Kaepernick Gives Up

[StillAWarrior]

The NFL is an incredibly pragmatic league. If you can help a team win, they may put up with off-field issues you might bring along. Of course, the better you are, the more off-field issues teams may tolerate. The opposite is also true.

****

It's a coldly calculating league, and if he were Tom Brady-good, then he could be Louis Farrakahn's right-hand-man (or Bill O'Reilly's) in the off season and still have a job. Too bad for Kap... he's not.

For many years, I've believed this.  The way Kaepernick is being treated makes me re-think that position.  I don't like the guy and disagree strongly with a lot of what he did and said.  But I think it's hard to make a case that he's not getting blackballed.

[Golden Avalanche]

No, no and no.
He's not a bad quarterback, especially not relative to some of the actually bad quarterbacks getting contracts.
And he's not a head case, unless you believe that having unpopular political views makes one a head case. (True story, back in Soviet Russia, people with unpopular political views were often declared head cases and institutionalized ... which probably was a better outcome than the Gulag).
Please consider, from Pro Football Talk:

Kaepernick started 11 games for a horrible team in a new offensive system, generating numbers that were far from horrible.
As a passer, Kaepernick completed nearly 60 percent of his passes, averaging 6.8 yards per attempt and throwing 16 touchdown passes against four interceptions. His passer rating was 90.7 — his highest such number since signing his long-term deal after the 2013 season.
As a runner, Kaepernick averaged 42.5 yards per game and 6.8 yards per attempt. Bills quarterback Tyrod Taylor, the leading rusher among quarterbacks in 2016, averaged 38.6 yards per game, in 15 starts.
Speaking of Taylor, his numbers for the year were comparable to Kaepernick’s. Completion percentage: 61.7. Average per attempt: 6.9 yards. Passer rating: 89.7. Touchdowns to interceptions: 17 to 6. Average per rush: 6.1 yards.
Taylor emerged from the season with a two-year, $30.5 million contract to remain with the Bills despite an overhaul to the coaching staff.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/03/25/joe-thomas-asks-the-key-question-on-kaepernick/

Now, do you really believe that a guy who put up those numbers with a horrid supporting cast (top receivers = Jeremy Kerley and Quinton Patton) isn't better than any of Case Keenum, Mark Sanchez, Geno Smith, Blaine Gabbert, TJ Yates, EJ Manuel, Kellen Moore, David Fales, Aaron Murray and Austin Davis ... all of whom were awarded free-agent deals this spring?

"Kaepernik just isn't good enough" is a false narrative people tell themselves because they're uncomfortable admitting that he's being blackballed. The fact Kaepernick isn't with an NFL team right now has nothing to do with his ability to play football.

This times 1,000.

It's an old fashioned blackballing.

[tower912]

Amen.

[Pakuni]

The NFL is an incredibly pragmatic league. If you can help a team win, they may put up with off-field issues you might bring along. Of course, the better you are, the more off-field issues teams may tolerate. The opposite is also true.

If I'm a GM of a good team, hiring a talented backup QB who hopefully never plays a meaningful snap isn't worth the off-field headache.

If I'm a GM of a team that's terrible and has no QB, hiring a mediocre, replacement level, starting QB isn't worth the off-field headache because the end gain is maybe a win or two more and a worse draft slot + the ESPN sideshow.

It's a coldly calculating league, and if he were Tom Brady-good, then he could be Louis Farrakahn's right-hand-man (or Bill O'Reilly's) in the off season and still have a job. Too bad for Kap... he's not.

Disagree, somewhat
Yes, if Kaepernik were a generational talent like Brady, he'd still have a job in the league. But that's kind of a bad example, since only about 1 percent of the players in the league are generational talents.

Let's deal with the other 99 percent.
NFL general managers and coaches are extreme control freaks for whom there is no worse sin than "being a distraction." We know this.
Case in point: Ray Rice.
Rice isn't out of the league because he punched his wife. Hell, he was a member of the Ravens for seven months after he punched his wife. The team only cut him after the video of him punching his wife went public, and he became a distraction.

