NFL Protest Discussion

D9Male

Fair play to Kaep. I like it when good guys win.

Billy86

No collusion, no collusion. :pac:

Good on him though, he thoroughly deserves it and I doubt the prosecution ever needed to do more than just play every snap taken by Brett Hundley in 2017 to confirm that.

j8wk2feszrnpao

D9Male wrote: »

Fair play to Kaep. I like it when good guys win.

When I saw the news, I actually thought the NFL won. Even at the top figure of $80m, they've made this go away for peanuts for them. In the end, both sides settled, so not sure who won.

raze_them_all_

munstermagic11 wrote: »

When I saw the news, I actually thought the NFL won. Even at the top figure of $80m, they've made this go away for peanuts for them. In the end, both sides settled, so not sure who won.

The nfl gave up trying to win once someone traded for flacco!


He won I imagine and it will be seen that way. They paid someone to stop going to court. They knew they'd lose

j8wk2feszrnpao

raze_them_all_ wrote: »

They knew they'd lose

Then why did Kaep settle? He could have gotten more maybe, and won in court to strengthen the outcome in his favor?
All we actually know is that they both settled, with no view of the actual details; it could be that Kaep wasn't sure he'd win and so settled.

raze_them_all_

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Then why did Kaep settle? He could have gotten more maybe, and won in court to strengthen the outcome in his favor?
All we actually know is that they both settled, with no view of the actual details; it could be that Kaep wasn't sure he'd win and so settled.

Because civil suits in America can be dragged on for a decade with a massive bill for the suing party.

j8wk2feszrnpao

raze_them_all_ wrote: »

Because civil suits in America can be dragged on for a decade with a massive bill for the suing party.

There’s a bill for both parties. If Kaep was sure to win, he’d get costs as well.

All we actually know is that both parties settled. I assume Kaep got some good money, and the NFL make it go away. Seems more of a win for the NFL to me, collusion case is no more.

Ivefoundgod

Twitter saying around 60-80m for Kaep. I would call that a win for him, unlikely he would have earned much more in salary in the last few years and the fact the NFL paid him that shows they knew the jig was up.

eagle eye

So Kaepernick accepts a big settlement and it's all hush, hush and people are happy about it.?
I thought this wasn't about money, thought it was about black kids and the cops?
So because Kaepernick gets his money it doesn't matter anymore?
Basically he has accepted a settlement offer and it is all about him. People got conned by an athlete yet again.

Foxtrol

eagle eye wrote: »

So Kaepernick accepts a big settlement and it's all hush, hush and people are happy about it.?
I thought this wasn't about money, thought it was about black kids and the cops?
So because Kaepernick gets his money it doesn't matter anymore?
Basically he has accepted a settlement offer and it is all about him. People got conned by an athlete yet again.

I'm not sure where you are getting that the cause he protested for doesn't matter anymore. You're conflating two separate things there, as his protest during the anthem has nothing to do with settling here.

The lawsuit was essentially demanding lost earnings from the league and from all reports he's gotten that and more. What would have been the better result from taking it to trial? If anything there could be more in this settlement to benefit his cause than anything a judge could give.

I do wonder where all those posters are that were so adamant that he had absolutely no case and that he'd be laughed out of court.

raze_them_all_

eagle eye wrote: »

So Kaepernick accepts a big settlement and it's all hush, hush and people are happy about it.?
I thought this wasn't about money, thought it was about black kids and the cops?
So because Kaepernick gets his money it doesn't matter anymore?
Basically he has accepted a settlement offer and it is all about him. People got conned by an athlete yet again.

He was blacklisted and kept out of the league for his political beliefs. That is what the lawsuit was over. And he very clearly was. Some of the back ups in the league are easily worse than him

eagle eye

Foxtrol wrote:

I do wonder where all those posters are that were so adamant that he had absolutely no case and that he'd be laughed out of court.

