Quarterbacks Thankful That They Have A Job

[Ring 6]

Signing players is about much more than the probability of winning.

Do you care to explain this position?

 

[Froob]

ok...does ANYONE reading this thread think Kap doesn't have a job b/c of on the field football related reasons?

I doubt it...i think its obvious to all of us the reason he doesn't...but if an owner wants to go against the self interest of his team winning its their choice

It’s both, nobody wants to admit it but it is. People out there acting like if Russell Wilson or Cam Newton did this they’d be outta the league. And certainly can’t ignore some owners wouldn’t sign him because of the politics.

 

[Off The Grid]

I suspect the owners view Kaepernick as a PR nightmare. I don't think the product on the field plays into their calculus one bit.

I believe that both play into it.

If Kaepernick didn't suck, I'll bet that some Teams would be willing to deal with the controversy. Jones gave Hardy a chance in Dallas, and the Eagles let Vick play...But if there wasn't the chance that these guys could help their Teams win, I'm pretty sure that they would've been ignored. Indeed Hardy's since vaporized.

I'm pretty confident that if Kaepernick hadn't regressed in 2014...and gotten worse in 2015...and sucked even worse in 2016...that somebody'd give'm a shot.

 

[Froob]

I believe that both play into it.

If Kaepernick didn't suck, I'll bet that some Teams would be willing to deal with the controversy. Jones gave Hardy a chance in Dallas, and the Eagles let Vick play...But if there wasn't the chance that these guys could help their Teams win, I'm pretty sure that they would've been ignored. Indeed Hardy's since vaporized.

I'm pretty confident that if Kaepernick hadn't regressed in 2014...and gotten worse in 2015...and sucked even worse in 2016...that somebody'd give'm a shot.

Uh what lol? 2016 was one of his best seasons with arguably the worst roster in football.

 

[Off The Grid]

I don't necessarily agree with the politics of everyone I work with. I don't need to.

I suspect the owners view Kaepernick as a PR nightmare. I don't think the product on the field plays into their calculus one bit.

I believe that both play into it.

If Kaepernick didn't suck, I'll bet that some Teams would be willing to deal with the controversy. Jones gave Hardy a chance in Dallas, and the Eagles let Vick play...But if there wasn't the chance that these guys could help their Teams win, I'm pretty sure that they would've been ignored. Indeed Hardy's since vaporized.

I'm pretty confident that if Kaepernick hadn't regressed in 2014...and gotten worse in 2015...and sucked even worse in 2016...that somebody'd give'm a shot.

Uh what lol? 2016 was one of his best seasons with arguably the worst roster in football.

Yep. That 59.2 Completion Percentage and 186.8 Yards Per Game ~ when the Miners played the entire Season in "we're down 3 TouchDowns so let's throw the ball on every down against soft, squishy Prevent Defenses!!" mode ~ was terrifying.

 

[Ring 6]

Uh what lol? 2016 was one of his best seasons with arguably the worst roster in football.

Based on what? They were worst or 2nd worst passing and scoring offense and were better in Blaine gabbarts games than krapernicks.
In what way was he good in 2016?

 

[MassPats38]

QB Rating is imperfect, absolutely.

But I don't think the record is the best measure of evaluation either. A similar loser would be Josh McCown, who was 1-10 in his previous 2 seasons, 2-20 in his previous 3. He was actually pretty decent in his first season in Cleveland, but went 1-7 because the team was atrocious. His QBR was 79.3 over that period, he completed less than 59% of his passes, and still got a starting job for the Jets, where he's actually won 4 games so far, double his total from the previous 3 seasons.

I have no problem with keeping Kaepernick out of the league for political reasons. The locker room matters. It's important. But people need to stop arguing it's talent-based.

I agree with your record position as well. And yes, the politics/personality/history of a player absolutely factor into whether he will be added to a particular roster. The NFL is absolutely business/entertainment, so the fact CK has an appreciable group of fans boycotting a product will absolutely weigh-in to the personnel decision.

My issue with these CK articles is the claim he is this silver bullet for any bad organization based on statistics alone. Add him to the roster, and the team will improve. There is nothing to support that position. Nothing. And this 'talent' argument, for or against adding him, is an empty word, not an empirical/factual component of the argument. CK can have a lovely singing voice, but that does not make him an improvement in very different schemes as a QB. Talented at what - a QB role without definition? Brady was not viewed as talented at the combine in those measurables, yet somehow he worked well for the Pats. I wouldn't want Brady running a read-option offense either. So under this amorphous talent claim, stripped of fundamentals on fitness for particular systems, is Brady not a 'talented' QB? His stats are awesome, but is he going to achieve comparable results in a read-option system with an emphasis on running? Not remotely.

