Is NFL Breast Cancer Month a Scam?

[mr. burns]

hate to burst any bubbles here, but the reason people buy pink nfl crap is because:

a) lots of women fans like the color pink and now they have an excuse to where it for their team.

b) people aren't nearly as concerned about breast cancer as they are concerned that other people see how caring and concerned they are. without something to wear around as a personal badge of how much you care people aren't very likely to give away their hard earned cash.

[manbearchef]

I was in Boy Scouts and logged over 300 hours of community service. I'm currently in the Army and I volunteer at food shelters about once a month.

So, I suspect you'll find people are a lot more charitable than you'd believe.

As for the NFL, I agree they are making a difference, but it's hard for me to believe they have completely altruistic intentions when they pocket 95% of the profits...

That's good for you, but unfortunately, it's not quite so easy to find altruistic donations (money or time) anymore. Many people do it for non-altruistic reasons, such as religious requirements (it's not quite as "charitable" when you're practically required to), to put on their resume (I'd bet 85%+ of students who do voluntary community service do so to put on a college resume), or just to shove into someone else's face to make themselves look better.

[dbroncsinmo]

That's good for you, but unfortunately, it's not quite so easy to find altruistic donations (money or time) anymore. Many people do it for non-altruistic reasons, such as religious requirements (it's not quite as "charitable" when you're practically required to), to put on their resume (I'd bet 85%+ of students who do voluntary community service do so to put on a college resume), or just to shove into someone else's face to make themselves look better.

You hang around with the wrong crowd.

[manbearchef]

You hang around with the wrong crowd.

I wouldn't even say that. I just graduated with my four year degree, so most of my friends that are around my age obviously aren't in position to be tossing money away to others, but they would fall into the second category I listed (donate community service for scholarship offers and whatnot). My family has many friends that they went to church with over the years who pay their religious tithe, but I don't believe that is altruistic, since their faith requires it (I'm not religious, but I have no problem with it). Obviously I do know a handful of people who are nothing but leeches looking to suck someone dry and never pay a dime for anyone else, but I prefer to distance myself from them.

I wasn't saying there aren't people with altruistic motives, I just said they're not very easy to find.

[subroc]

I wouldn't even say that. I just graduated with my four year degree, so most of my friends that are around my age obviously aren't in position to be tossing money away to others, but they would fall into the second category I listed (donate community service for scholarship offers and whatnot). My family has many friends that they went to church with over the years who pay their religious tithe, but I don't believe that is altruistic, since their faith requires it (I'm not religious, but I have no problem with it). Obviously I do know a handful of people who are nothing but leeches looking to suck someone dry and never pay a dime for anyone else, but I prefer to distance myself from them.

I wasn't saying there aren't people with altruistic motives, I just said they're not very easy to find.

Spare us the diatribe. Regardless of what motivates someone to give and if they in turn receive some benefit from that giving whether it be just feeling good' about that giving, a line item in their resume, a tax deduction or a place at the right hand of the father, they gave freely, whether it was time or money. Their motives are not deserving of negative scrutiny or criticism for that effort. To be honest, their motives are really none of your business.

[Dnovakovic099]

Spare us the diatribe. Regardless of what motivates someone to give and if they in turn receive some benefit from that giving whether it be just feeling good' about that giving, a line item in their resume, a tax deduction or a place at the right hand of the father, they gave freely, whether it was time or money. Their motives are not deserving of negative scrutiny or criticism for that effort. To be honest, their motives are really none of your business.

I can't sit here and blame the NFL for doing good, but if you think there is nothing wrong with this, you have very low expectations for helping others and in turn being a good person. A person who thinks its ok to give five percent to the research of dying mothers and daughters while making it seem like they are doing more than that is a person who I would never trust to help me out or not lie to me. The mere fact that you think its ok for them to basically lie is an issue in itself.

[ChiTownPacerFan]

Spare us the diatribe. Regardless of what motivates someone to give and if they in turn receive some benefit from that giving whether it be just feeling good' about that giving, a line item in their resume, a tax deduction or a place at the right hand of the father, they gave freely, whether it was time or money. Their motives are not deserving of negative scrutiny or criticism for that effort. To be honest, their motives are really none of your business.