Well I'd be one of those that didn't think he had a case because he had lost his way and become a poor QB before the kneeling started.

eagle eye

raze_them_all_ wrote:

He was blacklisted and kept out of the league for his political beliefs. That is what the lawsuit was over. And he very clearly was. Some of the back ups in the league are easily worse than him

Well and if I was a coach I wouldn't have signed him for two reasons, firstly because he was no good and secondly because if the potential for locker room conflict because of the kneeling.
I don't think anybody could take a case against you over that because it's just good management.

Foxtrol

eagle eye wrote: »

Well I'd be one of those that didn't think he had a case because he had lost his way and become a poor QB before the kneeling started.

So I take from your lack of response to my other points that you also accept that you were talking out of your arse regarding the connection between accepting the settlement and the wider cause he was protesting

eagle eye

Foxtrol wrote:

So I take from your lack of response to my other points that you also accept that you were talking out of your arse regarding the connection between accepting the settlement and the wider cause he was protesting

I'm saying it might all have been a con job to get a nice payday.

Foxtrol

eagle eye wrote: »

I'm saying it might all have been a con job to get a nice payday.

You've really moved into tin foil hat territory there.

Pretty big risk he was taking running a 'con' over 2.5 years while giving away a lot of money to charity during that period, especially when you claimed he didn't have a case to begin with.

raze_them_all_

eagle eye wrote: »

Well I'd be one of those that didn't think he had a case because he had lost his way and become a poor QB before the kneeling started.

Blake bortles has a job. To this day.

jack presley

raze_them_all_ wrote: »

Blake bortles has a job. To this day.

2 teams have had Nathan Peterman on their roster too.

j8wk2feszrnpao

raze_them_all_ wrote: »

He was blacklisted and kept out of the league for his political beliefs.

He was offered some deals I believe (Bronco’s), but wasn’t happy with the money. Reported to have wanted $20m to play in the AAF when approached. Ravens went for him, but fans went nuts. So he wasn’t exactly blacklisted.

With the Nike money and now this payoff, IMO he’s taken the money first and foremost. Totally up to him, but he hasn’t really suffered much and not the martyr some portray him as.

I personally do think he was at least good enough to be a backup for a number of teams; but he’s nowhere near the player he was in his first few years.

But he now has the chance to really make a difference and go down the political avenue if he so desires.

eagle eye

raze_them_all_ wrote:

Blake bortles has a job. To this day.

Bortles is better than him and that's not saying much for either of them.

Foxtrol

munstermagic11 wrote: »

He was offered some deals I believe (Bronco’s), but wasn’t happy with the money. Reported to have wanted $20m to play in the AAF when approached. Ravens went for him, but fans went nuts. So he wasn’t exactly blacklisted.

None of that points to the fact he wasn't blacklisted. Broncos was before the protest and they wanted him to take a paycut on the money he had guaranteed with the 49ers in any trade. AAF is a separate league, with $20m being about going rate for a QB in the NFL and that's the level he see himself as. Ravens floating that they were thinking about signing him and not following through is pretty much worthless.

With the Nike money and now this payoff, IMO he’s taken the money first and foremost. Totally up to him, but he hasn’t really suffered much and not the martyr some portray him as.

I'm not sure many have been portraying him as a martyr in the last 20 hours. There was a period prior to this deal and definitely prior to the Nike ad (5 months ago) where it wasn't outlandish to portray him that way.

Ivefoundgod

munstermagic11 wrote: »

He was offered some deals I believe (Bronco’s), but wasn’t happy with the money. Reported to have wanted $20m to play in the AAF when approached. Ravens went for him, but fans went nuts. So he wasn’t exactly

The AAF $20m story was nonsense, one anonymous source and Benjamin allbright saying he has sources saying otherwise. The AAF reached out to Tebow and Kap, both declined to enter into any discussion which Tebow has confirmed this while Kap hasn't addressed it.

