• View topic

Posted: **September 8th, 2018, 5:37 pm**

JdPat04 wrote:
FSUKW wrote:[ img ]

What was this?

RG111

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc- ... a5f0626df5

Posted: **September 8th, 2018, 5:39 pm**

Posted: **September 8th, 2018, 6:24 pm**

FSUKW wrote:
JdPat04 wrote:
FSUKW wrote:[ img ]

What was this?

RG111

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc- ... a5f0626df5

Without looking at the approved logos of the nfl then atm I don’t have a problem with them not allowing it. (I’m sure they have some double standards if we looked though)

I do see the point that he doesn’t mind being fined for adidas but won’t be fined for Jesus

Posted: **September 8th, 2018, 7:03 pm**

JdPat04 wrote:
FSUKW wrote:
JdPat04 wrote:
FSUKW wrote:[ img ]

What was this?

RG111

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc- ... a5f0626df5

Without looking at the approved logos of the nfl then atm I don’t have a problem with them not allowing it. (I’m sure they have some double standards if we looked though)

I do see the point that he doesn’t mind being fined for adidas but won’t be fined for Jesus

He should make sure EVERY football related interview he ever does, avoids the NFL logo.

Example: Jogging off the field, reporter stops him for interview. He says wait a minute and either takes off anything showing NFL logo or asks cameraman to just get his face.