Colin Kaepernick's protest and it's impact on the NFL
-
CK protested police brutality.
The president just advocated rougher treatment during arrests. Police departments nationwide disavowed his recommendation. Many of those changed their arrest procedures after police brutality was publicized.
I’m going with CK on this one.
People are still talking about what he protested. But although you may not be paying attention, that doesn’t mean other people aren’t listening.
-
@JayHawkFanToo LeMelo isn’t blameless in people disliking him. He has a lot of his dad in him and has shown that in the times he’s been allowed to talk. When he was on WWE a few weeks ago, he crossed a line by saying the n-word multiple times to about a white guy. His actions alongside his dad has brought a lot of it on himself, but that doesn’t fit the ESPN narrative so they won’t mention that.
Kap took a calculated risk in choosing his protest method and it has been very effective in opening the dialog still today which is the 1st step in making real change. Go look throughout history and you will find that sports has often been the catalyst for change when it comes to social issues all around the world, including the US.
-
mayjay said:
The president just advocated rougher treatment during arrests.
Way to take out of context what the President said. He was talking specifically about the MS 13 gang and saying you don’t need to be as nice to them particularly after the killed someone and he mentioned only the shielding the head while placing them in a patrol car. How exactly is that a rougher treatment?
Do a little research on the MS 13 gang. I know several people from Central America where the gang originated and the stories they tell and what I have read about them will make you sick. Their preferred method of intimidation is to kill rivals by cutting them up in pieces with machetes while trying to keep the alive as long as possible and while their families watching. Absolute sociopaths withe no redeeming value to society. This has been happening now on a daily basis on many cities in this country, the MSM just does not report it because it goes against their open borders agenda and the narrative that very single alien that comes into the country illegally is nothing but a hard worker looking for a better life; many are and many are not.
-
I don’t disagree with his protest or message, my problem is the way he went about it. He could have called a press conference and presented his case without disrespecting the flag and the National Anthem and in the process alienating a large percentage of fans and causing his employer a lot of money and good will. He is enough of a big name that he could have had a huge audience and his message would have been better received. Many athletes have gone into politics and made a difference; there s no reason why, if he really wanted to make a real difference, he could not have followed that path instead.
-
@JayHawkFanToo Calling a press conference to say you disagree with how some law enforcement officers have treated minorities doesn’t gain nearly the attention or dialog that protesting during the national anthem does.
MLK didn’t accomplish what he did by preaching in his local church in Montgomery. He got the attention of the nation with big, grand actions like leading boycotts, marches, and other stuff that received national attention and made the country see what was happening to black people in Alabama and across the deep South.
When you make the big statements like Kap made, it’s going to be very polarizing. MLK’s actions were considered very polarizing at the time as well.
So while Kap could’ve expressed his opinion in a way that didn’t alienate a segment of the NFL’s fan base, those methods tend to be very ineffective because people don’t remember that stuff.
People are going to remember Kap kneeling during the national anthem and then see that he was protesting police brutality because it was a memorable statement.
Who’s to say he won’t get involved in politics once his career is over? He can’t run for office while he’s still an active NFL player, so making a statement while he’s an active player is the way he can express his views on a public forum since running for office is out of the question at this point.
-
JayHawkFanToo said:
I don’t disagree with his protest or message, my problem is the way he went about it.
It’s really not your problem at all, actually.
-
@JayHawkFanToo So all those police depts are wrong? Oh yeah, just a joke. Forgot.
As an engineer, can you tell me how far you can stretch the truth before it loses all characteristics of what truth is?
-
Again, I have no problem with his message, my problem is how he went about it at his place of work and on company’s time; I cannot think of any business employee that would be allowed to do this, particularly when it affects the employer’s bottom line. You did not see MLK purposefully antagonizing anyone, did you? CK went out of his way to insult police officers and most (obviously not all) football fans. His message got mostly lost in the way he delivered it. Nowadays, most talk about CK is about his disrespectful ways and next to nothing about his message.