As a Ravens fan what you're saying isn't correct, there was very little backlash or outrage from the fans until his idiot girlfriend put up this tweet;

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/sep/06/colin-kaepernick-ray-lewis-baltimore-ravens-nessa-diab-nfl

j8wk2feszrnpao

Ivefoundgod wrote: »

The AAF $20m story was nonsense, one anonymous source

There’s no actual sources on the money in the settlement either, but we’re using the figures cited (in a non disclosure agreement).

Ivefoundgod wrote: »

As a Ravens fan what you're saying isn't correct

Being a Ravens fan has nothing to do with it. It got plenty of coverage. There was a blacklash at the time. The girlfriends actions (more influential to the owners decision) certainly incited it further, but it was there.

Foxtrol

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Being a Ravens fan has nothing to do with it. It got plenty of coverage. There was a blacklash at the time. The girlfriends actions (more influential to the owners decision) certainly incited it further, but it was there.

Big difference with there being backlash from the usual anti-protest sources/groups (MAGA, Fox News, right wing talking heads etc) and saying the backlash from the Ravens fans in particular. I'd count on a fan of the team, live Ivefoundgod is, being in a much better place to speak about the Ravens fan base rather than what we see in the media.

Billy86

Foxtrol wrote: »

I do wonder where all those posters are that were so adamant that he had absolutely no case and that he'd be laughed out of court.

Funny enough, eagle eye was probably the #1 advocate of that on here, which makes it kind of curious who he is now claiming it to be some kind of surprise that "it is all about him. People got conned by an athlete yet again."

The court case was always about Kaepernick and his being blacklisted. Nobody ever had any doubt about that - eagle eye very much included from the quotes below, from the 2017 season where Scott Tolzien (1), Bryce Petty (3), TJ Yates (3), Brock Osweiler (4), Nathan Peterman (4), Mike Glennon (4), Drew Stanton (4), Blaine Gabbert (5) and Brett Hundley (9), combined for a total of 37 starts.

Kaepernick won pretty hard here - he was never going to be a $20mn/yr QB over the last few years but has now been paid out as if he had been on $30-40mn over the last two seasons if reports are true. His cause has gotten huge publicity, he became the center point of a Nike campaign that the likes of eagle eye claimed would cause them huge damage (whereas in reality Nike stock soon after hit an all-time high), was named GQ citizen of the year along with a bunch of other awards, and not a household name but certainly has grown his reputation a lot which is good as his playing days are surely over.

And the NFL? Well they clearly just badly want to see the back of this whole situation. Their extent of publicity was to bend over and lube up for a president that calls neo Nazi's "very fine people", only for the same president to continue to spit in their faces and throw temper tantrums after the fact, and to made complete asses of themselves throughout.

eagle eye wrote:

A lot of people seem to forget just how crap Kaepernick has been for a long time. He might feel like he was blacklisted but he wasn't good enough for that to be true.

eagle eye wrote:

He [Kaepernick] isn't better than Bortles, he is a lot worse than Bortles. As for Kizer, he is a rookie in an awful team, no chance you can call that one.

This Kaepernick should be on a roster stuff only started when he started kneeling down. Like wtf are people at? Nobody was saying he should be starting for the awful 49ers before he started kneeling.

eagle eye wrote:

No, I'm saying that the kneeling set him. off on a path which led to him becoming a divisive character. I'm saying he is a poor player.
He is not being blacklisted for kneeling. He is not being picked up because coaches don't want a divisive player who adds nothing to the team. If he was a good player some coaches might take the chance.
The key difference here is that imo he is not blacklisted for kneeling, it's simply a poor player who has now become a divisive character.

eagle eye wrote:

So let's take that on board and move on to after he became a media personality for kneeling. If I were a head coach I wouldn't want him in my locker room because it's very likely to cause disruption. There will be players who won't like him because he kneeled and started this whole thing, and there will be players who will stand or kneel with him which could end up causing a split in the locker room.

This suggestion that he has been blacklisted for taking a knee is wrong imo. He is not on a roster because nobody wants him.

