So That's The Third* Fourth** Penalty I've Seen Due To Shooting Gun First Down Celebrations (1 Viewer)

[rockaction]

League must have sent a memo.

 

[TheAristocrat]

Memo states you have to use the children in school prop for it to be acceptable

 

[Cowboysfan8]

League sent a memo.

Looked like downs was just signaling for a first down. I didn’t think anything of it tbh

 

[massraider]

Dumb.

Virtue signal off the field, please.

 

[Desert_Power]

No problem with this. Some idiot at my alma matter did this yesterday at a QB after sacking him. Get this shooting crap out of the game.

 

[smcindoe]

No problem with this. Some idiot at my alma matter did this yesterday at a QB after sacking him. Get this shooting crap out of the game.

Was that the dude who stood over the guy and just absolutely sprayed him?

 

[rockaction]

Looked like downs was just signaling for a first down. I didn’t think anything of it tbh

He clicked his cocked thumbs. Dead serious about that. I'm wondering when this became a thing to frown upon. I've seen the celebration many times before. Seems like they decided to have a league-wide crackdown on it.

 

[titusbramble]

Looked like downs was just signaling for a first down. I didn’t think anything of it tbh

He clicked his cocked thumbs. Dead serious about that. I'm wondering when this became a thing to frown upon.

I would guess an advertiser had a bit of a cry about it. As always, follow the money

 

[Desert_Power]

No problem with this. Some idiot at my alma matter did this yesterday at a QB after sacking him. Get this shooting crap out of the game.

Was that the dude who stood over the guy and just absolutely sprayed him?

Yes. And then, after getting flagged, did it a couple of drives later but directed towards his teammates. Dumb.

 

[Mitchie]

Looked like downs was just signaling for a first down. I didn’t think anything of it tbh

He clicked his cocked thumbs. Dead serious about that. I'm wondering when this became a thing to frown upon.

I would guess an advertiser had a bit of a cry about it. As always, follow the money

Perhaps, kids are watching though dude, just common sense.

 

[titusbramble]

Looked like downs was just signaling for a first down. I didn’t think anything of it tbh

He clicked his cocked thumbs. Dead serious about that. I'm wondering when this became a thing to frown upon.

I would guess an advertiser had a bit of a cry about it. As always, follow the money

Perhaps, kids are watching though dude, just common sense.

While true, it is not as if such a thing is a new problem, and not the sort of thing that the NFL front office suddenly decides "yep, let's start throwing flags for this" when they could have done so any time this century if they actually cared about it - unless there is a reason to instigate it

 

[Insein]

Memo states you have to use the children in school prop for it to be acceptable

As long as they allowed to bring a "gun free zone" sign in their sock.

 

[The Frankman]

This has been a no-no for decades, not sure why people are complaining about this. You probably didn't see flags because to be honest, how many NFL celebrations you see people pretend to shoot guns? It's been a HUGE no-no in the NBA since Gilbert Arenas and the Wizards locker room controversy, and it kinda became a sportwide thing.

 

[Desert_Power]

Looked like downs was just signaling for a first down. I didn’t think anything of it tbh

He clicked his cocked thumbs. Dead serious about that. I'm wondering when this became a thing to frown upon.

I would guess an advertiser had a bit of a cry about it. As always, follow the money

Perhaps, kids are watching though dude, just common sense.

While true, it is not as if such a thing is a new problem, and not the sort of thing that the NFL front office suddenly decides "yep, let's start throwing flags for this" when they could have done so any time this century if they actually cared about it - unless there is a reason to instigate it

Perhaps the Falcons complained to the league on it? I recall London got flagged for it on a TD but the refs ignored an opposing player doing it. Not sure if it was the same game.

 

[rockaction]

This has been a no-no for decades, not sure why people are complaining about this.

I'm not complaining and people have been doing bow and arrows and gun celebrations for quite a while if my memory serves me. I think there was even a famous celebration involving shooting guns at one's feet, never mind the football bomb that blows everybody up while they fall to the ground.

I mean, it's sort of part of the culture already. I really don't care. I only care when the JAX game last week gets altered because Thomas Jr. does it and it costs them fifteen yards and nobody can figure out why.

