Colin Kaepernick files Collusion Grievence

My sense is that there has been no collusion against Kaepernick, and he'll have a tough time proving otherwise.

He is an okay QB. Definitely better than some guys who have jobs in the league, but at the same time he's no star. I'd say he'd be like either a lousy starter or an above-average backup in the league right now. So it's not like he's going to lead some team to the Super Bowl. 

I think decisions have been made at the individual-team level to go in different directions with their QB situation. Like, okay Kaepernick may be better than Joe Schmoe on a purely football basis, but signing Kaepernick would bring a level distraction, so net-net, Joe Schmoe is a better choice for us. I don't think any such team-level decision is illegal. 

ml1 said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

If someone running a business doesn’t want their business used as a platform for a message, any message, that’s their... business.

I don't know if he's correct, but Jeffrey Toobin just made the statement on CNN that the NFL's collective bargaining agreement with the players' association doesn't allow owners to cut players due to their political statements.  That would seem to extend to players looking to be signed as well.

that said, I don't see how proof of collusion can possibly be shown.  anyone who follows the NFL surely knows that Kaepernick is still unsigned because of his protest.  And it wouldn't surprise me that owners have talked to each other about blackballing him.  But that's not proof.

You’re 100% right in the case of a contract- private parties (or their reps in this case) having a legally binding agreement. I should have been clear I was speaking broadly. As to whether any agreement plays here, that’s why we have civil courts.

I disagree with Kapernick. But. And this is a very uneducated “but”. Before all this nonsense, when he was a good player, I remember reading one of the very few sports articles I read in a year and coming away with a positive view of the guy. A guy who loves his family, has deep faith, and seems to be decent in his personal life. 

Those characteristics used to be table stakes for discussing the relative character of an individual. Today they seem as though they’re noteworthy. 

They’re probably not, but stories of “good son shovels parent’s driveway, reads a good book, and goes to bed early after talking to a team mate who is having a bad day” aren’t newsworthy.

Still think he’s wrong. 

I doubt it applies to on the job words and gestures.  When you're "on the clock" (in any job), you don't have a free hand to make political statements that the boss deems detrimental to the business. Again, I don't care about the anthem but I don't think a player has any more right, much less a 1st Am. right, to protest on work time than Odell had a right to get down on all fours in the end zone and pretend he was a peeing dog.   The owners control "speech" in all kinds of ways including what you can and cannot wear during game time and how you can and cannot celebrate on the field.     

ml1 said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

If someone running a business doesn’t want their business used as a platform for a message, any message, that’s their... business.

I don't know if he's correct, but Jeffrey Toobin just made the statement on CNN that the NFL's collective bargaining agreement with the players' association doesn't allow owners to cut players due to their political statements.  That would seem to extend to players looking to be signed as well.

that said, I don't see how proof of collusion can possibly be shown.  anyone who follows the NFL surely knows that Kaepernick is still unsigned because of his protest.  And it wouldn't surprise me that owners have talked to each other about blackballing him.  But that's not proof.

ml1 said:

EricBurbank said:

Yeah drummerboy, I know how I dare I mention that they were black males.

If you're going to dare mention their race, you really should also mention why you think it's relevant. 

I'll take a shot 

I think it's relevant for Eric because he's working on perfecting his racist vocabulary. Of course he'd prefer not to be called a racist while he is advancing racist ideas, preferring instead to imagine that he's simply transmitting information. For Eric, the Black guys that stole loose change from his car are connected to Black guys who take a knee before professional football games. The loose change thieves aren't just thieves- they are Black thieves and for Eric that is important to note. Their Blackness is connected to their actions and for Eric they become representative of thieves in general. For Eric mentioning their race re asserts his rights and his power (and understandably takes some of the sting out of being violated) but more importantly it also reminds like-minded racists that Black=thief. 

The football players represent a problem because they're demanding respect and the right to express themselves. Eric, like many others seems to think that marginalized people- Black men in this instance- should be grateful to be employed (after all they could be breaking into parked cars for loose change.) These ungrateful millionaires should thank their lucky stars to live in a country that has 'allowed' them to earn millions of dollars- in spite of their Blackness. By taking the time to point out that the protest taken on by Kaepernick 'probably' violated NFL rules and then wondering why he wasn't disciplined earlier, Eric clumsily connects the yet to be disciplined loose change thieves and the quarterback by linking them through their race, lawlessness and lack of punishment. For Eric the protesting players are thieves too, ungrateful thieves who take millions and still go unpunished for the crime of not being grateful to their benefactors. He then calls for a return to law and order. 