Case in point II: Josh Brown.
Eleven months after Josh Brown was arrested for domestic abuse, the Giants signed him to a $4 million extension. Even when he was suspended on the sly for domestic violence, the Giants kept and defended Brown. Only when the extent of his abuse became public did the Giants cut him ... not because he's a bad guy who beats women - he was that when they gave him a $4 million deal -  but because he became a distraction.

In both instances, Brown and Rice could have continued to help teams win games. But they're now kryptonite to NFL coaches because signing them would be a distraction.
That +1,000 for Kaepernik. Signing Kaepernik would be perhaps the ultimate distraction, and hence NFL teams won't touch him. And he's a distraction not because he's a criminal or a bad person. He's a distraction for taking a political stance that's unpopular with a large segment of the meathead NFL fan base, i.e. the people who don't understand PFTCommenter is satire.

Anyone who believes Kap couldn't help a team on the field more than Mark Sanchez or Austin Davis needs to leave this discussion and never discuss NFL here again.

[mu03eng]

Disagree, somewhat
Yes, if Kaepernik were a generational talent like Brady, he'd still have a job in the league. But that's kind of a bad example, since only about 1 percent of the players in the league are generational talents.

Let's deal with the other 99 percent.
NFL general managers and coaches are extreme control freaks for whom there is no worse sin than "being a distraction." We know this.
Case in point: Ray Rice.
Rice isn't out of the league because he punched his wife. Hell, he was a member of the Ravens for seven months after he punched his wife. The team only cut him after the video of him punching his wife went public, and he became a distraction.

Case in point II: Josh Brown.
Eleven months after Josh Brown was arrested for domestic abuse, the Giants signed him to a $4 million extension. Even when he was suspended on the sly for domestic violence, the Giants kept and defended Brown. Only when the extent of his abuse became public did the Giants cut him ... not because he's a bad guy who beats women, but because he became a distraction.

In both instances, Brown and Rice could have continued to help teams win games. But they're now kryptonite to NFL coaches because signing them would be a distraction.
That +1,000 for Kaepernik. Signing Kaepernik would be perhaps the ultimate distraction, and hence NFL teams won't touch him. And he's a distraction not because he's a criminal or a bad person. He's a distraction for taking a political stance that's unpopular with a large segment of the meathead NFL fan base, i.e. the people who don't understand PFTCommenter is satire.

Anyone who believes Kap couldn't help a team on the field more than Mark Sanchez or Austin Davis needs to leave this discussion and never discuss NFL here again.

OK let me ask this. Heisey carried on about how the kneeling protests were dragging down ratings, and rightfully you and others argued those protests were having little to no impact on ratings. However, the argument is now that he is being blackballed because owners are concerned he'll impact ratings and/or perception of the team that signs him? Or that owners are more scared of a flaky dude who protested a patriotic song than they are players who are committing sexual assault and domestic violence crimes? I don't think these lines of thinking are compatible.

[Pakuni]

However, the argument is now that he is being blackballed because owners are concerned he'll impact ratings and/or perception of the team that signs him? Or that owners are more scared of a flaky dude who protested a patriotic song than they are players who are committing sexual assault and domestic violence crimes? I don't think these lines of thinking are compatible.

1. I don't see anyone arguing that owners are concerned he'll impact ratings and/or perception the team (though they may be ... I don't know).

2. Yes, owners are more concerned with a guy who upsets fans because of his political stance than they are with thugs whose crimes aren't well publicized.
Did you read John Mara's comments on Kaepernik?
The same John Mara who gave Josh Brown a $4 million extension after he was arrested for beating his wife.
The same John Mara who kept Michael Boley on the team for two years after he was accused of child abuse (for which he later pleaded guilty).
Doesn't that tell you owners are more scared of a flaky dude who protested a patriotic song than they are players who are committing sexual assault and domestic violence crimes?

[mu03eng]

1. I don't see anyone arguing that owners are concerned he'll impact ratings and/or perception the team (though they may be ... I don't know).

2. Yes, owners are more concerned with a guy who upsets fans because of his political stance than they are with thugs whose crimes aren't well publicized.
Did you read John Mara's comments on Kaepernik?
The same John Mara who gave Josh Brown a $4 million extension after he was arrested for beating his wife.
The same John Mara who kept Michael Boley on the team for two years after he was accused of child abuse (for which he later pleaded guilty).
Doesn't that tell you owners are more scared of a flaky dude who protested a patriotic song than they are players who are committing sexual assault and domestic violence crimes?