QBs like Brady also will pull wins from losing scenarios. I have watched CK quite a bit, but do not see him as that type of QB day in, day out. I know Jim Harbaugh loved him, protests or not, and they ran a very specific type of offense. Harbaugh left, the scheme changed, and CK was benched. What to make of the lack of confidence from Harbaugh's successors is anyone's guess (there were not protests for all of that, but it may suggest that Harbaugh had to coach him excessively in order to get him to that level and Harbaugh is a great coach). The Niners were and are a disaster.

Does CK have the abilities to play backup if he is committed to learning the particular offense? Sure. Will he sign on to that role? I have no idea. Is a backup worth a PR nightmare? Probably not. Is CK the type of superstar QB that teams will morph an entire offensive scheme to accommodate? No. Has he elevated a team's play to heights unimaginable by his abilities alone? No. Are stats influencd by the talent on the team? Yes. How many number 1 receivers were added to the Niners roster with CK? Quite a few. Is there a guarantee in another system, meaning any of the systems outside the Niners under Harbaugh, he would achieve better results than these other lousy QBs listed above? Absolutely not. The only universe that reasoning works is Madden NFL, where his subjective numbers say how good or bad he works elsewhere.

By the logic of these articles, Ochocinco was a 'talented' receiver and should have 1,000 receiving yards for the Pats given his 'talent' and Brady as QB. Apparently worked to fit in, good guy and ultimately a disaster - 15 rec/231 yds/1 TD. There was no PR cost for him in adding him, but he didn't fit the Pats system, despite physical abilities and a desire to play for the coach. Corey Dillon, in contrast, worked with tremendous physical abilities and a role that fit those abilities.

I cannot claim to love the CK saga enough to do a team-by-team breakdown on skill sets required and comparative measurables of current QB and CK in order to determine if he is even better than the current player in that role and would ultimately prove to be a step up from what is currently there. Having said that, I haven't read that analysis from anyone else touting the amorphous 'talent' argument in support of the blackball theory either. Just stats from the Niners, which are just that. Teams in the end want wins, not stats. If CK cannot do that, then what good is he, and why should he be starting anywhere, regardless of his politics?

 

[brdmaverick]

I have no problem with keeping Kaepernick out of the league for political reasons. The locker room matters. It's important. But people need to stop arguing it's talent-based.

I think it's clear that it's both.

After all, we've seen many times before (such as with Mike Vick and Greg Hardy) that teams are willing to give guys 'a look' if they feel their talent is worth the trouble.

If Kaep was still having the on field success he had in his first few seasons he'd certainly still have a job despite his political actions.

His talent and on field success, for whatever reason, took a nose dive. I mean, I can't recall someone off the top of my head fall from the elite as fast and hard as he did without the built in reason of injury or older age. Is he still better than some of these backups and some starters in the league, sure.........but owners seem to have decided that he's only marginally better than those guys (at best) and therefore not worth the headache of the additional baggage he brings (potential locker room division, potential qb controversy, increased media scrutiny, etc).

 

[brdmaverick]

Certain people will never agree that Kap is not on a team for a reason beyond his play. Even if his QB rating and fantasy points land him way above the junk QBs playing now.

It is ok that teams don't want him on there team for various reasons. These are private companies and they can do what they want. But don't tell me with a straight face that it is all about his game.

I agree (see post above) but unfortunately for Kaep he has allowed people to at least make that argument based on his terrible record of late.

 

[Ring 6]

I agree with your record position as well. And yes, the politics/personality/history of a player absolutely factor into whether he will be added to a particular roster. The NFL is absolutely business/entertainment, so the fact CK has an appreciable group of fans boycotting a product will absolutely weigh-in to the personnel decision.

My issue with these CK articles is the claim he is this silver bullet for any bad organization based on statistics alone. Add him to the roster, and the team will improve. There is nothing to support that position. Nothing. And this 'talent' argument, for or against adding him, is an empty word, not an empirical/factual component of the argument. CK can have a lovely singing voice, but that does not make him an improvement in very different schemes as a QB. Talented at what - a QB role without definition? Brady was not viewed as talented at the combine in those measurables, yet somehow he worked well for the Pats. I wouldn't want Brady running a read-option offense either. So under this amorphous talent claim, stripped of fundamentals on fitness for particular systems, is Brady not a 'talented' QB? His stats are awesome, but is he going to achieve comparable results in a read-option system with an emphasis on running? Not remotely.