I have been to many football games for years.  Many fans paid no attention to the anthem.  Many were on line for beer, hot dogs, etc.  Many were walking to their seats, many in the bathroom and many just did not pay attention.  One black person kneels during the anthem and suddenly it is a big deal that someone did not stand at attention for the anthem.  How many people stand in front of their TV when the anthem was playing?  or do most just sit there eating nachos and having a beer. 

And Eric Burbank, do you think the white players should be just as grateful for the opportunity because you come across making it sound like black players need to be more grateful for the opportunity.  Basically you sound like a racist.  

Smedley said:

My sense is that there has been no collusion against Kaepernick, and he'll have a tough time proving otherwise.

Same here.

I think owners don't want to pick him up because he's controversial with the possibility of upsetting fans and hurting the bottom line. Even some owner saying that to another may not make it collusion.

I just think this not mentioning race when committing a crime is a bunch of BS. As I stated before is it really going to help catch a criminal if you can only say the guy "sorry" person because we shouldn't refer to the gender has a t-shirt and jeans. I watch news channels state that you should call if you see this person that robbed and raped someone with just a clothing description, no height, weight or race etc. It can narrow down the culprit if we knew they were white, brown, black, yellow, red or green if they were the M&M guy's.

BG9 said:

Smedley said:

My sense is that there has been no collusion against Kaepernick, and he'll have a tough time proving otherwise.

Same here.

I think owners don't want to pick him up because he's controversial with the possibility of upsetting fans and hurting the bottom line. Even some owner saying that to another may not make it collusion.

I would be willing to bet owners have discussed the issue with each other -- the question is does it rise to the level of collusion?  Not sure but would not surprise me.   It would take someone like Al Davis to rise up against them.  Now that the charges are out there, I wonder if  a team that is going nowhere that loses their starting QB signs him just to make the lawsuit go away.  NFL does not need more bad publicity.  

he was a lot better than mediocre for a terrible SF team last year.  He threw 16 TDs and only 4 INTS in 12 games last year.  And that was a season in which he missed the first 4 games rehabbing an injury.  And he was better in his final 9 games.  He would be a big upgrade at starter for several NFL teams.  Anyone being honest with themselves has to see that he's being blackballed by the league's teams.

Smedley said:

My sense is that there has been no collusion against Kaepernick, and he'll have a tough time proving otherwise.

He is an okay QB. Definitely better than some guys who have jobs in the league, but at the same time he's no star. I'd say he'd be like either a lousy starter or an above-average backup in the league right now. So it's not like he's going to lead some team to the Super Bowl. 

I think decisions have been made at the individual-team level to go in different directions with their QB situation. Like, okay Kaepernick may be better than Joe Schmoe on a purely football basis, but signing Kaepernick would bring a level distraction, so net-net, Joe Schmoe is a better choice for us. I don't think any such team-level decision is illegal. 

I haven't read the CBA, so I'm taking my cue from a lawyer (in this case, Toobin).  If the CBA lists all the reasons players can be disciplined, and taking a political stand on the field is not one of them, then the players can't be fired for doing so.

The difference between most workers and NFL players is that most people are not covered by collective bargaining agreements.  And even among those who aren't, I don't think it's entirely clear someone could legally be fired for a silent protest in the workplace.

bub said:

I doubt it applies to on the job words and gestures.  When you're "on the clock" (in any job), you don't have a free hand to make political statements that the boss deems detrimental to the business. Again, I don't care about the anthem but I don't think a player has any more right, much less a 1st Am. right, to protest on work time than Odell had a right to get down on all fours in the end zone and pretend he was a peeing dog.   The owners control "speech" in all kinds of ways including what you can and cannot wear during game time and how you can and cannot celebrate on the field.     


ml1 said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

If someone running a business doesn’t want their business used as a platform for a message, any message, that’s their... business.

I don't know if he's correct, but Jeffrey Toobin just made the statement on CNN that the NFL's collective bargaining agreement with the players' association doesn't allow owners to cut players due to their political statements.  That would seem to extend to players looking to be signed as well.

that said, I don't see how proof of collusion can possibly be shown.  anyone who follows the NFL surely knows that Kaepernick is still unsigned because of his protest.  And it wouldn't surprise me that owners have talked to each other about blackballing him.  But that's not proof.

My question for people who are blaming liberals for setting criminals free would be -- what do they think the proper prison term should be for a first offender convicted of breaking into a car?  Assuming of course that someone could even be convicted.  It's not "liberals" fault that there's often little to no evidence in these cases that would lead to a conviction.  The guys who broke into these cars are still out free not because of liberals, but because they generally don't leave any evidence behind that would lead to their arrest.

Surely Kaep would be an improvement for the Cleveland Browns.  

And somehow Fitzpatrick who had a horrendous season with the Jets, well past his prime and has played for numerous takes manages to get a starting job.  Geno Smith who was terrible gets to be back-up for Manning (and before the season the Giants were expected to go to the playoffs) but did not even give Kaep a shot.  The list goes on and on.  Most teams put winning first, but clearly this is not always the case.  