I did not say or even imply that he should go into politics while he is in the NFL; both are full time positions. There are a number of professional athletes that went into politics and achieved great success including a number of congressmen and senators. Jack Kemp was a congressman and presidential candidate, Byron White went all the way to the Supreme Court, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jesse Ventura went on to become Governors, Former Vikings great Alan Page is currently as Associate Justice on the Minnesota Supreme Court, Dave Bing is the mayor of Detroit and Kevin Johnson is the mayor of Sacramento, former KU great Jim Ryan went on to become a US Congressman like Tom McMillan, Steve Largent and JC Watts juts to name a few. All these people went to much better positions from where to affect real change.
I do respect your opinion and see the points you are making but I just don’t see it the same way.
-
@JayHawkFanToo Yes, MLK did antagonize people. He wasn’t violent about it, but he absolutely antagonized people. Kap did hurt the 49ers bottom line and he was released by the 49ers after the season. His actions did cost him his job.
How does Kap going into politics at least several years into the future help the issue of police brutality in 2016 when did his protest? Kap was also hardly the only athlete to protest police brutality. Many NBA players, including LeBron and other top stars were “Don’t choke me” shirts during warm ups and we’re fined for that and caused a lot of controversy at the time.
Spin it however you want, agree or disagree all you want, Kap’s message would not have nearly as effective or received the attention it did had he done it in a way that the 49ers approved of because that would’ve been an ineffective method that people would’ve forgotten about 3 days later.
Kap knew there were risks to what he chose to do, including losing his job, and he still chose to protest his cause and deal with the consequences of his actions.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 In addition, the boycotts organized by MLK and others were devastating to many white business owners and city bus systems, who sometimes were able to get them declared illegal business interference (the charges leveled against MLK and 89 others in Montgomery). Many organizers faced criminal charges for boycotts. Sounds purposely aggravatin’ to me.
-
Also, MLK was killed by someone who didn’t approve of his protest methods
-
@wissox I’m coming into this a little late- since when did anyone applaud Ray Rice after he sucker punched his wife? Name me one fan…one. The dirty slug will never play another down in the NFL, and should be taken out back, and worked over, imho. I still hate Kaepernick, btw.
-
@KUSTEVE Unfortunately, I wasn’t making this up. https://www.si.com/nfl/2014/07/29/baltimore-ravens-fans-ray-rice-standing-ovation
-
@wissox Wow. You can’t fix that kind of stupid.
-
@KUSTEVE It’s not quite as egregious as that, but after James Worthy got arrested and suspended for being with a prostitute, LA Flakers fans gave him a standing o also. Makes no sense to me except people are so focused on winning that they’ll tolerate anything as long as they got their guy back.
-
@wissox Also why fans don’t care about CTE. It’s all about winning.
-
Particularly when its not your health and lifestyle at risk.
-
Breaking the law is one thing. Disrespecting the American Flay the very Flag so many have died for that gives you the right to burn her is two different things.
You’re trying to compare apples to oranges. Killing someone is one thing. Hitting a woman is one thing. Both should be dealt with. Yet disrespecting a simple flag that represents the very foundation of this country. FREEDOM.
Well then I’m not watching the cat either, and I have no sympathy for him either.
If you want to protest then by all means do so. Yet why? why? disrespect a flag that represents your freedom? Yes our government is corrupt. Yes racism still exists. Yes our courts systems are too corrupt. Yet that flag represents at the end of the day we will do the right thing. That flag represents all colors and races. It represents that in this cruel world a man and woman can get a fair today. Maybe not today or tomorrow. Yet at some point that flags children will demand justice.
Geez so many died for not just that flag but what it represents. To disrespect her is to say you don’t like freedom, and justice.
-
@DoubleDD I would simply say that not everyone feels that the flag represents them very well. You counsel patience. It took the US 78 years after the Constitution to get rid of slavery. It only took 12 years after that for the South to start enacting Jim Crow laws, which took nearly a century to overturn, and which have left a legacy of inequality in housing, economic opportunity, justice, health, and education. That would be roughly 12 generations of blacks who have lived under Old Glory in a country ostensibly founded on freedom but offering millions much less for most of that time. I am guessing the “patience” advice seems kind of hollow by now.
-
DoubleDD said:
Breaking the law is one thing. Disrespecting the American Flay…
I hate Bobby Flay and I don’t care what you say. Plus, he’s really sort of Irish. Immigrants are BAD.
