It’s relevant because the last time he talked money he wanted 150% of a league’s cap. Guy has a history of pricing himself out.How is that relevant?
That was then, this is now.
It’s relevant because the last time he talked money he wanted 150% of a league’s cap. Guy has a history of pricing himself out.How is that relevant?
That was then, this is now.
His last year (2016) he had 1.2% interception rating for 6th best, between Aaron Rodgers and Matt Ryan. For reference Winston had a 4.6% interception rating in 2019 and was dead last in the league. You are making up stats to support your politics.Cool. Then it should matter that Kaepernick was equally as bad about taking care of the football.
Yes, which has absolutely nothing to do with how much he'd accept to play for the NFL.The last time he talked dollars and cents, he said he would play for 20M (for one of the now defunct leagues)
See aboveIt’s relevant because the last time he talked money he wanted 150% of a league’s cap. Guy has a history of pricing himself out.
There is no evidence he is asking for a ton of starter money outside of random speculation, is there anything since he was a free agent where he has rejected an NFL offer? The XFL does not count for the reasons people have stated in this thread. If I get an unsolicited contact asking if I want to shovel pig #### for a living, I would be like "sure, for $500,000". Is that the going rate for #### shovelers? No idea, but that is what it would take for me to do it. It does not mean I would not work anywhere else for less than $500,000. It is essentially the same as answering no.
Quoting myself from earlier in the thread. There is also a politics thread for Kaepernick in that section that might be more relevant for "rationale" discussion.His opponents could always hand-wave any success away (in the XFL) as inferior competition if they want to keep him out of the NFL, while if he does do poorly or get injured obviously it is bad, so it is truly a no win situation for him. It is like arm wrestling a girl in high school, if you win no one cares and if you lose your friends will tease you about it for the next 10 years.
Coach Anthony Lynn said free agent Colin Kaepernick is on the Chargers' emergency workout list.
Lynn said they have yet to reach out to Kaepernick and have no plans to bring him in at the moment, but noted he fits the style of quarterback the team prefers, and he'd be among their options in case of an emergency. For now, the Bolts are comfortable with the combo of Tyrod Taylor and first-rounder Justin Herbert with 2019 draft pick Easton Stick as the distant No. 3. There's no room for Kap at the moment.
RELATED:
Los Angeles Chargers
SOURCE: Ian Rapoport on Twitter
Jun 17, 2020, 12:26 PM ET
It's because he was so so so terrible didn't ya know? And his salary demands were so so so high!Even an emergency list workout is good, will get him exposure and word of mouth. Stunning that he couldn't even get that from teams.
The Chargers have no plans to bring him in for a workout or tryout. They just added him to their list of available emergency quarterbacks. That is probably the babiest of baby steps.Even an emergency list workout is good, will get him exposure and word of mouth. Stunning that he couldn't even get that from teams.
I do see reason for debate on that. When he opted out of his contract he was a backup level QB. What team wants to put up with a circus because of their backup QB? If he was a better player he would never have been out of the league. I really do not believe the NFL blackballed him, but that no team wanted to put up with a sideshow surrounding their backup QB.as-is its so politicized. It’s apparent he’s been blackballed, on that I’m not seeing any reason for debate.
It's the NFL. If he could play, he'd have a job. Check out some of the QB2's around the league. He was obviously better than most of those guys.I do see reason for debate on that. When he opted out of his contract he was a backup level QB. What team wants to put up with a circus because of their backup QB? If he was a better player he would never have been out of the league. I really do not believe the NFL blackballed him, but that no team wanted to put up with a sideshow surrounding their backup QB.
I'm not saying he wasn't better than a lot of backup QBs. If he was a star player he would have had a job. The fact is he wasn't and wasn't worth the distraction. I guess OJ Simpson isn't a murderer because he was found not guilty too.It's the NFL. If he could play, he'd have a job. Check out some of the QB2's around the league. He was obviously better than most of those guys.
The circus wasn't as bad then as it is now.
Also, didn't he literally win his case against the NFL? So yeah - not really debatable once a court says "yep - blackballed" (paraphrasing, which I guess I have to say due to some folks being twitchy about using quotation marks )
The OJ bit is a nice touch, though somewhat irrelevant.I'm not saying he wasn't better than a lot of backup QBs. If he was a star player he would have had a job. The fact is he wasn't and wasn't worth the distraction. I guess OJ Simpson isn't a murderer because he was found not guilty too.
