HuskerBoard

If you are a valuable enough asset to a team, you will be on the team regardless of morals.  There are crazy amounts of proof of this.  Kaep doing this is him trying to stay in the spotlight since nobody wants him to QB their team.  That's what this is.

Ray Rice punched a girl in a face and he can't find a team because he sucks now, not because of the punch.  The NFL just cares if you are still good at being a football player.  

Counterpoint: Kaep. There's been one example of Kaep's "morals", and the NFL is one-for-one in blackballing them. Look at some of the QBs on NFL rosters.

Us supporting the public against him is a sign of both public apathy for worker's rights (solidarity, schmolidarity) and an endorsement of the NFL's "stand for the anthem" stance. 

I don't believe that for a minute zoogs. There may be a few specific team cases where his activism is keeping him off a roster but it takes a giant leap to jump to collusion of the owners.  And, let's be honest, it's not his "activism" but rather the way he goes about it. There are all kinds of players who have knelt and commented on it that are still playing. The lesson here is if you're not valuable enough as a player you should probably have more tact or keep your mouth shut. When you're the equivalent to a dime-a-dozen quarterback, you probably don't want to have that negative baggage. It wouldn't be an issue if he was a better QB or if he was less of a tool about his "activism".

You don't have to like Kaep or what he stands for, and you may agree with the result, but let's be clear about what is happening and *why*. 

I am clear about it and why.  He made a ton of money he ended up sucking he priced himself out of a backup position and he isn't good enough to be a starter for the money he would want.  It happens all the time.  The players union PROBABLY won't let him play for the league minimum because of his years of experience and prior contracts so now he is not worth the contract he would demand.  

@El Diaco, wholesale collusion is hard to prove, yeah. Is there an NFL team that would sign him, but just isn't in the market at all for a QB? Of course that's possible. Several NFL teams aren't in the market, and maybe if that weren't true they'd go after Colin.

However, Colin's image issue as a problem character who has wrought his own well-deserved lockout, that's tied to his activism. It couldn't possibly be plainer where the NFL (and many of its teams) stand on the topic. Equally the evidence is abundant re: where teams stand on domestic abuse and "second chances". 

So I don't think it's a leap at all to say if Colin were quiet about his political views and kept his head down, then he wouldn't have this "baggage" issue that prevents a lot of teams from even entertaining him. 

In fact, we're agreeing: the "problem" is he didn't keep his mouth shut. Most players have the good sense to put their career first. The question is whether that's his failing of tact, or whether it's our problem (as a society, really, but largely this is directed at the NFL) for treating his vocal stand as something he did wrong. He clearly disregarded his career when he spoke out like this, but doing so never should have been a career sacrifice. 

It seems really clear to most of us..... :dunno

So zoogs, so we know exactly where you stand, are you saying the owners got together, circulated a memo, whatever and decided that nobody would put him on roster? And that he is demonstrably better than other comparably paid qb's who are currently employed in the NFL.  That would be collusion and that is what I'm saying is not happening.

But sure, his loud mouth untactful ways are bringing more scrutiny on him. In what world should a person not expect that?

Okay, maybe we sort of agree and fall on opposite sides of the line. My argument all along has been it's not collusion. When there are 20 other players of basically equal ability that can do what you do and don't have that negative baggage you can't blame it solely on his activism. When there are other players who have taken the same stand and are still playing, the issue isn't his activism but rather the collective- he isn't worth the trouble.

Like I said earlier, the owners are like a brood of whores, if even one of them felt like his play would help their team at market value and they had a need, he'd be signed in a heartbeat regardless of his activism.

Take his activism and his QB abilities out of the equation.  He's still a massive tool that is using this grievance as a PR story.

My question is what is his trouble or baggage other than his activism? 

Joe Callahan is not of basically equal ability. He just isn't all uppity and political.

@Redux, you can't take his activism out of the equation with that statement because his "tool"ness exactly derives from his activism. That's where the perception comes from.

We shouldn't be okay with that, but c'est la vie.