 

[Cowboysfan8]

This has been a no-no for decades, not sure why people are complaining about this. You probably didn't see flags because to be honest, how many NFL celebrations you see people pretend to shoot guns? It's been a HUGE no-no in the NBA since Gilbert Arenas and the Wizards locker room controversy, and it kinda became a sportwide thing.

No one has complained about it

 

[Jacob's Ladder]

Look up the Pat McAfee show's discussion on this. It's hilarious. I think Aaron Rodgers was on the show at the time. Happened last week.

 

[rockaction]

Another one by Slayton. Now I'm complaining. This is affecting close games. And they've been doing it forever, which is why they keep getting caught. This isn't a new craze.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Just waiting for this thread
Don't want to make it political
Happy to read everyone's thoughts

My own feelings are it is absolutely despicable to call these flags for things that mean NOTHING!
Can I be much clearer? This thread won't make it a day

Love the energy though

 

[Chaka]

Looked like downs was just signaling for a first down. I didn’t think anything of it tbh

He clicked his cocked thumbs. Dead serious about that. I'm wondering when this became a thing to frown upon.

I would guess an advertiser had a bit of a cry about it. As always, follow the money

Perhaps, kids are watching though dude, just common sense.

While true, it is not as if such a thing is a new problem, and not the sort of thing that the NFL front office suddenly decides "yep, let's start throwing flags for this" when they could have done so any time this century if they actually cared about it - unless there is a reason to instigate it

So, if you didn't care about something 24 years ago, you can't care about it now?

 

[rockaction]

While true, it is not as if such a thing is a new problem, and not the sort of thing that the NFL front office suddenly decides "yep, let's start throwing flags for this" when they could have done so any time this century if they actually cared about it - unless there is a reason to instigate it

Somebody important got bunched underwear. I mean, I get why they'd frown upon it, but this sort of stuff is a little ridiculous.

 

[jon_mx]

Did they ban all finger guns or just the assault finger guns? How do they distinguish between just pointing and gun. Do you have to **** the thumb? Is a bow and arrow OK. A tomahawk chop seems pretty violent.

 

[rockaction]

Is a bow and arrow OK

This was my main concern. Totes serious.

 

[cascaa]

Just called i n Slayton!

 

[FreeBaGeL]

While true, it is not as if such a thing is a new problem, and not the sort of thing that the NFL front office suddenly decides "yep, let's start throwing flags for this" when they could have done so any time this century if they actually cared about it - unless there is a reason to instigate it

Somebody important got bunched underwear. I mean, I get why they'd frown upon it, but this sort of stuff is a little ridiculous.

It's really dumb but within 2-3 weeks the players will have figured it out and 2-3 weeks after that everyone will totally forget that it even happened. Just like when they banned props in celebrations which was actually a much bigger deal because some of those were hilarious.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

While true, it is not as if such a thing is a new problem, and not the sort of thing that the NFL front office suddenly decides "yep, let's start throwing flags for this" when they could have done so any time this century if they actually cared about it - unless there is a reason to instigate it

Somebody important got bunched underwear. I mean, I get why they'd frown upon it, but this sort of stuff is a little ridiculous.

It's really dumb but within 2-3 weeks the players will have figured it out and 2-3 weeks after that everyone will totally forget that it even happened. Just like when they banned props in celebrations which was actually a much bigger deal because some of those were hilarious.

Joe Horn

 

[rockaction]

While true, it is not as if such a thing is a new problem, and not the sort of thing that the NFL front office suddenly decides "yep, let's start throwing flags for this" when they could have done so any time this century if they actually cared about it - unless there is a reason to instigate it

Somebody important got bunched underwear. I mean, I get why they'd frown upon it, but this sort of stuff is a little ridiculous.

It's really dumb but within 2-3 weeks the players will have figured it out and 2-3 weeks after that everyone will totally forget that it even happened. Just like when they banned props in celebrations which was actually a much bigger deal because some of those were hilarious.

I agree that it won't move heaven and earth but it might have cost JAX the game last week for doing something that up until then had been either okay or unenforced at best.

 

[rockaction]

While true, it is not as if such a thing is a new problem, and not the sort of thing that the NFL front office suddenly decides "yep, let's start throwing flags for this" when they could have done so any time this century if they actually cared about it - unless there is a reason to instigate it

Somebody important got bunched underwear. I mean, I get why they'd frown upon it, but this sort of stuff is a little ridiculous.