Yeah people will argue the numbers either way but the talent and combo of size/speed and arm is what people gamble on all the time and still gamble on today. Unfortunately he was still early in his development and wasn't good enough to turn around a terrible 49ers squad (not sure many QBs could make that a .500 team that year). It's sad because we will never know how good he could have been; even if he does sign with a team eventually his his development has been permanently arrested. He'd need a lot of work to get up to speed on reading today's NFL defenses, and that's something he wasn't great at.It would have been nice to see someone give Kaep a chance. His level of play would have helped to defuse this debate a little.
as-is its so politicized. It’s apparent he’s been blackballed, on that I’m not seeing any reason for debate.
But knowing whether or not dude could actually still play might have lended a little credibility to one side or the other.
what, we gonna still be having the “should a team give Kaep a chance” discussion in 2025?
I’m a Niners fan & Kaep fan, and I’m skeptical that if he slapped on pads he’d be winning football games today. He’s been out for some time, and let’s keep it real, he wasn’t all that great at the end anyway.
he coulda had a super bowl ring with better play calling, that’s for sure. I blame Harbaugh for that.
as for his skill set, he ran like a gazelle & had a cannon. That’s about it. He was not a good touch thrower, he wasn’t that good throwing on the run a la Mahomes, and he made some seriously horrible decisions that resulted in bad picks.
he was better than a lot of NFL backups & should have had a job. And the league would have been smarter to ignore his politics & let him play. By now he may have even played himself out of football.
the “Barbara Streisand effect” comes to mind here - the league likely lengthened Kaepernick controversy shelf-life & made things worse by the actions they’ve taken.
I don't think this is a relevant comparison.Those other QBs are probably not making the same money as he would and definitely aren't bringing the same level of distraction and controversy.There's no evidence he was blackballed. Other owners don't need to talk to, or wink at, each other to determine an unfavorable risk/reward.It's the NFL. If he could play, he'd have a job. Check out some of the QB2's around the league. He was obviously better than most of those guys.
Weird because they settled the lawsuit, basically an admission of having locked him out.I don't think this is a relevant comparison.Those other QBs are probably not making the same money as he would and definitely aren't bringing the same level of distraction and controversy.There's no evidence he was blackballed. Other owners don't need to talk to, or wink at, each other to determine an unfavorable risk/reward.
But this discussion is probably for the PF thread.
Many times lawsuits get settled because it is easier and more cost effective than actually playing out the lawsuit. Business wise settling was better and doesn't necessarily mean he was blackballed. There were other players that knelt that still had jobs and played. There are many factors on why he wasn't signed by anybody. Distraction vs ability vs cost to sign. It wasn't worth it.Weird because they settled the lawsuit, basically an admission of having locked him out.
then there’s this:
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/apr/13/kaepernick-reid-blackballed-nfl-kneeling-anthem
Also how do you figure he was making more than the backups?
He literally wasn’t making anything at the time. Anywhere he signed, a given team would have negotiated a contract just like any other player.
Very confused by that assertion.
Not disagreeing with the latter.Many times lawsuits get settled because it is easier and more cost effective than actually playing out the lawsuit. Business wise settling was better and doesn't necessarily mean he was blackballed. There were other players that knelt that still had jobs and played. There are many factors on why he wasn't signed by anybody. Distraction vs ability vs cost to sign. It wasn't worth it.
I think this is a solid post....however Kap's role in the whole thing deserves a little more juice.....he wasn't very good at the end and turned down an offer from DEN......once he did that, many of the other owners saw that he wasn't willing to play and/or compete for a job at about 8 mil.....so many of them probably took him "off their board" so to speak.....if thats called "blackballing" I'm not sure that is fair.....but when he told Elway to pound sand at that offer, he pretty much burnt that bridge (Elway has said as much)....and other owners noticed.....so their inactivity in pursuing Kap is somewhat justified.....Elway was asked about revisiting Kap some time back even before all this.... and he said "he had his chance to come here"....It would have been nice to see someone give Kaep a chance. His level of play would have helped to defuse this debate a little.
as-is its so politicized. It’s apparent he’s been blackballed, on that I’m not seeing any reason for debate.
But knowing whether or not dude could actually still play might have lended a little credibility to one side or the other.
what, we gonna still be having the “should a team give Kaep a chance” discussion in 2025?
I’m a Niners fan & Kaep fan, and I’m skeptical that if he slapped on pads he’d be winning football games today. He’s been out for some time, and let’s keep it real, he wasn’t all that great at the end anyway.
he coulda had a super bowl ring with better play calling, that’s for sure. I blame Harbaugh for that.
as for his skill set, he ran like a gazelle & had a cannon. That’s about it. He was not a good touch thrower, he wasn’t that good throwing on the run a la Mahomes, and he made some seriously horrible decisions that resulted in bad picks.
he was better than a lot of NFL backups & should have had a job. And the league would have been smarter to ignore his politics & let him play. By now he may have even played himself out of football.
the “Barbara Streisand effect” comes to mind here - the league likely lengthened Kaepernick controversy shelf-life & made things worse by the actions they’ve taken.