And if you want to see the continued bias against black players and managers -- look at Willie Randolph.  He was somewhat successful as the manager of the mets but no team will give him a second chance.  When you look at the number of managers that are white who continue to get hired despite failing over and over and it is easy to see that race certainly plays a part in the decision process.  

And just for the record, when I had a car broken into it was by a young white male from Livingston (and not relevant to anything other than someone feeling a need to tell us that his cars were broken into by folks who were black, as if whites never commit that type of crime)

TJ said:

I just think this not mentioning race when committing a crime is a bunch of BS. As I stated before is it really going to help catch a criminal if you can only say the guy "sorry" person because we shouldn't refer to the gender has a t-shirt and jeans. I watch news channels state that you should call if you see this person that robbed and raped someone with just a clothing description, no height, weight or race etc. It can narrow down the culprit if we knew they were white, brown, black, yellow, red or green if they were the M&M guy's.

If the news channels you watch are giving only a "T-shirt and jeans" description for at-large criminal suspects, you're watching the wrong news channels.

The better news outlets weigh descriptions in their entirety when deciding whether they're distinguishable enough, and whether witnesses are likely enough, for them to be useful. Here is a recent example from a Philly paper: "A search is underway for the attacker, described as 6-foot, black, 45 to 50, and with a thin build, dark complexion and beard. He was wearing a dark shirt with a white vertical stripe."

EricBurbank said:

What makes this country better?  It used to be we held criminals accountable.  See my new thread where 3 black males just broke in to 3 cars in 2 driveways with all,the lights. Tv's, and a person sitting out back at 9:30 p.m.  Yeah drummerboy, I know how I dare I mention that they were black males.  It could have been worse, they could have knelt before they robbed me.

Hey Eric.  Thanks for the super useful tip.  If I happen to see 3 black males (great description) I will definitely call the police and, if they ask me why I am calling, I will tell them that it is because my hella racist friend Eric gave this description of the folks that robbed his car.

Seriously dude, if you these are your true colors, please, don't let the screen door hit you in the butt.  I am sure there is a all white enclave in some redder than red state that would be MORE than happy to have you.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with Kapernick, if I remember correctly, he 'voided' his contract with SF, thereby causing his unemployment, though I could be mistaken

vermontgolfer said:

Whether one agrees or disagrees with Kapernick, if I remember correctly, he 'voided' his contract with SF, thereby causing his unemployment, though I could be mistaken

This.

Also the giants should be exempt from the suit, they already have a crappy qb and shouldnt be required to hire another. 

funny comment about the Giants... but surely Kaep is far better than Geno as a back-up and not sure Kaep is lousy  - might not be an elite one but better than many current QB's.  

Lots of players have caused their own unemployment hoping/expecting that they will get a better contract/place to play.   

the Jets had like 38 qbs on their roster a few seasons ago may kap could end up there as back up to the back up to the back up..

DaveSchmidt said:

TJ said:

I just think this not mentioning race when committing a crime is a bunch of BS. As I stated before is it really going to help catch a criminal if you can only say the guy "sorry" person because we shouldn't refer to the gender has a t-shirt and jeans. I watch news channels state that you should call if you see this person that robbed and raped someone with just a clothing description, no height, weight or race etc. It can narrow down the culprit if we knew they were white, brown, black, yellow, red or green if they were the M&M guy's.

If the news channels you watch are giving only a "T-shirt and jeans" description for at-large criminal suspects, you're watching the wrong news channels.

The better news outlets weigh descriptions in their entirety when deciding whether they're distinguishable enough, and whether witnesses are likely enough, for them to be useful. Here is a recent example from a Philly paper: "A search is underway for the attacker, described as 6-foot, black, 45 to 50, and with a thin build, dark complexion and beard. He was wearing a dark shirt with a white vertical stripe."

NY news channels give these descriptions many a times, your description from the Philly paper sounds like they should look into one of the referees on a Sunday football game.

mikescott said:

funny comment about the Giants... but surely Kaep is far better than Geno as a back-up and not sure Kaep is lousy  - might not be an elite one but better than many current QB's.  

Lots of players have caused their own unemployment hoping/expecting that they will get a better contract/place to play.   

True, however the Giants bank on Eli not getting hurt and have for quite some time. Before Geno, they went through recent seasons with Ryan Nassib as their #2. Enough said. Josh Johsnon, too. It's been clear that, with Eli's durability, having the best possible available backup QB -- especially at a cost -- is of little importance to the Giants.

Some of you are making my point on racism for me.  I am the racist for mentioning 3 black males or for disagreeing with the reason Kap was not signed or what he did was wrong and it wasn't about race.  But like everything else lets throw the race card in to the mix, it makes for a better sound bite.