It's really dumb but within 2-3 weeks the players will have figured it out and 2-3 weeks after that everyone will totally forget that it even happened. Just like when they banned props in celebrations which was actually a much bigger deal because some of those were hilarious.

Joe Horn

Blow your Joe Horn during these High Holy Days.

I mean, break out your cellular
I said that I was kidding
She said yeah the hell you were

 

[Grahamburn]

Bring back the throat slit.

 

[zed2283]

The league is so dumb.

If you're gonna do that, then just eliminate every demonstration. I'm sick of them anyway on every 5-yard play.

 

[rockaction]

I really think we need more defenses running the length of the field to celebrate a turnover

 

[Snoopy]

Article on this: https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/nfl-cracks-down-on-finger-guns They are saying it involved Lazard.

 

[Dizzy]

It's stupid. Am I supposed to feel guilty for what a terrible child I was to think that Yosemite Sam was funny?

Fake gun regulation. I guess that's progress.

 

[ChiefD]

So they can’t do the Shooter McGavin?

 

[eighsse2]

Cleveland Clinic: Psychosis

 

[fatness]

NFL celebration penalties, explained: Why league is cracking down on arrow, gun gestures in 2024​

That link is from this morning at 9 am or so, so sports press already knew about it. Seems like some coaches didn't get the message or pass on the message to the players, or some players ignored it.

This'll be forgotten in 3 weeks.

 

[rockaction]

"Violent imagery" is banned by the NFL.

It's like ray-ay-ayn on your wedding day

 

[eighsse2]

Buccaneers logo: a skull (implies death) and swords

Raiders logo: swords

Panthers

Bengal tigers

Lions

Bears

Jaguars

The Patriots with their muskets

The Buccaneers' cannons

This is some seriously scary stuff with dangerous implications. I don't know if we should be glorifying this kind of thing in front of kids. Or adults for that matter.

(Saying this I feel kind of like when you make a facetious proposition to a vegan conservationist such as "what, do you want to make it illegal to step on ants too?" and you start to think, "wait, they might actually want to do this now...")

 

[Chaka]

While true, it is not as if such a thing is a new problem, and not the sort of thing that the NFL front office suddenly decides "yep, let's start throwing flags for this" when they could have done so any time this century if they actually cared about it - unless there is a reason to instigate it

Somebody important got bunched underwear. I mean, I get why they'd frown upon it, but this sort of stuff is a little ridiculous.

IDK

I 100% understand where you're coming from and I own multiple guns and have my eye on a few more but, wouldn't it be kinda cool to live in a world where doing "shooting" celebrations were viewed as "a little ridiculous"?

I love Carlin's Football vs Baseball routine, as I imagine most of us do (those who don't haven't watched it yet) but after watching it a billion times I decided that I don't like using the language of war when referring to a game. A violent game but, still a game.

I have never openly spoken of this here but a couple years ago I made the choice to not use the language of war when discussing football. It's wasn't difficult, language is beautiful that way.

In a similar vein I chose to stop using the terms "own" when discussing FF teams. And now it is almost common to use "manage", "shares" etc. And I notice I was far from the only one to make that choice.

I think pivoting from that kind of language is a natural progression because there are always easy alternatives with language. And there are certainly as many options, if not more, when it comes to football celebrations.

 

[Smack Tripper]

I'm old enough to remember when the referees brought guns on the field to let you know the quarter was over.

 

[rockaction]

I have never openly spoken of this here but a couple years ago I made the choice to not use the language of war when discussing football. It's wasn't difficult, language is beautiful that way.

I try not to either. Good on you. I've always been uncomfortable when people seem to be confusing sport with matters of life and death, which to me, is a bit more sacrosanct than sport is.

In a similar vein I chose to stop using the terms "own" when discussing FF teams. And now it is almost common to use "manage", "shares" etc. And I notice I was far from the only one to make that choice.

I've been playing fantasy for over a decade and never used the term "own" because of its problematic implications. I have always been a GM. I'm sure you can catch me using the word "own" at times, but it's almost always, "I roster so-and-so," and I'm a "GM." Always have been.