D9Male

eagle eye wrote: »

So Kaepernick accepts a big settlement and it's all hush, hush and people are happy about it.?
I thought this wasn't about money, thought it was about black kids and the cops?
So because Kaepernick gets his money it doesn't matter anymore?
Basically he has accepted a settlement offer and it is all about him. People got conned by an athlete yet again.

Of course it's hush hush, there's a confidentiality clause.

Of course it's about the money. If you sue somebody for loss of earnings, by definition it's about money.

Not sure what you're implying about "black kids and cops." The kneeling was about social justice, the court case is about money... while also having the benefit of setting a good example of not allowing oneself to be bullied.

Why do you think his cause doesn't matter any more? It plainly does.

How were we conned?

eagle eye

What's your point there Billy?

NFL felt Kaepernick issue was damaging their brand due to the idiots on social media backing him so they settled.

Nike claimed that the Kaepernick campaign did not negatively affect them and they certainly didn't say it helped them. Lots of people do think the Kaepernick ads did negatively affect them as I predicted.

His settlement doesn't change my opinions or prove them wrong.

eagle eye

D9Male wrote:

Why do you think his cause doesn't matter any more? It plainly does.

I never once said the cause doesn't matter.
I'm saying that a failing QB might have used this to get himself a big payday.
I don't agree with kneeling during the national anthem, if somebody did that over here I'd lose all respect for them.

There are plenty of ways to promote this issue without kneeling during the national anthem. Players could have come up with a celebration of a big play which reminded people of it. They could make it the first thing they talk about in every interview.

Billy86

eagle eye wrote: »

Well I'd be one of those that didn't think he had a case because he had lost his way and become a poor QB before the kneeling started.

He was benched in 2016, when the team was playing woefully but he wasn't doing that poorly at all.

In 11 starts he went 196-of-331 (59.2%) for 2241 yards (6.8 ypa), 16 TDs vs 4 INTs with a 90.7 QB rating, and another 468 rushing yards and 2 TDs.

Extrapolate that to a 16 game season and it looks like this 285-of-481 for 3,259 yards, 23 TDs vs 6 INTs, with another 680 and 3 TDs on the ground.

On top of having an offensive line that PFF rated 28th in 2016, that FO rated 30th for pass protection (and 32nd for run protection) and that The Huddle had as the worst line in the NFL, Kaepernick's top four pass catchers were Jeremy Kerley, Garrett Celek, Quinton Patton and Shaun Draughn... Kerley & Celek last year had a combined 7 catches for 97 yards, while the other two were cut in 2016 and never got back into the league. Carlos Hyde isn't a bad player, but you know you're in a bad way when he is comfortably the best skill position player on your whole roster.

And of course, having the worst defense in the league that season both in yards and points allowed (and 4th worst in scoring percentage despite teams frequently running the clock down on them) hardly helped things either.

Kaepernick was by no means an all pro or anything, but with the players he had around him, he was doing a pretty solid job in 2016 and in no way should he have been sat at home while Petty, Hundley, Tolzien, Yates, Peterman, etc were starting games.

eagle eye

Billy86 wrote:

In 11 starts he went 196-of-331 (59.2%) for 2241 yards (6.8 ypa), 16 TDs vs 4 INTs with a 90.7 QB rating, and another 468 rushing yards and 2 TDs.

I'll answer with the words of the greatest coach in the game.

'Stats are for losers, the final.score is for winners'

I seen him play in his last couple of seasons and he was crap.

Billy86

eagle eye wrote: »

What's your point there Billy?

That the court case was always about Kaepernick's pay, or lack thereof, from the NFL colluding - something I very clearly stated in my last post. Yet you were trying to claim otherwise despite the fact you absolutely knew this was the case, as shown. Speaking out both sides of your mouth, in other words.

NFL felt Kaepernick issue was damaging their brand due to the idiots on social media backing him so they settled.

NFL finally faced up to the fact that they were doing damage to themselves by not hiring Kaepernick and going with far inferior players instead, while sucking up to a president that hates them with a passion and who in turn sucks up to white supremacists (while continuing to spit in the face of the NFL after they bent over for him). If you can't see how that's the PR equivalent of shooting yourself in the face, I can't help you.