-Settlement is not in any way an admissionWeird because they settled the lawsuit, basically an admission of having locked him out.
then there’s this:
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/apr/13/kaepernick-reid-blackballed-nfl-kneeling-anthem
Also how do you figure he was making more than the backups?
He literally wasn’t making anything at the time. Anywhere he signed, a given team would have negotiated a contract just like any other player.
Very confused by that assertion.
Except for the leaked tapes/emails with owners openly discussing blackballing him for fear of Trump retribution you’d probably have an excellent point.-Settlement is not in any way an admission
-That's an opinion piece
- I said "probably" and we're comparing what he WOULD make, which, even if he no longer cares about "starter money" has to be more than at least some, esp. those who have never taken a snap in the NFL. But, fine, throw that out and the distraction/controversy issue is enough. You think it is a coincidence that 32 people think it is a bad business decision. I think it is the decision anyone who did well enough at business to afford to buy a team would easily arrive at independently.
I wanted to respond, but am bowing out now, because this discussion belongs in the other thread. (And I helped beat it death there, too. )
Sorry for any hijacking I contributed to.
The Denver contract offer wasn’t relevant to the collusion case. He was still under contract by SF for $12M a year & they were allegedly asking him to take a pay cut.when Kap said "no" to an 8 mil offer to come in and compete for the job in DEN.....31 other teams/owners noticed......
if he just told Elway to pound sand at a potential starting gig and 8 mil.....and I was already on the fence about his skill/bringing him in.....why would I waste the time throwing my hat in the ring...?
the narrative is that is blackballing......not sure that's the case....if I know I can't afford a BMW, I'm not gonna keep shopping for and test driving them...
The Broncos’ offer has absolutely no bearing on the Kaepernick’s collusion case as it predates the allegations. It’s odd that Elway would even bring up the deposition. It’s even more odd that Elway referenced negotiations that took place two years ago (and conveniently left out that context) when answering a question about the current state of the team. Unless, of course, Elway had ulterior motives.
Whatever the case may be, one thing is clear: With Chad Kelly and Paxton Lynch fighting for the backup job, Denver could certainly use a player like Kaepernick in their locker room, and to dismiss him as an option because he turned the team down two years ago is just silly. Though it’s fairly obvious that isn’t the only reason Elway isn’t interested.
Is the funniest considering it's one guy against a huge organization full of billionaires who can throw lawyers at the problem like they're popcorn. Hell, the billionaires even had the president telling them that they were the good guys. Why on earth would you settle when you can stand up big and tall for all the idiots making videos about burning their jerseys and #### like that and tell them "not in our NFL!"Gally said:Many times lawsuits get settled because it is easier and more cost effective than actually playing out the lawsuit. Business wise settling was better and doesn't necessarily mean he was blackballed. There were other players that knelt that still had jobs and played. There are many factors on why he wasn't signed by anybody. Distraction vs ability vs cost to sign. It wasn't worth it.
Many times It's a business decision based on money lost. Sometimes it is better to just pay a lower sum of money that continue and spend a lot more to win. It's a numbers game. I am not saying this is the right way to play it. I am just saying that many businesses will take this approach once they crunch the numbers.It's kind of stunning how @Hot Sauce Guy
keeps coming back with salient points and articles time and time again in this post and yet people still don't seem to see the obvious.
I think this point -
Is the funniest considering it's one guy against a huge organization full of billionaires who can throw lawyers at the problem like they're popcorn. Hell, the billionaires even had the president telling them that they were the good guys. Why on earth would you settle when you can stand up big and tall for all the idiots making videos about burning their jerseys and #### like that and tell them "not in our NFL!"
As for Kap - Blaine Gabbert //still has a job//. I'm better than Blane Gabbert and I played weak side linebacker in high school over ten years ago and rarely made it off the bench. No one will ever convince me that Gabbert is better than anyone who isn't Nathan Peterman.
Even an emergency list workout is good, will get him exposure and word of mouth. Stunning that he couldn't even get that from teams.
That media bit might have been true five years ago.Chargers will be on Hard Knocks. This is a simple PR move mandated quietly by the league. Kapernick will never play for an NFL team again. Never.
Professional teams now try to measure everything. Teams, not just the NFL, track how their players hydrate and sleep. Nothing is left to chance.
Number 1 fear in the entire world? Public speaking. What is dealing with the media? A form of public speaking. It creates a lot of stress for coaches and players. Some people thrive on it because they are narcissists ( Gruden) but most don't. Getting blitzed on and on about Kapernick on your team is going to burn out a lot of players. Teams have enough to worry about, they don't need the distraction.