Lets go over who is the racist here?  Who bought their house in a black neighborhood when whites were moving out?  Who bought their next house in a black neighborhood when he could have moved to a more white neighborhood?  Who lives in a predominantly white section of town yet loves to say they moved to Maplewood because of the diversity.  Who doesn't cross Springfield ave because of the reputation it has? I know that doesn't fit most if not all of you, I imagine the conversations I have had over the years with these people.

Who gets a phone call on a Sunday morning from a black man living in the heart of Newark asking them for money to feed their kids? Who goes down there, takes him food shopping and pays for the bill even though he doesn't have the extra money himself?  Who goes before a judge in a custody hearing and argues with the judge that this is the problem with the system and society.  Here you have a black father looking to get custody and take care of his kid yet you are going to deny him for no good reason.  Then put it in the books as another black child without a father in the picture. Who invites a bunch of black people over there house in the summer for a bbq and to go swimming because they don't have any food, or a.c. on a 95° day.   Who was it that they said thank you, nobody ever invited us in to their house to eat and chill to get away from the city for a day?  Who kept his job a lot longer than he wanted to but did because he was told if he left one of the black co-workers would get fired? Who was it that so many black people said to him, " you do more for us than our own people do, you sure you ain't a light skinned brother?" And the list could go on but I don't think I need to go on anymore because I will still be the racist.

So you can call me a racist all you want, but at the end of the day I have no problem putting my head down to sleep when it comes to this topic.

EricBurbank said:

Some of you are making my point on racism for me.  I am the racist for mentioning 3 black males or for disagreeing with the reason Kap was not signed or what he did was wrong and it wasn't about race.  But like everything else lets throw the race card in to the mix, it makes for a better sound bite.

Lets go over who is the racist here?  Who bought their house in a black neighborhood when whites were moving out?  Who bought their next house in a black neighborhood when he could have moved to a more white neighborhood?  Who lives in a predominantly white section of town yet loves to say they moved to Maplewood because of the diversity.  Who doesn't cross Springfield ave because of the reputation it has? I know that doesn't fit most if not all of you, I imagine the conversations I have had over the years with these people.

Who gets a phone call on a Sunday morning from a black man living in the heart of Newark asking them for money to feed their kids? Who goes down there, takes him food shopping and pays for the bill even though he doesn't have the extra money himself?  Who goes before a judge in a custody hearing and argues with the judge that this is the problem with the system and society.  Here you have a black father looking to get custody and take care of his kid yet you are going to deny him for no good reason.  Then put it in the books as another black child without a father in the picture. Who invites a bunch of black people over there house in the summer for a bbq and to go swimming because they don't have any food, or a.c. on a 95° day.   Who was it that they said thank you, nobody ever invited us in to their house to eat and chill to get away from the city for a day?  Who kept his job a lot longer than he wanted to but did because he was told if he left one of the black co-workers would get fired? Who was it that so many black people said to him, " you do more for us than our own people do, you sure you ain't a light skinned brother?" And the list could go on but I don't think I need to go on anymore because I will still be the racist.

So you can call me a racist all you want, but at the end of the day I have no problem putting my head down to sleep when it comes to this topic.

Dear Bwana

Thank you for your service and sacrifice and especially the bbq.

- From 'a bunch of Black people"

I am sure that Geno's contract is much lower than Kap would accept even now. And for all his flaws Manning has been very durable. 

ska said:

I am sure that Geno's contract is much lower than Kap would accept even now. And for all his flaws Manning has been very durable. 

They can't know if they don't ask?

@Eric - unfortunately you aren't helping yourself.  I recommend quitting while you still can.

I don't pretend to know everything there is to know about racism and I believe the topic will always be a work in progress for both society and the individual. I don't know Eric Burbank but it seems to me from this board that he's a reasonable person who's sincerely putting his views out there, however flawed or not flawed as you might see them. 

From that best way to advance the discussion is just that -- advance the discussion, rather than just call racism and shut it down.    

There are just too many people who don't know what they don't know. 

Thank you, Donald Rumsfeld!

Red_Barchetta said:

There are just too many people who don't know what they don't know. 

Smedley said:

I don't pretend to know everything there is to know about racism and I believe the topic will always be a work in progress for both society and the individual. I don't know Eric Burbank but it seems to me from this board that he's a reasonable person who's sincerely putting his views out there, however flawed or not flawed as you might see them. 

From that best way to advance the discussion is just that -- advance the discussion, rather than just call racism and shut it down.    

I also don't think it advances the discussion to claim that it's the fault of "liberal snowflakes" that one's car was broken into.

If silent kneeling is not an appropriate and respectful form of protest, then what IS??