Nike claimed that the Kaepernick campaign did not negatively affect them and they certainly didn't say it helped them. Lots of people do think the Kaepernick ads did negatively affect them as I predicted.

See, you're trying to claim something here which is proven wrong. Nike launched the ad on September 4th 2018. Some (including yourself if I recall) predicted this would hurt their stocks... instead, on September 14th 2018, Nike's stock hit an all time high - something I very clearly stated and linked to in my last post.

The campaign was a resounding success, there are no two ways about it, and for further proof they 'crushed' their earning expectations for the quarter they launched the campaign at the very start of - https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/20/nike-earnings-q2-2019.html .

His settlement doesn't change my opinions or prove them wrong.

Except for the part where it does. The NFL, if they had much of a leg to stand on, could have exhausted his finances easily through court proceedings. Instead, they knew they were badly in the wrong and that their handling of the entire situation from when the kneeling began was doing them significant damage on the PR front (hence Nike running that ad campaign - they hardly did it out of the goodness of their own hearts... they knew it would be a success, and they were right).

The NFL beat itself and just got it's arse handed to it on the PR front, from a guy who didn't have an excellent PR record during his playing days.

eagle eye wrote: »

I'll answer with the words of the greatest coach in the game.

'Stats are for losers, the final.score is for winners'

I seen him play in his last couple of seasons and he was crap.

OK, without addressing the fact that my post talked about a lot more than statistics, I want to thank you. I was waiting for that exact type of response from you.

Now, here you are using stats to claim Bortles is a better QB than Eli Manning, speaking out both sides of your mouth when and as it suits, again:

eagle eye wrote:

Last season Eli Manning had a 6.1 yard average with a 61.6% completion rate for 3468 yards with 19 tds and 13 ints over 15 games.
Bortles averaged 7 yards per pass with a 60.2% completion record for 3687 yards with 21 tds and 13 ints.

Shedite27

Billy86 wrote: »

Kaepernick was by no means an all pro or anything, but with the players he had around him, he was doing a pretty solid job in 2016 and in no way should he have been sat at home while Petty, Hundley, Tolzien, Yates, Peterman, etc were starting games.

Think most nfl teams seem to lean towards an unknown quantity QB rather than a known-mediocre QB. At least with the unknown, there's a chance he turns out to be a good QB and the GM/coach looks a genius. Getting a Kap to be Kap proves nothing and won't get you far.

Billy86

Shedite27 wrote: »

Think most nfl teams seem to lean towards an unknown quantity QB rather than a known-mediocre QB. At least with the unknown, there's a chance he turns out to be a good QB and the GM/coach looks a genius. Getting a Kap to be Kap proves nothing and won't get you far.

Generally true yes, though Tolzien and Yates were very known quantities at that point, and both are older than Kaepernick. Petty was 23 with 6 games under his belt, but a passer rating of 60.0 and looking horrific when he was on the field would have me seeing Kaepernick as a much preferential option. Brett Hundley and Peterman that may be more applicable to, but Peterman was a new kind of laughably woeful, and it was painfully obvious after about 3 weeks than Hundley just is not an NFL QB.

Funny thing is, had Ted Thompson hired Kaepernick he and Mike McCarthy might still be in a job today. The team was far from great in 2017, but Hundley was just remarkably inaccurate, and clueless for a guy who had had 2.5 years to learn behind an all timer, and on a number of occasions just average QB play could have got us a few wins to limp into the playoffs.

eagle eye

Billy86 wrote:

That the court case was always about Kaepernick's pay, or lack thereof, from the NFL colluding - something I very clearly stated in my last post. Yet you were trying to claim otherwise despite the fact you absolutely knew this was the case, as shown. Speaking out both sides of your mouth, in other words.

The NFL lost the social media battle, the stupid went with Kaepernick, as I've already said and decided to pay up and shut everything down.