-
@DanR All immigrants. Anywhere, any time. Everyone should have just stayed in Africa 2 million years ago, for crying out loud. And what’s with the Bering Straits bridge in the Ice Age, anyway? Should have had a freakin’ wall. People ruined this hemisphere. The birds and bison would have been very happy being left alone.
-
@DoubleDD I believe the flag is a symbol of the freedom we have and it includes the freedom to do things that would offend many.
I agree with @mayjay wholeheartedly. The flag may mean something different to so many. While the situation has improved for many African Americans, many generations of discrimination has led to the multigenerational poverty that afflicts our country.
-
wake up dude. White people are poor too. And in another decade the whites will be the minority. Will you be singing the same tune? Will then whites get to tap into the affirmative action? I mean after all they will be the minority. So will the whites be able to scream bloody murder because they didn’t get hired for a job because of the color or their skin? You going to be on board?
If you want the American people no matter skin to respect your cause you don’t disrespect the American flag. You just don’t. It doesn’t matter what skin color you are. You just don’t show disrespect to the American flag.
CK made a choice. He decided to disrespect the American flag. And now he’s paying the price. Don’t know why you’re upset with it. He made a choice and the American people made a choice. He decided to disrespect the American flag and the American people decided not to show him any respect.
It’s as simple as that.
-
@DoubleDD That’s an opinion you’ve shared. There’s differing viewpoints on it. I’ll respect yours, your choice whether to respect mine.
-
I think you misunderstand the term “minority”. It doesn’t just mean less people. It’s also reflective of power and access.
For instance, in the colonial days, there were far fewer British people in their colonies, but they were by no means the “minority” because they had the money, the power (both political and military) and the access to things that allowed them to control their own destiny, and the destiny of those they had colonized.
Just because there are less of a particular group, that doesn’t make them a “minority”.
Think about it this way - the super rich are, from a pure numbers standpoint, an extreme minority. However, no one would argue that the super rich are a minority, because they have power, both politically and financially, that the rest of us simply do not have (unless you are also super rich, which, in that case, congratulations). They have the ability to manipulate their finances and taxes (and hire lawyers and accounts to do so) in ways that the rest of us simply cannot. There is a reason that while the tax rate for the super rich is higher, they often end up paying less on a percentage basis, than most anyone else.
Second, you assert that some white people are poor, which is absolutely a true statement. But unless and until the people making the hiring decisions (the vast and overwhelming majority of which are white and male) decide that they are no longer going to hire other white people, your statement is entirely absurd on its face.
The law is enforced in a way that is different. If you rob a convenience store of $500, you might get a couple of years in prison. You can steal 1000 times that amount through fraud or embezzlement, and get the same couple of years in prison. Why? Because we assume that violent crime is more damaging to society, even though embezzling half a million dollars may ruin a company and cause it to go bankrupt, costing dozens of people their jobs. But really, it’s because money is power, and being in a position to embezzle money is an indication of power, so we treat it differently. Knocking off a convenience store requires no societal power. Embezzling half a million dollars does.
Minority status isn’t just about numbers (unless those numbers follow dollar signs).
-
I respect your opinion. Yet CK made a decision and so did the American people. So what’s the problem?
So are you saying the American people are wrong?
In life there is cause an effect. For instance If I go racing around in my car or truck breaking the speed limit. At some point I will get pulled over for speeding. I make think it’s unfair. Yet I will be paying the fine.
Like go around disrespecting the American Flag there will be a back lash. It’s just that simple. Maybe CK has a great cause? Yet whether you or I agree or not. He’s paying the price.
He made a very bad decision, and now he’s paying for it. You see the cause doesn’t give you the right to be disrespectful. CK made is bed and now he has to sleep in it.
-
Well um first off in the colonies they were all British. It was only later after the colonies decided to create their own country because the King of Britain wouldn’t give in to their request for proper representation. That America began the process of slavery and immigration.
You associate being rich with being white skin. When in fact that is far from the truth. When in fact the 1% as you speak of are mostly if not all Muslin or Jewish. Speaking world wide of course.