Remember the next time you nod along to performative outrage over Trump or the GOP trying to stamp out dissent that you were 100% on board with the NFL asserting its right to keep its players quiet and in line. 

His activism isn't what makes him a tool.  It's his characteristics, attitude and attitude that make him a tool.  Put his activism back in it and how he carries himself and he's not worth it.  Put his QB abilities back in it and he's definitely not worth the price tag.

Zoogs, nobodyin their right mind on this board is ever going to be naive enough to think they can persuade your stance on something.  If you want to believe that a league wide conspiracy against Kaepernick is occurring to simply silence players from protesting, you go right ahead.

@zoogs That's where we disagree. This isn't a case of the NFL keeping it's players quiet or in line. #1- He isn't a current NFL player. #2- He isn't being prevented from voicing his opinion. The fact he isn't on a roster has more to do with his football ability than his political stance on any issue. I'm not on an NFL roster, are they keeping me quiet and in line? Numerous other NFL players have spoken out on the issue.  If this is about activism being stymied by the NFL, why are they still on rosters and being allowed to play? #3- Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't most in the NFL basically on the same side of the issue as he is? Isn't there still kneeling going on and what was this linking arms thing they all did awhile back? So they're blackballing a guy who they agree with? 

This is about a guy that's not collectively worth the price tag of his performance and antics.  How many teams are there, 32? He may think he's one of the top 64 qb's in the world, just like every other QB that hasn't made a roster. I think he's in the bubble range of that. Are there guys in that bubble range that are not currently under contract? Yes, and it's not because they are being blackballed. If he was a better player, he would be employed. If he wasn't as abrasive in his approach to said activism, he MIGHT be employed. It's not an NFL issue, it's a Colin Kaepernick issue.

He was an NFL player when he chose to step outside of line, and now he's no longer. The message is clear: obey.

You're not on an NFL roster anymore, and you didn't have a 90.7 QBR last year either. That comparison doesn't fly, sorry to say  

Numerous other NFL players have spoken out, but none of them like Colin. None are the face of the movement, the standard bearer, in the way he is. All of them have found ways to express safely within the system. I'd be hopeful to see them become more vocal, but really none of them can ever be what Colin was, which was the guy who started the fire.

This is about what are antics and what are not. Colin has been judged to be full of antics. And now we're rewriting the story of his football ability to justify the outcome. Yeah, if he were Tom Brady, he would probably still be employed. But also if he hadn't decided to "antic" it up, he'd still be employed. Colin made a choice. That choice should not have cost him in the way that it did, and we should not be defending all the structures that made it this way.

:ahhhhhhhh

I mean, the NFL is right now going all out to stop players from protesting during the anthem. 

You can enjoy watching the game without needing to defend the ways of the league. Or at least recognize your contribution to and endorsement of "Don't Speak Too Out of Turn". Maybe you feel that NFL players shouldn't be using their stardom as such a platform, and they should all just be more modest about their views and focus on giving us entertainment product. Fine. Just don't pretend the NFL doesn't put the clamps on controversy.

It doesn't make much sense to me that, given that so many players who've been involved in far greater controversies than this have had no issues finding continued employment in the league, Kaepernick would be the guy they'd all band together to make an example out of.  We'll never know if he'd have found himself unemployed had he chose not to protest or draw other attention to himself (a lot of people thought Miami should've signed him instead of Cutler, but I don't think that a guy who has shown up to press conferences wearing a shirt with Che Guevara on it would warm up to Miami fans very quickly) because it all coincided.  He wanted out of San Francisco and he got out, only to find that nobody was interested in signing a guy who's basically a slightly more talented version of Taylor Martinez.

Have there been 'far greater controversies' than this? It seems like the dominant sports controversy of the day. That's kind of the issue. It's not that this is some giant, targeted conspiracy. NFL teams avoiding controversy is par for the course. It's that this marked him with a huge red flag -- wearing a Che Guevara shirt and all that, in a world where "he deserves a second chance" gets applied to what (IMO, at least) should be far less forgivable.