But—and you knew this was coming—there is an imperfect analogy at work here. When we penalize and fine, we're regulating behavior now, not simply practicing a freely chosen option on our own. And we're telling people who give a ton for our entertainment, including their bodies and minds, that we're going to tell them how to behave when they achieve the goals we want them to achieve. We're now the arbiters of appropriateness or on the side of the arbiters. I'm a bit uncomfortable with that. It's like being the owner of a company and telling labor what to eat and where to go on their lunch hour. It might be done with noble intentions, but it can be officious, intrusive, and overweening.

I think if we're going to be honest, this is the last hill I'd die on, but it is the internet and die I must in an argument, so let me dissent.

 

[BassNBrew]

I have never openly spoken of this here but a couple years ago I made the choice to not use the language of war when discussing football. It's wasn't difficult, language is beautiful that way.

I try not to either. Good on you. I've always been uncomfortable when people seem to be confusing sport with matters of life and death, which to me, is a bit more sacrosanct than sport is.

In a similar vein I chose to stop using the terms "own" when discussing FF teams. And now it is almost common to use "manage", "shares" etc. And I notice I was far from the only one to make that choice.

I've been playing fantasy for over a decade and never used the term "own" because of its problematic implications. I have always been a GM. I'm sure you can catch me using the word "own" at times, but it's almost always, "I roster so-and-so," and I'm a "GM." Always have been.

But—and you knew this was coming—there is an imperfect analogy at work here. When we penalize and fine, we're regulating behavior now, not simply practicing a freely chosen option on our own. And we're telling people who give a ton for our entertainment, including their bodies and minds, that we're going to tell them how to behave when they achieve the goals we want them to achieve. We're now the arbiters of appropriateness or on the side of the arbiters. I'm a bit uncomfortable with that. It's like being the owner of a company and telling labor what to eat and where to go on their lunch hour. It might be done with noble intentions, but it can be officious, intrusive, and overweening.

I think if we're going to be honest, this is the last hill I'd die on, but it is the internet and die I must in an argument, so let me dissent.

I hear you brother. I GM my shares of Amazon and Google. Wouldn't want any employees to think I actually own them.

 

[Mitchie]

I have never openly spoken of this here but a couple years ago I made the choice to not use the language of war when discussing football. It's wasn't difficult, language is beautiful that way.

I try not to either. Good on you. I've always been uncomfortable when people seem to be confusing sport with matters of life and death, which to me, is a bit more sacrosanct than sport is.

In a similar vein I chose to stop using the terms "own" when discussing FF teams. And now it is almost common to use "manage", "shares" etc. And I notice I was far from the only one to make that choice.

I've been playing fantasy for over a decade and never used the term "own" because of its problematic implications. I have always been a GM. I'm sure you can catch me using the word "own" at times, but it's almost always, "I roster so-and-so," and I'm a "GM." Always have been.

But—and you knew this was coming—there is an imperfect analogy at work here. When we penalize and fine, we're regulating behavior now, not simply practicing a freely chosen option on our own. And we're telling people who give a ton for our entertainment, including their bodies and minds, that we're going to tell them how to behave when they achieve the goals we want them to achieve. We're now the arbiters of appropriateness or on the side of the arbiters. I'm a bit uncomfortable with that. It's like being the owner of a company and telling labor what to eat and where to go on their lunch hour. It might be done with noble intentions, but it can be officious, intrusive, and overweening.

I think if we're going to be honest, this is the last hill I'd die on, but it is the internet and die I must in an argument, so let me dissent.

I hear you brother. I GM my shares of Amazon and Google. Wouldn't want any employees to think I actually own them.

well the distinction here is shares (which you do in fact own) vs. people.

 

[rockaction]

I have never openly spoken of this here but a couple years ago I made the choice to not use the language of war when discussing football. It's wasn't difficult, language is beautiful that way.

I try not to either. Good on you. I've always been uncomfortable when people seem to be confusing sport with matters of life and death, which to me, is a bit more sacrosanct than sport is.

In a similar vein I chose to stop using the terms "own" when discussing FF teams. And now it is almost common to use "manage", "shares" etc. And I notice I was far from the only one to make that choice.

I've been playing fantasy for over a decade and never used the term "own" because of its problematic implications. I have always been a GM. I'm sure you can catch me using the word "own" at times, but it's almost always, "I roster so-and-so," and I'm a "GM." Always have been.