You will also find that when if comes to America’s wealthiest or Rich. You’ll find that a big majority of them are self made millionaires. Meaning they didn’t inherit the farm sort of speak. They started with little and made much. I’m not sure why this a bad thing? Plus it not just a so called white thing. Oprah started with nothing is now considered one of the richest woman in the world. Jordan farts and he makes money. Whoopi Goldberg started with nothing. Reggie Fowler: Minority Owner, Minnesota Vikings. Kirbyjon Caldwell: Limited Partner, Houston Texans Serena & Venus Williams: Limited Partners, Miami Dolphins. It goes on and on. Success has nothing to do with color. Success and wealth has to do with drive and determination.
You see rigging the system never works. You pound the drum that the system isn’t fair to minorities because you believe they don’t get a fair shake and are poor. Yet you gloss over the real facts. That their are more poor white people in the US than any other race. There are more poor white people in welfare than any other race. These are just facts.
Plus I would add one more thing. You speak as your trying to create equality? Yet when you rig the system in such a way that a person gets a leg up on others because of the color of their skin. Then you my friend are creating racism.
I was once passed over for a nice paying job with great benefits. I was competing against another fellow who was quite nice. My resume of experience was far superior. I didn’t get the job because the company had to hire a minority to make the numbers right, and of course I was white. I didn’t hold it against the man. In fact I became good friends with him. To this day when we are cracking open some brews. He feels bad. You know why? because he didn’t earn it. He got the job because the color of his skin. Well that’s what he tells me.
Special treatment is not what Martin Lurther King wanted or fought for. So many just want to give handouts or make special allowances for the color of one skin. In the end all you do is create ill feelings.
-
I tried to find your definition of minority? I couldn’t find it anywhere. This was all I could find.
mi·nor·i·ty [məˈnôrədē]
NOUN the smaller number or part, especially a number that is less than half the whole number: “harsher measures for the minority of really serious offenders” · [more] the number of votes cast for or by the smaller party in a legislative assembly: “a blocking minority of 23 votes” a relatively small group of people, especially one commonly discriminated against in a community, society, or nation, differing from others in race, religion, language, or political persuasion: “representatives of ethnic minorities” · [more] the state or period of being under the age of full legal responsibility.
Maybe you can direct me to a website that has your definition of a minority?
-
@DoubleDD Did you miss this part?
“especially one commonly discriminated against in a community, society, or nation”
If the demographic projections are true, whites will still be the largest single racial group for quite some time, some 46%:
"Minorities, classified as those of any race other than non-Hispanic, single-race whites, currently constitute about a third of the U.S. population, according to Census figures. But by 2042, they are projected to become the majority, making up more than half the population. By 2050, 54 percent of the population will be minorities.
"Minority children are projected to reach that milestone even sooner. By 2023, the bureau said, more than half of all children will be minorities…
"The projections are based on Census 2000 results and assumptions about future childbearing, mortality rates and net international migration, the bureau said.
"The group predicted to post the most dramatic gain is the Hispanic population. It is projected to nearly triple, from 46.7 million to 132.8 million, from 2008 through 2050, the bureau said. Its share of the total U.S. population is expected to double from 15 to 30 percent. “Thus, one in three U.S. residents would be Hispanic,” the Census Bureau said in a news release.
"The African-American population is projected to increase from 41.1 million to 65.7 million by 2050, going from 14 percent of the U.S. population to 15 percent. The Asian-American population is expected to increase from 15.5 million to 40.6 million, or from 5.1 percent to 9.2 percent of the population.
“Among the remaining races, the bureau said, American Indians and Alaska natives are projected to increase from 3.9 million to 8.6 million, going from 1.6 percent to 2 percent of the U.S. population. Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders are expected to more than double, increasing from 1.1 to 2.6 million.”
I don’t think you have to worry about being rounded up into camps or anything.
-
Why would I need to worry about being rounded up into camps? To many associate the term minority with one’s skin color, and that’s just not the case. One of many points I was making in my ramblings. Also I don’t put a lot of stock in assumptions and projections from our Government. I mean the CBO is like the biggest joke. It’s laughable to see so many tout it like it’s some kind of Holy Bible. Especially when it’s never even been remotely correct on anything.
I’m not trying to stop CK from protesting or standing up for what he believes. Hey this is America. Yet just because you have the right of freedom of speech doesn’t mean there could be a repercussion for what one says, or does. So many forget that aspect. They want to spout off at the mouth and then hide behind the 1st amendment right. For instance if I walk into a bar and pick a fight with the biggest dude in said bar. Well there’s a good chance I’m going to get a reaction that I might not like.