Billy86 wrote:

NFL finally faced up to the fact that they were doing damage to themselves by not hiring Kaepernick and going with far inferior players instead, while sucking up to a president that hates them with a passion and who in turn sucks up to white supremacists (while continuing to spit in the face of the NFL after they bent over for him). If you can't see how that's the PR equivalent of shooting yourself in the face, I can't help you.

He is garbage as a QB, it made no sense for any team to hire him imo.
It's all about social media, nothing to do with the real story. If they did blacklist him they paid the price anyways. Who really cares. Hopefully the kneeling is over with and we can get back to talking about football.
More of your political bs again too I see.

Billy86 wrote:

See, you're trying to claim something here which is proven wrong. Nike launched the ad on September 4th 2018. Some (including yourself if I recall) predicted this would hurt their stocks... instead, on September 14th 2018, Nike's stock hit an all time high - something I very clearly stated and linked to in my last post.

Yeah ten days later, no chance that had anything to do with the Kaepernick ads.
As I've said already even Nike were defensive about the ads saying it didn't hurt them when many said it did. They have never claimed it benefitted them

Billy86 wrote:

The campaign was a resounding success, there are no two ways about it, and for further proof they 'crushed' their earning expectations for the quarter they launched the campaign at the very start of -

Show me where Nike claimed it was a resounding success.

Billy86 wrote:

Except for the part where it does. The NFL, if they had much of a leg to stand on, could have exhausted his finances easily through court proceedings. Instead, they knew they were badly in the wrong and that their handling of the entire situation from when the kneeling began was doing them significant damage on the PR front (hence Nike running that ad campaign - they hardly did it out of the goodness of their own hearts... they knew it would be a success, and they were right).

The NFL will do whatever they deem best for their profit margin, in this instance it was to make a deal with a confidentiality clause.

Billy86 wrote:

The NFL beat itself and just got it's arse handed to it on the PR front, from a guy who didn't have an excellent PR record during his playing days.

OK, without addressing the fact that my post talked about a lot more than statistics, I want to thank you. I was waiting for that exact type of response from you.

stats to claim Bortles is a better QB than Eli Manning, speaking out both sides of your mouth when and as it suits, again:

They got beat up because of every dumbo on social media. They have a powerful voice now as insane as that is.

So I used stats in a player versus player argument and it was just a backup to my eye test. What about it?

I responded to you with a quote from Belichick because you really come across as not to being able to discuss talent without stats. I can talk stats but I form my opinions by watching football games.

I remember you coming ng into a draft thread one time when I picked a player and suggesting that I read some bodies stuff or listened to a podcast when it was from watching college football that I formed the opinion that the guy would work out in the NFL. Just as I told everybody on here that the best QB on a draft class a couple of years ago was Derek Carr when everyone was raving about Teddy Bridgewater and some about Manziel.

raze_them_all_

Eagle eye reads like a redneck respect the fleg type a lot over the last few days which is a shame as he usually has intelligent things to add

eagle eye

raze_them_all_ wrote:

Eagle eye reads like a redneck respect the fleg type a lot over the last few days which is a shame as he usually has intelligent things to add

There are lots of intelligent people who respect the national anthem too.
Just because you think it's only red necks doesn't make it so.
Your view of the world seems to be fogged up.

batgoat

eagle eye wrote: »

There are lots of intelligent people who respect the national anthem too.
Just because you think it's only red necks doesn't make it so.
Your view of the world seems to be fogged up.

I still don't view kneeling as disrespectful. He used the national anthem to highlight a national issue that affects many citizens. He did so in a respectful fashion and it was more reminiscent of conscientious objectors during Vietnam and the likes, sports people taking a stand when something seriously wrong.

Also appears to be a bit dishonest to claim that he's engaged in an elaborate ploy to get money. Eg the kneeling at the time only resulted in negative consequences for him for a long time.

raze_them_all_

eagle eye wrote: »

There are lots of intelligent people who respect the national anthem too.
Just because you think it's only red necks doesn't make it so.
Your view of the world seems to be fogged up.

