Owners including Kraft must turn over all cell phone records

[brdmaverick]

If a 1-10 record reflects badly on him, than you have to work it the other way as well. 2012 and 2013 he was 17-6-1 in the regular season and 4-2 postseason including a very competitive SB appearance. It works both ways.

Of course, the 17-6-1 and Super Bowl appearance reflected very well on him....and if this was the 2014 offseason he'd be snatched up in a second. We wouldn't even be having this conversation.

Unfortunately this is a 'what have you done for me lately league' and his 3-16 record seems to have highlighted some flaws in his game that people don't want.

He was once regarded a good/great quarterback who even had one media person proclaiming him to be the best quarterback the league will ever see........but clearly things have changed.

 

[Ring 6]

No. He is average. 18 teams in this league have average starters right around Kaepernick's skill level. They'll excell with a good roster around them and can't elevate a bad one. Just like Kaepernick.

That could be the least knowledgeable football comment I have read in years.

I would say that Kaep compares roughly in terms of raw skill to Matt Cassell. Put a good coach and roster around Cassell and he can get you to the playoffs, he did it in KC and just missed here in New England. But he's not going to take a bad team and make it a good one like Tom Brady, like Payton Manning, or even second tier guys such as Brees, Wilson, Eli and Cousins, because he's not a great quarterback like Brady, or a good quarterback like Cousins, he's an average quarterback.

You should have watched him play.

I believe the most appropriate possible response to this statement is that it is indeed a statement, possibly even in the English language.

If you can’t read through basic typos because I am posting from a phone o feel bad for you. The point is obvious despite a couple of typos.

Really love to know how you managed to knit that strawman together out of anything I actually said.

Your entire argument was brees is good and hasn’t won and you tried to use that as your proof krapernick doesn’t suck

Congratulations, another alleged example of the English language.

Grow up

At the end of the day, you're arguing intangibles and using as evidence the fact that the team loses. You're arguing from the conclusion and not providing any actual support for your argument.

No. I am pointing out TE player sucks.

You're not drawing an actual connection between the quarterback and his team's performance.

Of course I am. You are saying “but brees”

You're not even actually drawing a connection to quarterback's own intangibles -- you know, the ones that actually help teams win more games than they otherwise might..

They won 1 game with him. His tangibles are enough to know he sucks.

Hell you're not even actually making an argument, you're just piling a bunch of condescending assumptions and outright superstitions on each other that it looks like an argument, and hoping nobody notices the difference.

No I am relying on facts. You should try it.

 

[Doctor DDS]

Hard to know that "facts" of this claim without knowing what Kaepernick was looking for in a contract and if he only wanted a starting opportunity. If he went into the off season willing to take veteran minimum or take a low salary with some incentives and communicated that to everyone he can at least make a case for some type of collusion. (would still be a very weak case) Have no idea if Baltimore was seriously considering signing him, what they were offering and if Kaepernick would have accepted it as that seemingly fell apart when his girlfriend accused the ownership of being racist.

It is perfectly reasonable to not want a player who is divisive to a large portion of your paying customers. Even if the owners were personally 100% behind his protest position it is still logical to not want an employee to do anything to alienate numerous customers. That to me is what keeps getting lost in the argument, it is irrelevant if the cause if just, if a % of customers do not approve of it and if a team hiring Kaepernick would lose some fan support it is completely reasonable not to want him on your team even if talent wise he is better than someone else. There has always been a talent/distraction continuum and Kaepernick is way too low on talent and is a specialty player (meaning a system needs to be built around him) to deal with that level of distraction.

 

[mgteich]

The collusion thing should not be a thing, they can hire who they want.

Let us say that the top 5 owners let it be know that it would damage the NFL if he were hired, perhaps even saying that the president might punch them. BTW, the tax treatment of stadium funding has been made much worse for the NFL.

This should be collusion, especially if everyone complied.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

This is one where for once I am not worried about the Pats. Based on our QB situation all through the Kap drama, I believe the Pats have never had any interest whatsoever in signing Kap, and rather than discourage other teams from doing so, if anything they would have encouraged other teams to do so, because he's a lousy QB and they would have been happy to see him go to a rival. But I don't think he or his situation has been on their radar at all. Edit - except for when our dope of a President made it a fake issue in order to distract from the country's real problems.