Bottom line CK made a choice to disrespect the American Flag. Whether right or wrong as the debate seems to be. The American people made a choice not to respect CK. That’s just the way it is. CK has nobody to blame but himself.
Cause and effect.
-
Look up the term “social minority”.
Here, from Dictionary.com
noun, plural minorities.
- the smaller part or number; a number, part, or amount forming less than half of the whole.
- a smaller party or group opposed to a majority, as in voting or other action.
- a group in society distinguished from, and less dominant than, the more numerous majority: The ethnic minority was disproportionately affected by the reduction in preventative medical services.
- a racial, ethnic, religious, or social subdivision of a society that is subordinate to the dominant group in political, financial, or social power without regard to the size of these groups: legislation aimed at providing equal rights for minorities.
- a member of such a group.
- the state or period of being under the legal age of full responsibility. adjective
- of or relating to a minority.
Look at definitions 4 and 5.
- a racial, ethnic, religious, or social subdivision of a society that is subordinate to the dominant group in political, financial, or social power without regard to the size of these groups: legislation aimed at providing equal rights for minorities.
- a member of such a group.
That’s almost verbatim what I was talking about.
Second, I never said that being white equated to being rich, or being non-white equated to not being rich. Certainly, there are rich minorities. Certainly, there are whites that are not rich.
You pointed to welfare, and I am glad that you acknowledge the fact that there are more whites on welfare than any other race. Yet, when you hear people discuss cutting welfare politically, they always talk about “inner city welfare queens taking advantage of the system.” The implication is clear - poor minorities abuse the social safety net system, while poor whites are just hard working people that need some help. Why is that? Why is there the connotation that poor minorities abuse the system while poor whites are just unlucky?
It seems like every time a minority athlete takes a social stand, there’s an outcry that they need to just “shut up and play the game” because “nobody is interested in their opinions”, hearkening back to the days of minstrel shows, where black people specifically were mocked for being lazy, stupid, and comic relief, existing only for the entertainment of whites.
Let me be clear when I say that I am absolutely NOT accusing you or anyone on this board of that type of attitude. I am simply pointing to the history and using it as both a guide and as a warning. Saying that an athlete should keep their opinions to themselves draws on that history - that the black performer is here only for entertainment, not to speak and have an opinion as a human being.
Again, I want to be clear. I do not want anyone here to think I am making an accusation about anyone’s opinions or attitudes. I am just pointing out the historical parallels.
Again, we are talking about biases that are built into society. There are lots of studies that suggest that even a “black” or “hispanic” sounding name is more commonly associated with violence or anger than a “white” sounding name. These are societal biases.
I wrote about implicit bias a few weeks ago. Its the bias that all of us have. It’s the thing that makes us believe that things that are “blue” are cooler, while things that are “red” are warmer. It’s the thing that makes us associate a pink balloon with a girl and a blue balloon with a boy. We don’t even think about these things because they are built into our societal understanding. We associate big with strong and small with weak. We associate physical height with leadership. We associate things higher up on a shelf or list with status, importance and value (that’s why cheap cereal is on the bottom shelves, while the more expensive cereal is on the top).
It’s how we sort through information - we categorize it with implicit bias without even really thinking. Most of the time, its harmless. Sometimes, it can lead to mistakes - you may overvalue something simply because it was placed higher on a shelf or list. Other times, it can lead to misjudging a person or group when the implicit bias leads to judgments based not on fact, but on biases we don’t even realize are at work.
Racism, obviously is an overt expression of hatred related to bias. It’s a decision. I’m more worried about the negative connotations associated with implicit bias that lead to inequality. But of course, the first step is to get everyone to understand that this even exists.
-
I guess I just see things a bit differently. When I look across the land scape I see all people suffering. I just don’t see it as a skin color thing.
Now there are things I can and would get on board with. Like the disparity in public school funding. That’s a big pet peeve of mine. Some would say I was unlucky but I got to see both side of the fence growing up in KC. It’s just not right. You see I agree there are things we can and should do.
However if all we are focusing in on is skin color, then we are just spinning our wheels. At the end of the day it’s about equality, not special rights for certain people.