The NBA puts up with douchebags because it's hard to find a 6'8 guy who can run like the wind and jump like something out of Game Of Thrones. MLB did away with Canseco and Bonds because it's not so rare to find a guy who can hit 30-40 bombs in a season for the negative tradeoff with other game aspects, media and lockerroom.
Kapernick is not talented enough, never was, to get away with being this much controversy. You'd have to go back to George Mikan on the old Lakers to find a player so dominant, that a league would have to question what the tradeoff was worth.
Was Kapernick better than X number of NFL QB backups Y number of years ago? Probably. Was he 150 percent or 200 percent or 300 percent better? If you are 30 percent better, that's just not going to be worth the media firestorm. Or the attrition on your players.
My man's got a Twitter. He also was on Westworld breaking through the line.
He didn't say they didn't use it. He said the biggest fear of the Front Offices are the players and public speaking. They have no real control and damage can be huge. Social Media is an added headache for the teams from that stand point as well.That media bit might have been true five years ago.
Find me a pro athlete now that doesn't use social media and I've got a bridge with your name on it.
It will be interesting if teams start adding bonuses and incentives to contracts if players lay off social media during the season (or whatever timeline they want to use). If a team gives a player a $500K kicker not to post anything on social media (which they probably would have paid out anyway), let's see if players would keep from posting. Of course, the loophole will be if they make an alias account and still post anyway, but there are probably ways teams could find out.He didn't say they didn't use it. He said the biggest fear of the Front Offices are the players and public speaking. They have no real control and damage can be huge. Social Media is an added headache for the teams from that stand point as well.
I think that would be a very bad move. There would be calls of censorship and hindering voices on social justice.It will be interesting if teams start adding bonuses and incentives to contracts if players lay off social media during the season (or whatever timeline they want to use). If a team gives a player a $500K kicker not to post anything on social media (which they probably would have paid out anyway), let's see if players would keep from posting. Of course, the loophole will be if they make an alias account and still post anyway, but there are probably ways teams could find out.
There are many jobs that prohibit or limit the use of social media. It is a term of employment. Why would this be any different?I think that would be a very bad move. There would be calls of censorship and hindering voices on social justice.
That media bit might have been true five years ago.
Find me a pro athlete now that doesn't use social media and I've got a bridge with your name on it.
Just because you can doesn't mean you should. There are plenty of restrictions on what athletes can and can't do in their contracts.There are many jobs that prohibit or limit the use of social media. It is a term of employment. Why would this be any different?
Change is hard. People are slow to adapt to change. Social good / inclusion is hard for some to adapt to.Just because you can doesn't mean you should. There are plenty of restrictions on what athletes can and can't do in their contracts.
There's a call now for public figures to use their platform to speak out for public good. You think squashing that is a good look?
Couldn't disagree with you more. I'd say that intolerance has increased exponentially in the last month and shows no signs of slowing down.The world is waking up to a new reality where intolerance is no longer tolerated.
it’s a fascinating time to be alive.
Yes, Intolerance of intolerance. It’s a paradox.Couldn't disagree with you more. I'd say that intolerance has increased exponentially in the last month and shows no signs of slowing down.
Yes, Intolerance of intolerance. It’s a paradox.
If BLM is what you’re referring to, It seems like the majority are showing that they are no longer tolerant of racism.
not sure why anyone sees that as a bad thing.
It's a great thing....unless you are racist.Yes, Intolerance of intolerance. It’s a paradox.
If BLM is what you’re referring to, It seems like the majority are showing that they are no longer tolerant of racism.
not sure why anyone sees that as a bad thing.
Looting, rioting, innocent people being attacked in the streets, monuments being torn down, no respect for law and order...yeah, I'd say that's a bad thing. In fact, I'd say this is one of the worst moments in our country's history. But hey, if a violent communist insurrection and a Marxist coup is your idea of tolerance, that's good to know.Yes, Intolerance of intolerance. It’s a paradox.
If BLM is what you’re referring to, It seems like the majority are showing that they are no longer tolerant of racism.
not sure why anyone sees that as a bad thing.
Maybe conflating peaceful protests with a handful of anarchists isn’t the most logical approach to judging a movement.Looting, rioting, innocent people being attacked in the streets, monuments being torn down, no respect for law and order...yeah, I'd say that's a bad thing. In fact, I'd say this is one of the worst moments in our country's history. But hey, if a violent communist insurrection and a Marxist coup is your idea of tolerance, that's good to know.
His post reads like a series of Tucker a Carlson chyrons.Don't get sucked down this rabbit hole, he is definitely one of those guys who says things like "the intolerant left".
Aww...thanks!!!His post reads like a series of Tucker a Carlson chyrons.