But—and you knew this was coming—there is an imperfect analogy at work here. When we penalize and fine, we're regulating behavior now, not simply practicing a freely chosen option on our own. And we're telling people who give a ton for our entertainment, including their bodies and minds, that we're going to tell them how to behave when they achieve the goals we want them to achieve. We're now the arbiters of appropriateness or on the side of the arbiters. I'm a bit uncomfortable with that. It's like being the owner of a company and telling labor what to eat and where to go on their lunch hour. It might be done with noble intentions, but it can be officious, intrusive, and overweening.

I think if we're going to be honest, this is the last hill I'd die on, but it is the internet and die I must in an argument, so let me dissent.

I hear you brother. I GM my shares of Amazon and Google. Wouldn't want any employees to think I actually own them.

well the distinction here is shares (which you do in fact own) vs. people.

That you don't really own. At all. I always found the terminology very odd. I'll say "I'm invested in X" or "I have shares of X," although that was a while ago I did that. I usually just say "I roster X." Nobody gets confused. It's not clunky. And you don't sound like you're delusional in your magic football world with male unicorns and tea parties in your bedroom, you know?

I "own" CeeDee Lamb. No, you don't. You don't own him in the least. Jerry Jones doesn't "own" him, either. It sounds so self-important and weird to even be thinking that way in language. It's like your weird uncle that enjoys Stratego on a Saturday night, only it's every Saturday night that he plays instead of the grooming he so desperately needs.

 

[Soulfly3]

i miss players grabbing their nuts

 

[rockaction]

i miss players grabbing their nuts

You think all I do is stand here and feel my nuts
Well, I'ma show you what, you gon' feel my rush
You don't feel it, then it must be too real to touch
Peel the Dutch, I'm about to tear **** up
Goosebumps, yeah, I'ma make your hair sit up
Yeah, sit up, I'ma tell you who I be

 

[zamboni]

i miss players grabbing their nuts

Head down to Richmond next summer

 

[Max Power]

"Violent imagery" is banned by the NFL.

It's like ray-ay-ayn on your wedding day

Can I still sheathe a sword or swing a bat?

 

[Max Power]

Buccaneers logo: a skull (implies death) and swords

Raiders logo: swords

Panthers

Bengal tigers

Lions

Bears

Jaguars

The Patriots with their muskets

The Buccaneers' cannons

This is some seriously scary stuff with dangerous implications. I don't know if we should be glorifying this kind of thing in front of kids. Or adults for that matter.

(Saying this I feel kind of like when you make a facetious proposition to a vegan conservationist such as "what, do you want to make it illegal to step on ants too?" and you start to think, "wait, they might actually want to do this now...")

The Saints logo has a violent past, but the NFL ignores that argument.

 

[BassNBrew]

I have never openly spoken of this here but a couple years ago I made the choice to not use the language of war when discussing football. It's wasn't difficult, language is beautiful that way.

I try not to either. Good on you. I've always been uncomfortable when people seem to be confusing sport with matters of life and death, which to me, is a bit more sacrosanct than sport is.

In a similar vein I chose to stop using the terms "own" when discussing FF teams. And now it is almost common to use "manage", "shares" etc. And I notice I was far from the only one to make that choice.

I've been playing fantasy for over a decade and never used the term "own" because of its problematic implications. I have always been a GM. I'm sure you can catch me using the word "own" at times, but it's almost always, "I roster so-and-so," and I'm a "GM." Always have been.

But—and you knew this was coming—there is an imperfect analogy at work here. When we penalize and fine, we're regulating behavior now, not simply practicing a freely chosen option on our own. And we're telling people who give a ton for our entertainment, including their bodies and minds, that we're going to tell them how to behave when they achieve the goals we want them to achieve. We're now the arbiters of appropriateness or on the side of the arbiters. I'm a bit uncomfortable with that. It's like being the owner of a company and telling labor what to eat and where to go on their lunch hour. It might be done with noble intentions, but it can be officious, intrusive, and overweening.

I think if we're going to be honest, this is the last hill I'd die on, but it is the internet and die I must in an argument, so let me dissent.

I hear you brother. I GM my shares of Amazon and Google. Wouldn't want any employees to think I actually own them.

well the distinction here is shares (which you do in fact own) vs. people.

I do own the rights to Daniel Jones's fantasy stats output for the 2024 season in league xyz and I'm free to trade my ownership interest in some leagues and even sell it in others for imaginary FABB dollars where I can buy the rights to someone else's fantasy stats output.