As for CK I have no problem with him trying to use his platform as a football player to voice his opinion or shine a light on something he feels is an injustice. I just disagree with who he did it. My friend so many people have died for the American flag. Not social issues or political parties, but for freedom. That flag has never hurt anybody. That Flag represents the greatest nation the world as ever seen.
No America is not perfect. Yet no country has ever been free like Americans. No country has ever allowed it’s citizens from meager beginnings to become rich like America.
When we set up parameters trying to create a certain mix of races so we can sleep feeling good about ourselves. We’ve created nothing, but racism. We should allow the best and brightest to rise to the top. In the end it’s better for the country and it’s citizens.
Prime example is some of the Ivy schools make it harder for Asian students to attend their prestige schools. Reason being they are too smart, too motivated. The theory is mesh or have a certain balance of skin color. Really?
No I say the biggest thing we can do is to offer all the tools to our youth we can to be successful, and then turn them loose. Don’t look at skin color. Look at the person and their heart.
If we keep focusing on how different we are, we will never see how much the same we are.
I’m blessed in that I’ve walked many paths in my life time. I’ve gotten to see both sides of the tracks if you will. And I’m telling you when you give certain advantages to someone because of their skin color? All you doing is creating more racism.
-
-
@DoubleDD You a frequent visitor to the website at the end of the Mork video?
-
Nah, Just like the video.
-
More and more coverage of Colin after the Dolphins pass on him and sign Cutler. You know I think his protest to the flag has little to do with his not being signed. I just read post on facebook a couple days ago that he turned down a million dollar for a year offer from Seattle, sounds like he wants big bucks for a back up in most situations. I personally can’t blame Miami because of his comments on Castro, he would be booed for that above nothing else with a lot of Cubans living in that area. If I’m an owner I’m less likely to sign him because of the Castro comments (have no idea how people could defend him based off his comments on a dictator and murder, don’t send your kids to Nevada for college), the pigs socks and anti cops statements and his GF running her mouth constantly on twitter, if he just protested the flag i think he has a job right now.
-
I have read the same thing. Here is a link with related information. Essentially all the information has also been publicized by other outlets so appears to be true; the link provides a good summary of where things stand.
-
@kjayhawks With the baggage Kaep brings to the jobsite it’s just a poor strategic business decision to put him on your roster. Fans pay the bills & salaries & his actions & words alienate too many in different ways. Personally IDT he even wants to play, he just wants to be a statesman known for ideology. We were all young once, but sometimes you have to pay your own bills so things evolve for most.
-
All but a handful of backup QBs in the NFL earn more than the $900,000 veterans minimum that CK was offered. Offering him the veterans minimum would be the equivalent to offering an experienced person in your field an entry level salary. Yeah, a million dollar offer sounds like a lot, but every starter in the league except Dak Prescott (rookie deal) makes more than that, as well as Matt Barkley, Ryan Mallett, Mark Sanchez, Scott Tolzien, DeShone Kizer, Christian Hackenberg, Dan Orlovsky, Josh Johnson, Luke McCown, Ryan Griffin, Brandon Weeden, Landry Jones, Colt McCoy, Chase Richardson, Drew Stanton, Mitch Frazier, Kellen Clemens and Chad Henne, among others.*
Simply put, even mediocre QBs in the NFL make more than what CK was offered. Only guys on rookie deals make less. Why should CK take less than many backups would make? If I offered anyone on this board less than their subordinates made, it would be turned down, and it wouldn’t be to create a media frenzy.
- I made up two of the names in that list. I wonder how many people noticed…
-
The amount offered is the minimum for an 8 year veteran. Keep in mind tha CK lost the starting job to Blaine Gabbert, one of the bigger busts in the NFL, so how good is he anymore?
You pay an employee based on what he/she brings to the table; he brings a set of diminishing skills and a whole lot of negatives and creates a distraction that no coach would want to have and a team would have to be desperate to consider.
-
I’m glad you brought up Blaine Gabbert in comparison to Colin Kaepernick.
Gabbert’s QB rating last year was 68.4 in 6 (5 starts) games.
Kaepernick’s was 90.7 in 12 (11 starts) games.
Kaepernick had a higher completion percentage, more yards per attempt, a better TD/Int ration (4 to 1 for CK, 1/1.17 for BG).