So the ends always justifies the means? The NFL is giving money to charity, so whatever steps they take to get there are automatically fine and dandy? You can't possibly believe that! You don't think there's anything wrong with a business being purposely disingenuous, taking advantage of people, and exploiting a serious disease. If you really think that there is no immorality in that level of deceit, then you are a very dangerous person.

Imagine that this weren't a company, but a person instead. Not just any person, think of it as a friend of yours. For fun, let's call him Roger. Roger comes to you and tells you that his mom has breast cancer, and she doesn't have the money to pay for treatment. Roger offers to sell you some of his stuff to raise money for her. You don't really want any of it, but you care about him and his mom, so you give him $100 for some of his crap. The next day, Roger shows up with a new pair of designer sunglasses. You confront him, and he says he used the money you gave him, but don't worry, he gave his mom five bucks. Would you not be furious!?... I'm sorry dude, but the same ethical rules that apply to Roger must apply to the NFL.

[hoggin88]

The NFL's pink clothing line is just a way for them to bring in more money. Think about how much pink merchandise they sell in October, then they keep almost everything they make on it. Of course they kick 5% over to cancer research so that people will still think they are helping a great cause and keep feeding the NFL money.

I guarantee if they weren't making a big profit off this, they wouldn't do it. I just don't like that they obviously count on people not realizing this.

[subroc]

So the ends always justifies the means? The NFL is giving money to charity, so whatever steps they take to get there are automatically fine and dandy? You can't possibly believe that! You don't think there's anything wrong with a business being purposely disingenuous, taking advantage of people, and exploiting a serious disease. If you really think that there is no immorality in that level of deceit, then you are a very dangerous person.

Imagine that this weren't a company, but a person instead. Not just any person, think of it as a friend of yours. For fun, let's call him Roger. Roger comes to you and tells you that his mom has breast cancer, and she doesn't have the money to pay for treatment. Roger offers to sell you some of his stuff to raise money for her. You don't really want any of it, but you care about him and his mom, so you give him $100 for some of his crap. The next day, Roger shows up with a new pair of designer sunglasses. You confront him, and he says he used the money you gave him, but don't worry, he gave his mom five bucks. Would you not be furious!?... I'm sorry dude, but the same ethical rules that apply to Roger must apply to the NFL.

This post is childish and naive on so many levels. Since you're in the imagining business, lets just imagine for a minute the NFL did nothing at all.

BTW, if there is so much malice and deceit and disingenuous and exploitation going on clearly the first step for all those that are riding their high horse would be to sever all ties. There are many entertainment choices available to be in bed with such a nefarious organization. Further if this opinion of the NFL is at all representative of the type of business the NFL is you should be duty bound to thy to organize to remove it as an entertainment option. To do less would have you just standing around doing nothing while such a deceitful, disingenuous, and exploitative organization soldiers on unhindered to continue

[manbearchef]

Spare us the diatribe. Regardless of what motivates someone to give and if they in turn receive some benefit from that giving whether it be just feeling good' about that giving, a line item in their resume, a tax deduction or a place at the right hand of the father, they gave freely, whether it was time or money. Their motives are not deserving of negative scrutiny or criticism for that effort. To be honest, their motives are really none of your business.

Lol, calm down Captain Butthurt. I haven't "negatively scrutinized" anyone, I merely stated my point. It's not altruistic if someone has a beneficial motive, and I don't consider it altruistic when a religious person pays the amount they're required by their religion. I haven't made anyone's motives "my business" I'm merely pointing something out. You act as if I called you out for something you donated, but clearly you must fall into one of the three categories I pointed out if you're upset this much. Obviously, I think it's a good thing when money is donated, regardless, I've just pointed out that a lot of people don't do it for the simple point of doing it.

I can tell you've been on a little tirade to defend the NFL in this entire thread, but you should probably look at my prior posts before saying anything. A few pages back I clearly said that I thought the NFL has done fine given that they're giving 5% + free advertisements (which 10ish BCA commercials multiplied by every game is probably substantial).