No one here can give a strong concise reason why it was either. Without seeing the evidence there is no way to say one way or the other. For everyone that says he was better than X amount of QBs on a roster during 2017 and 2018, that does not prove collusion. The bad publicity and the fact he wouldn't take a pay cut after going 1-10 as a starter in 2016 also have to be weighed.
Stupid question, maybe, but just what is so all-fired disrespectful about kneeling? I used to have to do it a half dozen times an hour when I had to go to church. I wasn't pissing all over the lord. Sitting down or turning your back, that's disrespectful.
Sure seems that way to me. Maybe I'm just not that patriotic, but kneeling just doesn't curdle a lot of milk in my fridge. I knelt at my grandmother's funeral.
Of course no one here has made an objective case here for collusion, any evidence of same has been sealed. All we have is opinions. My opinion is that sufficient evidence exists and it is significant enough to have caused the NFL to agree to a settlement in the tens of millions of dollars But getting back to the "bogus claim" situation, I have seen nothing to support such a characterization. Such a characterization could only be descriptive if there is a belief that Kaepernick has been insincere in his actions and does not truly believe in the opinions he has offered for public consumption. Is that your opinion?
"Bad publicity" is part of the collusion. Because in reality it wasn't bad publicity. The NFL owners seemed to have thought the kneeling was hurting those that fought for our country and that to me is utter BS.
That's perfectly stated. Well done. I'm not here to satisfy your curiosity. I've stated my reasons and quite frankly I'm sick and tired of being painted as cozying up to racism because of my beliefs. It's insulting. I don't believe--in my humble opinion-- that Kaep originally did what he did because of what everyone assumes he meant. And the narrative that folks took and ran with. Bogus faux fake fraudulent. Oh and he took the money and ran.
I believe that is his opinion yes. He is a conspiracy theorist who believes Kaepernick didn't stand for the national anthem only because he got benched.
Nobody called him a racist. I simply pointed out that he was a tool of vested interest ginning up hate for Kaep. His making a fake claim. There are plenty of people who aren't racist who have been ginned up to hate Kaep by vested interests. There's absolutely no reason for anyone to hate Kaep for what he did. None. It's fake outrage.
About as silly as there not being any collusion. The Ray Rice thing, I give you pretty pointless on my end. But hey I wasn't in the room. Look at the money he received. Teams THOUGHT he was a starting QB in this league https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nf...-a-starting-quarterback/ar-AAxzTBr?ocid=ientp But hey I wasn't in the room.
This is the second time you've responded to me with references to racism because of your beliefs. You have also stated that those references are not directed towards me so why make them when responding to my postings? To continue to characterize Kaepernick's claims as "bogus" because his actions may have been misinterpreted by "everyone" seems quite a stretch to me. Hold it as a personal opinion but constantly putting it out there without support does not meet your usual standards. Again, I'm of the opinion his claims can only be called "bogus" if he was insincere in making them; you, or everyone, may find them faulty but that does not make them fake.
I’m sorry to have disappointed you. I don’t think I could further explain to you why I think his stance was fake faux bogus fraudulent in a manner that would satisfy you. Sorry to disappoint you again.
Employers can choose not to employ someone if they think the publicity that comes along with it will be detrimental to their business. If every McDonalds in the U.S. decided they did not want to employ a convicted pedophile because of the bad publicity it would generate, that is not evidence of collusion. If your opinion is that it would not bring bad publicity that is only your opinion and has not evidence of collusion. A monetary settlement is not evidence of collusion. No matter how many the number of NFL QBs you think Kaepernick is better than, is not evidence of collusion. There is simply no evidence we have available to us that proves or disproves collusion. Your claim that there is evidence of collusion is just conjecture.
Because everytime I respond in this thread another poster surreptitiously calls me racist without having the balls to do so and/or makes patronizing comments that I’m uneducated or need to be educated and that I’ve been led to my beliefs by conservative media and that I’m cozying up to racism. Fuck that.
Too bad for you. I expect I'm not the only one who would be interested in how you came to your characterization of his claims as "fake faux bogus fraudulent." Simply saying you've already explained, without reference, doesn't cut it for me. Thanks for not whining about the racism thing this time around.
On the pay cut. That actually helped Kaep in his case. Kaep was under contract and the Bronco's traded for him. Kaep refused to take the pay cut, he was under contract with the 49ers for more money. The trade went away. Kaep had a much better season in 2016 than 2015 after he rejected the trade. Elway was in position to get Kaep without giving up anything and at a much lower price. He passed. Did Elway not sign Kaep to a contract in 2017 because of the QB controversy? That's okay if he came to that conclusion by himself. But it does beg the question. Why would 1 team worry about the anthem controversy? They have revenue sharing and the Bronco's are sold out for years. Certainly the league could put this past them and the Broncos could actually benefit by getting a QB they wanted at a discount while giving up nothing. It might be the worry was shared by other teams in concert because of TV revenue sharing? To me the reason this looks like collusion is the structure of NFL revenue. Individual teams are shielded by the league from losses. The Jets signed Michael Vick and while it may have turned off viewership and possibly impacted league tv revenue, it had almost no impact on the Jets fan base. So the question becomes did the 5 to 8 teams that had legitimate interest in Kaep without the controversy all come to the same conclusion individually or was it a collective interest that more than 1 team discussed with another. After deposing several owners, and failing to get the case dropped. After the Nike ad and Kaep's standing among both fans and players had been partially restored, the NFL decided to seal the evidence for enough money for Kaep to drop the case. All good. Kaep is compensated and the NFL can move on.
Young and naive, OK, I can go with to a certain point, but c'mon now, he's gonna be 32 years old. I don't even remotely dislike Colin Kaepernick. I just don't think he's the Nobel Peace Prize nominee a lot of people make him out to be. Half the time he doesn't even know what he's talking about. Police brutality and racism is a very real thing, it's abhorrent, and we can all agree it needs to stop; but wearing pig socks as a way to open an honest dialogue with police while also wearing a Fidel Castro T-shirt is not the way to go. He very successfully killed his own arguments at times. The police are suppressing and brutalizing people of color! Fidel Castro approves this message! Um, what?
Pretty much. FYI I never get my news from NFL players twitter accounts. I do give him credit for seemingly growing up in a hurry. He gave away a lot of money and seems to recognize that if you want to be a lightening rod for a good cause you better walk the walk.