QBs like Brady also will pull wins from losing scenarios. I have watched CK quite a bit, but do not see him as that type of QB day in, day out. I know Jim Harbaugh loved him, protests or not, and they ran a very specific type of offense. Harbaugh left, the scheme changed, and CK was benched. What to make of the lack of confidence from Harbaugh's successors is anyone's guess (there were not protests for all of that, but it may suggest that Harbaugh had to coach him excessively in order to get him to that level and Harbaugh is a great coach). The Niners were and are a disaster.

Does CK have the abilities to play backup if he is committed to learning the particular offense? Sure. Will he sign on to that role? I have no idea. Is a backup worth a PR nightmare? Probably not. Is CK the type of superstar QB that teams will morph an entire offensive scheme to accommodate? No. Has he elevated a team's play to heights unimaginable by his abilities alone? No. Are stats influencd by the talent on the team? Yes. How many number 1 receivers were added to the Niners roster with CK? Quite a few. Is there a guarantee in another system, meaning any of the systems outside the Niners under Harbaugh, he would achieve better results than these other lousy QBs listed above? Absolutely not. The only universe that reasoning works is Madden NFL, where his subjective numbers say how good or bad he works elsewhere.

By the logic of these articles, Ochocinco was a 'talented' receiver and should have 1,000 receiving yards for the Pats given his 'talent' and Brady as QB. Apparently worked to fit in, good guy and ultimately a disaster - 15 rec/231 yds/1 TD. There was no PR cost for him in adding him, but he didn't fit the Pats system, despite physical abilities and a desire to play for the coach. Corey Dillon, in contrast, worked with tremendous physical abilities and a role that fit those abilities.

I cannot claim to love the CK saga enough to do a team-by-team breakdown on skill sets required and comparative measurables of current QB and CK in order to determine if he is even better than the current player in that role and would ultimately prove to be a step up from what is currently there. Having said that, I haven't read that analysis from anyone else touting the amorphous 'talent' argument in support of the blackball theory either. Just stats from the Niners, which are just that. Teams in the end want wins, not stats. If CK cannot do that, then what good is he, and why should he be starting anywhere, regardless of his politics?

One thing. The decline started while harbaugh was still there.
In his last 10 games with harbaugh they averaged 16.5 ppg, scores over 20 just twice and 17 or less 7 times. He averaged 191 passing yards (and only
151 in the last 5) threw TD passes and 6 ints completed 58% of his passes and in the playoff hunt at 7-4 lost 4 straight.
From week 7 of the 2014 to today he has proven he doesn’t belong in the nfl.

 

[Ivan]

What about the $$? What teams actually pay Kaepernick? Would he settle for the vet. minimum? No one seems to be talking about the financial side of things.

My understanding is that he wants to start and therefore would want starter money. I agree with his initial cause and support his right to protest, but I wouldn’t sign him or give him starter money. The Tebow analogy is accurate because neither had the humility to go to Canada and show teams they deserve a shot.

 

[Kontradiction]

colinkaepernickfans.com/colin-kaepernick/messageboard

 

[Deus Irae]

CK took a knee for a cause that is certainly not popular. TT spouted his Christian faith far and wide, refused to play any position other than QB and never worked to improve his miserable mechanics. Tebow put his faith ahead of everything else, including football and his team. Yet he got umpteenth chances to play, though he was nowhere near as good a QB as many others, and certainly not in CK’s class.

Your argument is beyond terrible. It's nonsensical.

 

[Ring 6]

ok...does ANYONE reading this thread think Kap doesn't have a job b/c of on the field football related reasons?

I doubt it...i think its obvious to all of us the reason he doesn't...but if an owner wants to go against the self interest of his team winning its their choice

It’s both.

He doesn’t have a job because he sucks. If he were a good qb he would have a job.
If he wasn’t a dlck he may have a job and may not. Most teams realize he sucks and is not a developmental prospect. Perhaps one might take a shot and have him as a 3rd strong guy running the scout team in weeks you see a mobile qb.
If he was the greatest qb in the league off the field he would be sitting in someone’s bench.

 

[Deus Irae]

ok...does ANYONE reading this thread think Kap doesn't have a job b/c of on the field football related reasons?

I doubt it...i think its obvious to all of us the reason he doesn't...but if an owner wants to go against the self interest of his team winning its their choice

I have asked the same question in different ways, and the Kaepernick champions have yet to come up with an answer that actually supports their position of some large number of teams who could have used Kaepernick, and there, therefore, being an obvious conspiracy (and I don't say that there's not one. I just say that one's not needed to end up with Kaepernick being unemployed in the NFL). So, you try it:

Given the situation of the league, and the teams, at the beginning of this season, now, and moving forward, where would Kaepernick make sense, and where would have have made sense earlier in the season?