Going to the advanced stats, Kaepernick was higher in Yards per attempt + (100 is average for all of these) with a 90-66 advantage. CK also had an 80-70 edge in net yards per attempt, 102-65 in average yards per attempt, 95-67 in average net yards per attempt, 85-76 in completion percentage plus, 105-84 in TD percentage plus, 120-74 in Int percentage plus and 101-68 in Rate plus.
Gabbert holds a 96-66 advantage in Sack percentage plus.
I look at all of those numbers and determine that Colin Kaepernick was, at worst, a fairly average quarterback last season. I look at those same numbers and determine that Blaine Gabbert was very much below average last year.
So Blaine Gabbert gets the veterans minimum because he was very decidedly below average last year. The numbers dictate that Gabbert is a backup at best.
Kaepernick was not. He was average or even above. He could very well be a starter. He was 23rd by QBR last year. That means there are 9 guys starting this year that were worse than he was last year at a minimum.
This article shows every free agent QB over the last several years (from fivethirtyeight.com). You see that CK is the best QB to go unsigned for this long after a performance like he had last year.
If this were about football, CK would have been signed months ago, and likely would be starting for the Rams, Bills, Broncos, Jets, Texans, Jaguars or 49ers. This is not about football.
As bad as some of those team’s QB situations are, they are beyond desperate - look at the QBs they will start instead. Those guys are terrible. They should be pleading with CK to come play for them. Instead, they are silent, which makes it pretty clear that there’s an informal agreement not to sign CK.
-
I think you’re overlooking or looking past a few points of Truth.
-
CK doesn’t have a job. I’m sorry but he’s done nothing on the football field that affords him the right going around demanding a certain amount for his services.
-
The NFL is just as much a brand as it is a sport. To stay in business you have to protect that brand.
Whether you think CK is a fine OB or not, he brings a lot of baggage to the table. An owner would have to weigh the risk of CK versus protecting his team’s brand.
The BG point is a fine example. You showed us the numbers that CK was in fact the better QB. Yet the 49ers chose BG. Now why is that? Is it because the 49ers are racist? No It’s because CK has made himself tainted with off the field comments, and on field antics.
People don’t watch football to see what some guy thinks about BLM, or racism. We watch because we played the game at one time and enjoy watching the game being played by others.
As a huge fan of the NFL. I would absolutely get tried of a QB like CK playing for my team. At some point shut up and play the game.
-
-
That’s a fine point you make. But the thing is, the NFL owners are, to a large degree, trying to claim this is a football talent issue. A lot of fans are too. You are not trying to make that point, but many are, so I laid out the points that refute that. I even made that point (or tried to) in my own post by saying:
If this were about football, CK would have been signed months ago, and likely would be starting for the Rams, Bills, Broncos, Jets, Texans, Jaguars or 49ers. This is not about football.
The thing is, the NFL doesn’t want to admit that this is about Kaepernick taking a public stand that they happen to not agree with. They want it to be about football. They need it to be about football.
If it’s not about football, the NFL has just entered some very ugly territory:
Drunk driving (a crime by the way) is okay. You can get re-signed as long as you can produce.
Domestic violence (also a crime) is also okay, so long as you produce you will have a spot in the league.
Protesting how minorities are treated by cops - not okay, we will blackball you out of the league.
And that’s a problem in a sport where almost 70% of the league is black. Maybe it doesn’t matter to most fans what the players think about BLM or racism, but as a black man in this country, I know that matters to me every single day.
-
I respectfully disagree. There are multiple factors taken into considerations when you want to hire some one to do a certain job and what he does on the field is by no means the only one.
As an employer I can tell you that when hiring someone you look at how qualified that person is for the job? how is that person going to represent your firm when he interfaces with clients? How is he going to get along with other employees? Is he going to get you more clients or lose you existing clients? and most importantly of all…is he going to make you or lose you money.
Obviously some positions, such as secretaries, are what we call overhead and are not expected to produce revenue. In football positions such as equipment managers, office personnel and the proverbial water boy do not make you money directly but are an integral part of a successful organizations. Players on the other hand are directly responsible for putting butts on seats since fans pay good money to see them perform; likewise, a player that causes fans to stay away is effectively causing a loss of income.