If the nfl respected it so much they wouldn't need to be payed by the military for all the stuff

eagle eye

batgoat wrote:

I still don't view kneeling as disrespectful. He used the national anthem to highlight a national issue that affects many citizens. He did so in a respectful fashion and it was more reminiscent of conscientious objectors during Vietnam and the likes, sports people taking a stand when something seriously wrong.

As discussed explained earlier there are lots of things that could b done to highlight the issue and I think it should be highlighted too. Things like instead of a celebration of a big play you do something to remind people of this. In every interview before you answer the question posed you talk about this stuff. There was plenty of ways of giving the issue huge exposure without upsetting a lot of people by kneeling during the anthem.

eagle eye

raze_them_all_ wrote:

If the nfl respected it so much they wouldn't need to be payed by the military for all the stuff

Thanks is a totally separate issue. This isn't about the military at all.

batgoat

eagle eye wrote: »

As discussed explained earlier there are lots of things that could b done to highlight the issue and I think it should be highlighted too. Things like instead of a celebration of a big play you do something to remind people of this. In every interview before you answer the question posed you talk about this stuff. There was plenty of ways of giving the issue huge exposure without upsetting a lot of people by kneeling during the anthem.

Kneeling during the anthem is far more striking and sticks in people's minds so does have the greatest impact. If people get upset by that, maybe they should consider where their priorities are, given what it is highlighting.

eagle eye

batgoat wrote:

Kneeling during the anthem is far more striking and sticks in people's minds so does have the greatest impact. If people get upset by that, maybe they should consider where their priorities are, given what it is highlighting.

Your 1+1 does not equal 2. People who were very upset about kids being shot were also very upset by the kneeling.
The whole issue was almost forgotten, it became a back story, the kneeling became the major story.

Jolly Red Giant

eagle eye wrote: »

Your 1+1 does not equal 2. People who were very upset about kids being shot were also very upset by the kneeling.
The whole issue was almost forgotten, it became a back story, the kneeling became the major story.

The kneeling became the major story because the US establishment wanted to deflect from their responsibility for not dealing with gun laws.

This does not mean that the players who participated in the protest were wrong to do it - they were absolutely entitled to reflect the mood in society.

brinty

Anything to be said for a separate Kaepernick thread

eagle eye

brinty wrote:

Anything to be said for a separate Kaepernick thread

Totally up for that so I can forget all about this stupidity.

Realt Dearg Sec

brinty wrote: »

Anything to be said for a separate Kaepernick thread

Well whaddya know...

https://www.boards.ie/b/thread/2057876336

Adamocovic

Kaepernick one is an odd one.

I understand the complaints regarding the US but to decide the protest the anthem until he feels like "[the American flag] represents what it's supposed to represent" seems so ambiguous. Yes he argues about the inequality minorities face but the problem for me is there is no clear achievable goal or desired result, or at least not to my knowledge. It could theoretically go on forever due to this.

Do think the very public protest has hampered his chances or oppurtunities, don't think wearing pig socks to depict the police was a wise move either, but his talent and reported demands are also another stumbling block. If the stories about the AAF contract demands are correct he is living in another world.

Suppose the long waffled story simplified is the following in my eyes:

A.) Is Kaepernick good enough to play in the NFL? Absolutely yes.
B.) Is Kaepernick good enough for a team to live with the distraction/PR he brings while also guaranteeing him a big salary and starters position? Absolutely not.

KrustyUCC

Is Kaepernick good enough for a team to live with the distraction/PR he brings even if he's only a backup? Absolutely not.

Foxtrol

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Is Kaepernick good enough for a team to live with the distraction/PR he brings even if he's only a backup? Absolutely not.

The NFL failed to get the case thrown out and ended up settling so clearly this wasn't as easily proven as you tend to feel about it.

Adamocovic

Interesting read here:

In Colin Kaepernick Case, N.F.L. Makes a Familiar, Safe Call

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/16/sports/football/nfl-kaepernick-concussions-settlements.html