If the bolded is true, what are the owners concerned with, if not perception and/or ratings? I literally can't comprehend what concerns they would have that aren't ratings related that are significant enough to blackball a player that by your contention would bring more value to the team than players currently on the roster.

[jficke13]

Oh it's a blackballing alright, but it has as much to do with what Kap can do on the field as with what he does off it. Again, if Brady were doing what Kap is, he'd get signed.

I'd argue that to a team playing for a high draft pick/shot at their own Brady, it's not worth the marginal gain of adding a replacement level QB and getting the ESPN sideshow.

Likewise, for virtually every team that has a franchise QB, if that QB goes down, their Superbowl chance is blown regardless of whether the backup is Kap or Sanchez. I'd look at having the league's best back up kind of like having the world's best life insurance policy. If you have to use it, you're screwed anyway, so why bother with the sideshow.

At the end of the day he's being blackballed because of the sideshow, which wouldn't exist save for his political activism, but I'd argue that it's not the activism itself that is why he's not signed.

[Pakuni]

If the bolded is true, what are the owners concerned with, if not perception and/or ratings? I literally can't comprehend what concerns they would have that aren't ratings related that are significant enough to blackball a player that by your contention would bring more value to the team than players currently on the roster.

I think you're a) confusing my point and b) conflating perception with ratings.

First, if you look at my post to which you responded, I said nothing about owners. I was talking about coaches and GMs, who are not concerned about ratings. They're concerned about so-called "distractions," of which I'm sure they believe Kaepernik would be one. that's why he's not getting signed. Control freak coaches have an all-abiding fear that factors outside their control might influence their fiefdom, and the additional attention Kaepernik would bring  - at least in the short term - would bring factors outside their control.

Second, the perception of an individual team or owner - like, say, Giants fans writing mean letters to John Mara about Kaepernik - is not the same thing as national ratings (which was the topic of last year's debate).
John Mara isn't avoiding Kaepernik because he fears it will keep people from tuning into the Sunday night game between the Packers and Falcons. He fears it would piss off the paying customers at his gate and, perhaps, local sponsors. It's not about national ratings, it's about local revenues. These are not synonymous.

[4everwarriors]

He accused some cops of murder.  Which is actually a truthful statement.

Here's the lesson that needs to be taught and understood. Do not run from the police.

[GGGG]

Here's the lesson that needs to be taught and understood. Do not run from the police.

Not exactly sure what this has to do with my statement...

[Pakuni]

Likewise, for virtually every team that has a franchise QB, if that QB goes down, their Superbowl chance is blown regardless of whether the backup is Kap or Sanchez. I'd look at having the league's best back up kind of like having the world's best life insurance policy. If you have to use it, you're screwed anyway, so why bother with the sideshow.

Seven teams have won the Super Bowl with a quarterback who started the year as the backup.

[4everwarriors]

Exactly everything. When a person runs, he gives the police license and justification to subdue, by whatever means necessary which may include bodily harm or death.

[Pakuni]

Exactly everything. When a person runs, he gives the police license and justification to subdue, by whatever means necessary which may include bodily harm or death.

Umm, yeah, that's nowhere close to true.

[GGGG]

Exactly everything. When a person runs, he gives the police license and justification to subdue, by whatever means necessary which may include bodily harm or death.

It is actually scary that you believe this to be true.

But again, cops have murdered people who they weren't chasing too. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

If the bolded is true, what are the owners concerned with, if not perception and/or ratings? I literally can't comprehend what concerns they would have that aren't ratings related that are significant enough to blackball a player that by your contention would bring more value to the team than players currently on the roster.

You've never done something that you knew was wrong when you thought no one would notice?

"Murder is easier for most people to do than perjury.  Nobody's watching when you commit a murder"

[4everwarriors]

It is actually scary that you believe this to be true.

But again, cops have murdered people who they weren't chasing too.

Wow, this isn't that hard. I suppose you believe Fuhrman framed O.J. too, hey?

[GGGG]

Wow, this isn't that hard. I suppose you believe Fuhrman framed O.J. too, hey?

