would see how many ‘Merica-lovin’, flag waving patriots are in their seats.  You might have 5-10% of the crowd there.  At that point, one last cheap beer in the parking lot beats America.   Tells me everyone’s priorities.  

[Aqua Buddha 14782]

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

For anyone that doesn’t believe that employees make political statements, you haven’t worked much with newer companies like Facebook. Google, etc.    

of course many think that the national anthem before every game is a weak attempt at displays of patriotism.   I pay money to watch a game not waste time on singing a song.  If you think that everyone wants to sing the anthem move the national anthem 30 minutes before kickoff.  Then we would see how many ‘Merica-lovin’, flag waving patriots are in their seats.  You might have 5-10% of the crowd there.  At that point, one last cheap beer in the parking lot beats America.   Tells me everyone’s priorities.  

Hell, at an Astros ghome game, there is an absolute shit-ton of fans not in their seats for first pitch.

It's worse than church on Sunday mornings...LOL.

 

Point being... butts in seats at kickoff ain't necessarily a good measure either.

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

The violence against women happens at work?

Players are being punished for what they say away from the workplace?

I saw a star player and prime franchise dicked around last season over an ACCUSATION of domestic violence by a less than reputable "victim."

The NFL is far from defensible on these issues, but this meme is stupid too.

 

 

Edited May 25, 2018 by slorch

[elfenix 34658]

2 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

I don't think that changes my #3. I have no problem with someone arguing the NFL should fire them and I absolutely agree that it can (again, ignoring the players' agreement). But arguing that the players shouldn't take up their civic duty is crazy to me. If they want to incur the penalties, good for them. Braver folk than me. 

i'm also fine with anyone bearing the consequences of their actions.  if the NFL puts out a fine schedule and someone wants to protest when it comes out of their pocket, i'm ok with it.  (putting aside that the NFL is being pressured by the .gov in this matter)

Edited May 25, 2018 by elfenix

[Guest]

I'm betting I do not agree with the Jets owner on much of anything regarding politics, but I support his stance to cover any player fines/ sanctions.  

I do not see this League policy as a viable solution.  I also disagree with making ANYONE stand for the anthem.

Edited May 25, 2018 by slorch

[Hurtlocker 2219]

24 minutes ago, slorch said:

  I also disagree with making ANYONE stand for the anthem.

This.   

On the flip side, if these were white players kneeling to protest adding another flavor to Fruit Loops, they'd be heroes.

[ChickenSandwich 9918]

10 hours ago, slorch said:

I'm betting I do not agree with the Jets owner on much of anything regarding politics, but I support his stance to cover any player fines/ sanctions.  

I do not see this League policy as a viable solution.  I also disagree with making ANYONE stand for the anthem.

This is crazy talk. They are not forcing ANYONE to stand and participate. They simply ask you to protest on your own time, or abstain. They are not making ANYONE stand. Why is this so difficult for some?

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

This is crazy talk. They are not forcing ANYONE to stand and participate. They simply ask you to protest on your own time, or abstain. They are not making ANYONE stand. Why is this so difficult for some?

If you’re on the field, the expectation is to stand.  It says so in the League’s release of their resolution.

I say again, NOBODY should be made to stand for the anthem.  That’s the freedom and liberty the freaking song represents.

I am NOT saying fans should not be able to make their own judgments and financial decisions because of the choice a player makes.  I am disagreeing with the threat of sanctions from the League.

Edited May 25, 2018 by slorch

['stache 22117]

So to be clear,

Rapists, domestic abusers, gang bangers, drug dealers. . . “Whatever, Go team go!”

Political opinion unpopular with old white guys tied to fake patriotism . . . “Buncha thugs, not gonna watch ever again!!!”

This is America.

[The Earl of Texas 3211]

13 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Oh, I agree, at least as to #5. I think the President using his position to essentially force a private entity to stamp down on political speech is a violation of the 1st amendment, or at least the principle of it (I haven't done a full legal analysis as to whether it would legally be a violation). 

The league is losing money & support, while also hearing people bitch in white hot terms about the kneeling... so they have tied the two issues together as if they are the same issue and are looking to do something about it.

This is about money. They don’t give a fuck what politicians say.

Trump is just pandering to his fan base who were spouting this same stupid rhetoric long before he did.

[Alien Octopus 631]

15 hours ago, slorch said:

That's what little buttercup whispered in Kap's ear.

 

Do this and you'll be this generation's John Carlos and Tommie Smith.

 

Not quite though... and times are a shit-ton different now.

I think he said, "So you can't pick up the third progression in the formation, no big deal, feign activist, deflect your shitastic play"

[GreenspointTexas 9933]

Im loving a buncha old ass white guys getting riled up by people voicing their opinion.

 

And I love watching the NFL burn. Shows how fucking stupid professional sports are

[GabrielsHorn 2242]

On 5/23/2018 at 10:17 PM, 'stache said:

You really don’t get how protests work, do you. It’s not about not wanting to respect the flag. It’s about calling attention to a cause. The league just said “fuck your cause, shut up and stay away.” This is not a compromise.

You really just want to be a dick, don't you? You're right - as a protest, it failed. The root of the issue, police brutality, was never addressed and instead it's a focus on patriotism/nationalism. The NFL tried to act and give $89m to funds that combat police brutality (http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/21621783/malcolm-jenkins-philadelphia-eagles-protest-nfl-89m-pledge) and some of the players rejected that (ex: Eric Reid). 

Meanwhile, in the NBA where there's a rule against kneeling during the anthem:

Quote

2) Players, coaches, and trainers are to stand and line up in a dignified posture along the sidelines or on the foul line during the playing of the National Anthem.

Instead, the NBA actually address it by focusing directly on the issues itself (Ex: Stephon Clark shirts https://www.voanews.com/a/basketball-league-protesting-shooting-of-unarmed-black-man/4316183.html Ex2: http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/12010612/nba-stars-making-statement-wearing-breathe-shirts).

It's a compromise that they aren't directly fining the players. Meanwhile, the original message has been so distorted that people aren't talking about accountability and justice for those who have been killed but instead are talking about Kapernick getting on a team. 

Edited May 25, 2018 by GabrielsHorn