|
Post by nighttimer on Sept 29, 2017 21:16:37 GMT -5
I think Rob's claim that Kaepernik isn't being signed because he's a lightning rod for controversy has kind of been eclipsed by recent events, since it seems like half the NFL is now a lightning rod for controversy. But I think originally, yes, he was definitely being punished. It wasn't just "Oh, he's so controversial, we don't want the bad PR." See: apparently non-controversial NFL players who torture dogs and beat their girlfriends. You've referenced Vick and I think that is a good comparison to some degree, but maybe not in the way you are supposing. When Vick plead guilty to the dogfighting stuff, the NFL suspended him indefinitely and his sponsors all deserted him. The Falcons forced Vick to pay back millions (almost $20 millon in fact) from his signing bonus, then ultimately released him outright, as opposed to trading him, because no other teams wanted the rights to him. It's true that the Eagles ultimately rolled the dice and signed Vick to a one-year deal when he got out of jail (after Goodell reinstated him), but I recall them catching a lot of heat for that (so did Goodell). So let's not pretend that Vick was "non-controversial," that his illegal activities were simply ignored and that NFL owners and managers were willing to sign him without a second thought. Of course, what Vick did was illegal; not so for Kaepernick. But then Kaepernick hasn't been suspended or the like, either. Still, Kaepernick is also not the player Vick was (and never will be). So that's necessarily a part of the calculation, as well. Hey, I don't have a vested interest here. I have no problem with Kaepernick playing. But I'm not the one who has to deal with any consequences that may arise from that; I'm not the one tasked with signing players for an NFL team. So, what you're saying is you have no problem with Kaepernick playing BUT if you had the ear of someone who is tasked with signing players for an NFL team, you'd tell them what? You're going to have to deal with the consequences that may arise from that? What consequences? The consequences that came for Dallas by signing Greg Hardy? The consequences that came for Baltimore for initially defending Ray Rice and continuing to defend Ray Lewis? The consequences that came for Cincinnati when they signed Joe Mixon? Colin Kaepernick has beaten no women like Hardy and Mixon and Rice and stabbed no one (allegedly) like Rice or killed any dogs like Mike Vick. Memo to all those Angry White Men out there burning your NFL gear because players took a knee or linked arms. You're all a bunch of whiny pussies. If you didn't burn the jerseys of all the women beaters, drug addicts, gang bangers, thugs, drunk drivers, and straight up idiots who have put on your team's colors and run around on the field, you're a fucking hypocrite. But, you're right about one thing, robeiae. Kaepernick is NOT the player Vick was (and never will be) and I bet he's pretty goddamned happy about that. Kap has killed no dogs and Vick has never taken a team to a Super Bowl. He was an exciting quarterback, but based upon what he did with his feet as much as his arm. Advantage: Kaepernick. it could really be that many teams have no issue with him, would take him otherwise, but don't want their ticket sales to plummet. It's a business decision. Think of that what you will. Or, I should say, that plays into it at the least. Exactly. There are multiple concerns, I think. And again, it's certainly plausible that a need for "punishment" is one of those concerns in some cases. But apart from ticket sales, there's also whether or not a given team has any use for Kaepernick's services. Some certainly don't. For those that might, things like fan response and ticket sales are possible concerns, along with what the GMs and coaches think about Kaepernick, what his talent level is, how he would fit in to what they want to do, and so on. So again, imo a calculation is being made here and it's not working out for Kaepernick right now. That could of course change at any moment. But it won't. It hasn't yet and it won't. That's how blackballing a player works.
|
|
|
Post by Don on Sept 30, 2017 7:02:25 GMT -5
Based on personal observation, the NFL has long been a gateway drug to getting one's ass shot at in some exotic land. It promotes the values necessary for good cannon fodde, and the militarism on display makes me want to puke. I know because there are a shitload of military and ex-military thugs on both sides of my family, all rabid football fans you'd think were the team quarterbacks, and their thuggishness is on full display over this incident. Quite frankly, they act and sound precisely like the "precious snowflakes" they were deriding on the left not many moons ago. There is no room for discussion; you're either with them or against them, and the only narrative possible is the one they claim is the truth.
We now live in a nation of six-year-olds, and I'm sick and tired of being one of the few adults in the room.
I'm glad we have our own safe space for adults here. Rational discussion outside this forum is getting harder to find every day.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Oct 1, 2017 20:15:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Oct 3, 2017 7:55:21 GMT -5
A review of the week four "protests" by NFL teams: www.nytimes.com/2017/10/01/sports/nfl-trump-anthem.htmlOf all the actions taken, I think the path chosen by the Steelers and Ravens (and Jaguars) was positively the worst: How wishy-washy. As to Kaepernick, I noted yesterday in a conversation with friends down here--Dolphin fans, all--that the Dolphins should try to sign Kaepernick, because Cutler ain't cuttin' it (to no one's surprise) and at this point, there's not much of a downside, since the heat has shifted to the league in general. Which I guess raises another question: would Kaepernick even want to sign with a new team under the current circumstances, wherein his cause has kinda been swallowed up by the league as a whole, with many people less interested--imo--in Kaepernick's actual motives and more interested in a) getting on the bandwagon or b) covering their own asses.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Oct 3, 2017 8:12:56 GMT -5
This is interesting, especially the very first chart (imo): fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-every-nfl-teams-fans-lean-politically/The first chart suggests the following order for sports, from favored by Dems to favored by Repubs: NBA-most popular in Democrat markets MLB NHL NFL NCAA Basketball NASCAR NCAA Football-most popular in Republican markets I suppose it's probably just a function of geography, at the end of the day. But it makes for an interesting graphic.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Oct 3, 2017 8:17:29 GMT -5
I think the real mystery is which side watches more WNBA. *
*and by mystery, of course I mean probably extremely guessable
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Oct 3, 2017 14:37:29 GMT -5
A review of the week four "protests" by NFL teams: www.nytimes.com/2017/10/01/sports/nfl-trump-anthem.htmlOf all the actions taken, I think the path chosen by the Steelers and Ravens (and Jaguars) was positively the worst: How wishy-washy. As to Kaepernick, I noted yesterday in a conversation with friends down here--Dolphin fans, all--that the Dolphins should try to sign Kaepernick, because Cutler ain't cuttin' it (to no one's surprise) and at this point, there's not much of a downside, since the heat has shifted to the league in general. Which I guess raises another question: would Kaepernick even want to sign with a new team under the current circumstances, wherein his cause has kinda been swallowed up by the league as a whole, with many people less interested--imo--in Kaepernick's actual motives and more interested in a) getting on the bandwagon or b) covering their own asses. As I have said before, but will say again: Kaepernick says he wants to play.