I don’t care what the owners say, they are obviously constrained by political correctness and have to give the political correct answer. The bottom line is that owners see fans staying away if CK is hired and no responsible business person in his right mind would purposefully hire some one that will negatively affect the bottom line. In CK’s case, the negatives greatly outweigh the positives. If it was a Tom Brady or a Russel Wilson or an Aaron Rogers or a Cam Newton, I could see owners taking a chance, but for a marginal, on his way down QB, no way.
LeBron James famously said: “The first time I stepped on an NBA court, I became a businessman.” For the players, football is a business not a cause and likewise, the owners are businessmen and they are not in it to lose money. There is plenty of evidence that CK caused the 49ers and the League at large to loose a great deal of money; they will not make that mistake again.
In my opinion, if CK would have made his statement on his own time and not at his employer’s place of business and not being so antagonistic and alienating people, the result would have been quite different. Yes,the effect would have been smaller but which one is better? a large but mostly negative effect or a smaller but mostly positive effect? I would think that most unbiased observers would pick the second as the better outcome, I know I would.
-
CK needs to make up his mind on what he wants to do. Play football or be a political activists.
I’m not sure why we should point the blame on the owners? Look last year the numbers of watching viewers of the NFL game went down for the first time in forever. You can bet the NFL brass noticed and investigated on why. The results and polls showed that the average watching football person got tired of the disrespect of the American Flag and constant attention CK was getting pushing his political agenda.
We can debate whether kneeling down is disrespecting the flag, or what the flag really means? We can also argue If CK has a the right to use the NFL press to push his agenda. Yet at the end of the day the American people got tired of it and stopped watching. That is just how it is.
CK can make a fine living being a political activist. Give paid speeches, right a few books, and start a few for profit organizations. Life would be good for him.
So lets stop bashing the NFL. Nobody in their right mind wouldn’t be cautious about hiring CK. If you didn’t then you don’t care about making money. And lets stop acting like CK is some star QB in the NFL. He’s not. He should be thankful that someone offered him a chance to still play the NFL game.
-
Again, you are comparing CK to Blaine Gabbert, one of the bigger bust of all time as rated by many publications like this, and this, and this and I could go on.
You are not doing CK any favors and setting the bar almost close to the ground by saying he is better than Gabbert, who actually took the starting job from CK at San Francisco before he proceeded to stink up the place. Neither one is now a decent QB and unless he is locked on an existing contract, neither should be getting starting QB salary on a new contract.
-
@JayHawkFanToo I’m just guessing your secretary, part of your overhead, is a female too.
-
If you look at my post, you will see that while I compared him to Gabbert, I pointed out the numbers CK posted.
Here are CK’s leaguewide rankings in several different passing categories (there are 32 starting spots in the league):
Completion% - 26th
TD% - 13th
INT% - 6th
Yard per attempt - 23rd
Average yards per attempt - 16th
Yards per completion - 17th
Rating - 17th
QBR - 23rd
Kaepernick ranks in the middle a lot, and even shows up in the top 10 once. He is legitimately better than probably half a dozen STARTING QBs in the league right now at a minimum.
I’m not disagreeing with you at all when you say the league is considering “other factors” in evaluating CK. Let’s just not push under the rug the fact that CK is physically capable of playing in the NFL right now, but the “other factors” are preventing that. Heck, I’m not even arguing the merits of whether those other factors should keep him out of the league. What I’m saying is the NFL needs to fess up that it is the “other factors” and not skill level because the statistical data is showing that it’s not production. Go look up the QB depth charts for Cleveland, Denver, Jacksonville, Los Angeles and Buffalo, the look at the stats and tell me there’s a football talent reason why those teams wouldn’t be better off with CK under center.
Once we agree that there’s not a football reason, we can move to the truth, which you have already hinted at - that CK is not employed for “other reasons.”
-
I am not sure what point you are trying to make; I have had both male and female secretaries.
-
Ok, so let’s assume that he is better than 6 starting QBs, it would place him in the bottom 20%, not exactly a ringing endorsement.
If you think an owner would come out and say we will not take CK because he is just bad for business then I have some Florida water front property I can sell you. Any owner that says this would be crucified by the liberal MSM and labeled a racist even when it would be a sound business decision…and the NFL IS a business. Nobody that has made enough money to own a NFL franchise is that stupid.