WTF are you talking about?  If someone runs for the Police, they don't have the right to use "whatever means necessary," including deadly force, to get them to stop.

[4everwarriors]

Any y'all out there in law enforcement? I think we need an authoritative voice opinin', rather than a rewind of whatever the liberal media is spittin' out as the gospel.

[mu03eng]

I think you're a) confusing my point and b) conflating perception with ratings.

First, if you look at my post to which you responded, I said nothing about owners. I was talking about coaches and GMs, who are not concerned about ratings. They're concerned about so-called "distractions," of which I'm sure they believe Kaepernik would be one. that's why he's not getting signed. Control freak coaches have an all-abiding fear that factors outside their control might influence their fiefdom, and the additional attention Kaepernik would bring  - at least in the short term - would bring factors outside their control.

Second, the perception of an individual team or owner - like, say, Giants fans writing mean letters to John Mara about Kaepernik - is not the same thing as national ratings (which was the topic of last year's debate).
John Mara isn't avoiding Kaepernik because he fears it will keep people from tuning into the Sunday night game between the Packers and Falcons. He fears it would piss off the paying customers at his gate and, perhaps, local sponsors. It's not about national ratings, it's about local revenues. These are not synonymous.

I said perceptions and ratings, I'd lump the owners being concerned about local revenue as part of the perception lump but perhaps not, my fault.

The fact that Adam Jones has had a double digit career length is testimony to coaches and GMs putting up with a lot.

Additionally, there were other players that knelt during last season; I don't have a complete list but I'm not aware of any of them being out of a job. Is this perhaps because the protest by Kaepernik in of itself is not the problem but the general clown show he brings with it as compared to the value he brings to a team as a quarterback?

[Pakuni]

Any y'all out there in law enforcement? I think we need an authoritative voice opinin', rather than a rewind of whatever the liberal media is spittin' out as the gospel.

Is the Supreme Court part of the liberal media?

Tennessee v. Garner
Court rules police cannot use deadly force against a fleeing suspect unless  "the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."
(Emphasis mine).
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/471/1.html

So, no, police cannot subdue by whatever means necessary a person who runs.

[4everwarriors]

Probable cause? Kinda a grey area, hey?

[Pakuni]

Additionally, there were other players that knelt during last season; I don't have a complete list but I'm not aware of any of them being out of a job. Is this perhaps because the protest by Kaepernik in of itself is not the problem but the general clown show he brings with it as compared to the value he brings to a team as a quarterback?

This makes my point.
How many of those other players can you name (without looking it up)? Unlike Kaepernik, those other players were not front and center in the national debate. So their signings would be unlikely to create much of a stir.
Also, how many of those other players were free agents?

What beyond the protest do you consider the general Kaepernik clown show? His former coaches like Harbaugh and Chip Kelly have nothing but praise for him as a professional and teammate. Some quotes from a recent SI story:

“Every day his car would be the first one in the parking lot,” says Jim Harbaugh, who almost won Super Bowl 47 with Kaepernick in San Francisco before moving on to the University of Michigan. “He’d be studying film and he’d be working out in the morning. I mean, no later than 5:45. He was already in a full lather when I would see him.”

“There was zero distraction,” Kelly says. “He met with the team immediately after [his first protest]. He met with the other team leaders. He explained his position and where he was coming from. And literally, that was it. Colin was focused on football. He was all about the team and trying to help us win.”

Harbaugh says of his time coaching Kaepernick: “It got to the point where nobody could challenge him in a workout. Otherwise, he’d bring them to their knees. Like in running workouts—nobody could hang with him. Nobody was in the kind of shape he was.

“When Colin is with us, he is 100 percent football,” Kelly says. “There’s not, ‘Hey, Coach, I don’t have time for this.’ That was never him. [The protest] never affected how he worked or what our workplace was like. And that’s a credit to Colin.”

[GGGG]

Probable cause? Kinda a grey area, hey?

Not compared to the "when a person runs" justification you brought up earlier.

[Pakuni]

Probable cause? Kinda a grey area, hey?

Yeah, as a legal concept it's only been around a few hundred years or so, and there are only about a half dozen Supreme Court decisions detailing its definition.