1. For example: he makes absolutely no sense in New England, where Brady's the #1, Hoyer knows the system and is a quality backup, and Kaepernick's game is the opposite of the offensive system the Patriots play. And, obviously, he would have made no sense when JAG was in N.E., either.
   
2. Second example: he would have made sense in Buffalo for this season where, as a backup QB, he would have fit a little more of what Taylor does, and would have been an improvement on that disastrous backup situation. Important to note here, however, that Buffalo's system has changed with the new coaches, and that Taylor will almost certainly be gone next year (they don't really even run a Taylor friendly offense there now, nevermind moving forward), as the Bills will look to bring their system all the way into line with the new coaching philosophy, so Kaepernick would have been looking at a 1 year stint as a backup, and then being back on the street again.

So, I've evaluated a Zero percent scenario and a backup position possibility. Go down the list of the 29 other teams (SF was obviously not an option) and find the huge number of teams that had/have/will have a Kaepernick friendly situation, as either a starter or backup.

 

[Ring 6]

I have asked the same question in different ways, and the Kaepernick champions have yet to come up with an answer that actually supports their position of some large number of teams who could have used Kaepernick, and there, therefore, being an obvious conspiracy (and I don't say that there's not one. I just say that one's not needed to end up with Kaepernick being unemployed in the NFL). So, you try it:

Given the situation of the league, and the teams, at the beginning of this season, now, and moving forward, where would Kaepernick make sense, and where would have have made sense earlier in the season?

1. For example: he makes absolutely no sense in New England, where Brady's the #1, Hoyer knows the system and is a quality backup, and Kaepernick's game is the opposite of the offensive system the Patriots play. And, obviously, he would have made no sense when JAG was in N.E., either.
   
2. Second example: he would have made sense in Buffalo for this season where, as a backup QB, he would have fit a little more of what Taylor does, and would have been an improvement on that disastrous backup situation. Important to note here, however, that Buffalo's system has changed with the new coaches, and that Taylor will almost certainly be gone next year (they don't really even run a Taylor friendly offense there now, nevermind moving forward), as the Bills will look to bring their system all the way into line with the new coaching philosophy, so Kaepernick would have been looking at a 1 year stint as a backup, and then being back on the street again.

So, I've evaluated a Zero percent scenario and a backup position possibility. Go down the list of the 29 other teams (SF was obviously not an option) and find the huge number of teams that had/have/will have a Kaepernick friendly situation, as either a starter or backup.

Something that is interesting is that almost every team with a running qb has a pocket passer as a backup.
It seems there really isn’t a “mobile qb system” but more of a varying the system to accommodate the running ability.

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

I don't care all that much about Kaepernick, but nothing I read suggested a divided locker room. Divided fanbase, angry cops, whatever, sure. It may not be good business to sign Kaepernick (though I'll admit I don't understand why there's a special animus against him when half the league has kneeled), but it's not for locker room reasons.

Because the other half didn't.

 

[Deus Irae]

Something that is interesting is that almost every team with a running qb has a pocket passer as a backup.
It seems there really isn’t a “mobile qb system” but more of a varying the system to accommodate the running ability.

NFL edge defender speed makes running offensive systems essentially unsustainable, with only a few QBs having the speed and/or elusiveness to have any sort of long term success doing it, and with the injury likelihood being so high, you don't really want to have multiple high-risk QBs on the squad, unless you've got the space to carry extras. That's why it makes sense for teams to have pocket QBs as backups (not many running QBs who can be both good enough to succeed and bad enough to be just backups).

Hell, when you look at the NFL today, you only see

Taylor
Newton
Wilson

as "established" running sorts, although some of the young guns do enjoy a good dash

RGIII is the ultimate cautionary tale.

 

[Deus Irae]

JULIAN EDELMAN HAS A CAREER PLAYOFF QB RATING OF 135.4. THERE'S AN OBVIOUS CONSPIRACY HERE, OR HE'D BE A STARTING QB FOR SOME TEAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Deus Irae]

Given the O.P., and the angle some of the Kaepernick defenders like to take, this seems like an appropriate place for this:

Colin Kaepernick made a surprise appearance at the Alcatraz Indigenous People's Sunrise Gathering on Thursday.

A tradition since 1975, the annual dawn festivities, also known as Unthanksgiving Day, commemorate the 1969-71 occupation of Alcatraz by American Indians, during which 89 American Indian activists and leaders occupied the island and former penitentiary with the demands that it be turned into an Indian cultural center and school.

Colin Kaepernick makes surprise appearance at 'Unthanksgiving Day' on Alcatraz