Here we are four weeks into the NFL season and quarterbacks have been benched in Houston and Chicago or injured in Tennessee and Oakland, but Brandon Weeden, a former Number One draft pick/scrub who busted out with the Browns, Cowboys and Texans was signed to a guaranteed contract by the Titans. Meanwhile, Kaepernick waits for a call that isn't coming.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Oct 8, 2017 12:49:21 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2017 13:06:50 GMT -5
I hope that is NOT true, because if it is, IMO it would considerably dilute Kaepernick's protest, turning it, in many people's eyes, into a "what I'm really protesting is not being picked up by a team." That said? I have some serious doubts that it IS true. The Washington Examiner is very partisan and not on my list of trusted news sources. (Yes, they carry some real news. But the slant is very obvious, and they are quick to report anti-left stories based on "reports." Both sides have news sources like this. And of course, any news outlet can be a bit too quick to rely on a "report." Skepticism is a good thing to have these days when looking at news. I'm much more inclined to believe when I see direct quotes and specific, sourced details.) We seem to have no direct quote from Kaepernick, and I haven't heard he's confirmed what this reporter claims. I looked around to see what CBS said about this, since allegedly it is a CBS reporter who is claiming this. All I've found so far is a removed page where an article about it once was. www.cbsnews.com/news/colin-kaepernick-national-anthem-protest-nfl-free-agent-interview/I'm open to believing it's true, if it comes from a solid source with confirmation.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Oct 8, 2017 13:09:09 GMT -5
Yeah, I don't know it's true yet. If it is, it doesn't diminish what he originally protested for. This is his livelihood and has the right to rethink how he's doing things.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2017 13:20:16 GMT -5
Yeah, I don't know it's true yet. If it is, it doesn't diminish what he originally protested for. This is his livelihood and has the right to rethink how he's doing things. Certainly he has that right. Of course. But it would diminish his protest just the same (if true, which I doubt). If I say I'm not going to ride the subway until DeBlasio does something about the homeless problem in NYC, but then say, "well, I'll start riding the subway again if I get that awesome job," the message is that I'm willing to toss my protest aside for my own benefit, which in turn conveys (truly or not) that I wasn't all that committed about my protest to begin with. Or if I go on a hunger strike for some cause, but then say "tell you what, I'll eat if you take me to that fancy restaurant." This impression would be furthered because probably the reason he doesn't have a slot on an NFL team already is because of this protest. So to abandon the protest to get that slot absolutely says "yeah, this gesture wasn't worth it." Of course, he might, with a proper gesture and explanation, do something about that impression. But for me not to be a bit disappointed with him, he'll have to do so. Perhaps he could say he feels his protest has already served its purpose, or that another gesture would serve his purpose better. (Except, well, if that's the case, why not start standing now? Why "I'll stand if someone hires me"?) BUT, as I said, I am pretty skeptical that he said this to begin with. We'll see, I'm sure. I'd like to seem him to get a spot on a team -- but I'd rather he did it without abandoning his protest. ETA: Here's my guess, based on CBS's retracted story. We'll see if I'm right. I am betting La Canfora misunderstood or miscontrued a statement Kaepernick made and CBS rushed to report it. When Kaepernick saw the reports, he called La Canfora/CBS and denied it. CBS retracted it and has not yet updated to say so. But meanwhile, other outlets picked up the story and ran with it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2017 13:32:42 GMT -5
To note, Colin Kaepernick just retweeted this a few minutes ago:
and this:
and this:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2017 13:37:38 GMT -5
Aaaaaaannnnnd ---
It looks like La Canfora didn't claim this. He didn't discuss it with Kaepernick at all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2017 14:46:24 GMT -5
Aaaaaand...
The Associated Press is backpedaling madly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2017 14:51:24 GMT -5
Here's the trouble, of course. A shit ton of people have seen the "Kaepernick will dump his protest if an NFL team picks him up" story splattered all over twenty different outlets. It plays directly into a narrative on the right that Kaepernick's protest was really about him not getting on a team, thus making his protest selfish and unpatriotic. They will pay no attention at all to the retractions, if they even see them.
Kaepernick denying them will do no good unless an NFL team picks him up AND he continues his protest. If a team doesn't pick him up, the people burning jerseys will continue to sneer and say his protest was all about him.
The trouble is, it's way too easy to jump on reports like these without stopping to think about whether they're confirmed or have a good basis. I checked it out because I'm that kind of person, and because my own predisposition about this story was to not believe it. Most people won't.
ETA:
And of course, this further fuels the partisan divide and the increasing tendency of many to believe one cannot trust ANYTHING.
Stupidest. Culture war. Ever.
|
|