If the owners communicated to each other something like "this guy's hurting our brand so let's agree to not hire him" I'm not sure that this amounts to anything actionable.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

If they find collusion they can void the CBA and then get ready for a long protracted work stoppage

1) The CBA expires in 2020 anyways.
2) Collusion only voids the CBA if there are more than N teams involved. I can't remember what N is, but I believe it's more than 10. It's certainly more than 2 or 3.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Remember, this is not a civil suit. This is an internal NFL proceeding, and per the terms of the CBA will be conducted by an independent arbitrator.

If owners are actually required to turn this stuff over, it is either because the CBA says that in a collusion proceeding they can be required to do so if the other party asks or because the CBA generally gives arbitrators the power to demand such things, and Kaep convinced the arbitrator to order it. (I have no idea which it is.)

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

Remember, this is not a civil suit. This is an internal NFL proceeding, and per the terms of the CBA will be conducted by an independent arbitrator.

If owners are actually required to turn this stuff over, it is either because the CBA says that in a collusion proceeding they can be required to do so if the other party asks or because the CBA generally gives arbitrators the power to demand such things, and Kaep convinced the arbitrator to order it. (I have no idea which it is.)

I'm still hazy on what the actual issue is here. The owners aren't within their rights to say to each other "this guy is a jerk and an embarrassment to the league and needs to go away?"

 

[A Defiant Goose]

First time I've rooted for Kaep in anything lol.

Ok wait I lied. Second time. But he let me down in SB 47

 

[PatRiot]

Sorry guys (Jungs),

from a german standpoint (far away - i know) this league (when the news r for real) is a KINDERGARTEN BS league. What is next ? Who is next ? Brady`s Mobil ------------- Owners Mobil ----- destroy your league and your g`ment..... good luck with that... i am not quitting, but f.... the league.

Pats 4ever​

 

[PatRiot]

and all b cause of KAEP - HAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[mgteich]

If the owners communicated to each other something like "this guy's hurting our brand so let's agree to not hire him" I'm not sure that this amounts to anything actionable.

I believe that you are incorrect. IMHO, it would be collusion or conspiracy to deny Kaepernick employment. I suspect that there are states where this is actionable.

 

[rochrist]

Of course, the 17-6-1 and Super Bowl appearance reflected very well on him....and if this was the 2014 offseason he'd be snatched up in a second. We wouldn't even be having this conversation.

Unfortunately this is a 'what have you done for me lately league' and his 3-16 record seems to have highlighted some flaws in his game that people don't want.

He was once regarded a good/great quarterback who even had one media person proclaiming him to be the best quarterback the league will ever see........but clearly things have changed.

Or, you know, teams are deciding to not sign him based on some other criteria altogether.

 

[FibSeq13478]

No. I believe if they do a search of Bob Kraft's e-mails & texts for the name "Colin Kaepernick" it will say, "No results matching this search."

I am hoping there will be a few matches and all of them happen to be from goodell, Jerry Jones and McNair but there is no response from Kraft. That would be sweet revenge from Kraft.

 

[PatRiot]

bull s.hit

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I'm still hazy on what the actual issue is here. The owners aren't within their rights to say to each other "this guy is a jerk and an embarrassment to the league and needs to go away?"

No, they're not. Because in the CBA they agreed to not collude against players.

Owners can individually, independently decide not to hire Kaep. But once two or more owners cooperate to not hire him, that's banned-by-the-CBA collusion.

 

[brdmaverick]

I'm still hazy on what the actual issue is here. The owners aren't within their rights to say to each other "this guy is a jerk and an embarrassment to the league and needs to go away?"

Ya, I'm not sure of the rules here either, after all, the NFL is a different work environment than your typical corporate America. In corporate American you can't discriminate against age, height, weight, etc when obviously you can in the NFL (all sports in general).

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Ya, I'm not sure of the rules here either, after all, the NFL is a different work environment than your typical corporate America. In corporate American you can't discriminate against age, height, weight, etc when obviously you can in the NFL (all sports in general).

In corporate America you can discriminate against all of those when they are bona fide occupational qualifications for a job.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

No, they're not. Because in the CBA they agreed to not collude against players.

Owners can individually, independently decide not to hire Kaep. But once two or more owners cooperate to not hire him, that's banned-by-the-CBA collusion.

Interesting. That's sounds like it's going to be hard to prove unless one of the owners said something really stupid. Seems like an enormous fishing expedition.

 

[Ring 6]

I believe that you are incorrect. IMHO, it would be collusion or conspiracy to deny Kaepernick employment. I suspect that there are states where this is actionable.

It’s tricky because although they are partners in the league they are separate employers.
Sharing that opinion is not an offense however.