Kapaernick

[dismal]

We are saying that the arbitrator will require more than circumstantial evidence, all of which has a logical alternate explanation. We are also saying that 32 teams reaching the same conclusion, even for the same reason, is not even circumstantial evidence of collusion.

You are basically saying that no matter the conduct of the owners it is impossible to prove collusion unless you hear them talking about it.

I don't believe you.

And we shall see.

There are approximately 7 billion people not in the NFL today. There are probably even a couple hundred that were in the NFL last year and are not now.

To show collusion, you're going to need more evidence than those people have.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'd say a notable difference between Kaepernick and Bonds is that 2008 would have been his 22nd season. Where as Kaepernick is in his prime, age wise.

 

[untermensche]

You are basically saying that no matter the conduct of the owners it is impossible to prove collusion unless you hear them talking about it.

I don't believe you.

And we shall see.

In 2015, Barry Bonds lost his collusion case against Major League Baseball, even though his circumstantial case was an order of magnitude stronger than Kaepernick's:

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/...nds-in-collusion-case-over-his-career-ending/

Yes, we shall see.

Bonds cheated. He took performance enhancing drugs. Everybody knows that.

Kaepernick has not engaged in any behavior that is illegal or disrespectful.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

In 2015, Barry Bonds lost his collusion case against Major League Baseball, even though his circumstantial case was an order of magnitude stronger than Kaepernick's:

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/...nds-in-collusion-case-over-his-career-ending/

Yes, we shall see.

Bonds cheated. He took performance enhancing drugs. Everybody knows that.

Kaepernick has not engaged in any behavior that is illegal or disrespectful.

Each owner is free to draw his own conclusion about whether Kaepernick's behavior is disrespectful. Your opinion is irrelevant. In both the Bonds and Kaepernick cases, an owner could decide not to hire because of HIS opinion about the behavior, or because of the possible negative reaction of that team's fans to a hiring. Neither supports a finding of collusion.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

I'd say a notable difference between Kaepernick and Bonds is that 2008 would have been his 22nd season. Where as Kaepernick is in his prime, age wise.

The relevant difference is the skill level of the two individuals. Bonds was still one of the best hitters in baseball, and would have made an excellent designated hitter. He could have been signed to a 1-year contract. Kaepernick's skills seem to have deteriorated steadily since his Super Bowl performance.

 

[untermensche]

Bonds cheated. He took performance enhancing drugs. Everybody knows that.

Kaepernick has not engaged in any behavior that is illegal or disrespectful.

Each owner is free to draw his own conclusion about whether Kaepernick's behavior is disrespectful. Your opinion is irrelevant. In both the Bonds and Kaepernick cases, an owner could decide not to hire because of HIS opinion about the behavior, or because of the possible negative reaction of that team's fans to a hiring. Neither supports a finding of collusion.

No they are not.

His conduct was clearly not disrespectful.

To quietly kneel or sit is not disrespectful.

The owners are not allowed to turn reality on it's head.

- - - Updated - - -

I'd say a notable difference between Kaepernick and Bonds is that 2008 would have been his 22nd season. Where as Kaepernick is in his prime, age wise.

The relevant difference is the skill level of the two individuals. Bonds was still one of the best hitters in baseball, and would have made an excellent designated hitter. Kaepernick's skills seem to have deteriorated steadily since his Super Bowl performance.

The issue is Kaepernick's skill level compared to the skill level of people who are getting the jobs.

 

[dismal]

I'd say a notable difference between Kaepernick and Bonds is that 2008 would have been his 22nd season. Where as Kaepernick is in his prime, age wise.

LOL @ Kaepernick is in his prime. His prime was a few good runs in the 2013 playoffs.

 

[untermensche]

You are basically saying that no matter the conduct of the owners it is impossible to prove collusion unless you hear them talking about it.

I don't believe you.

And we shall see.

There are approximately 7 billion people not in the NFL today. There are probably even a couple hundred that were in the NFL last year and are not now.

To show collusion, you're going to need more evidence than those people have.

You have the resume of somebody being passed over and the resumes of people being hired.

It is no different from trying to prove racial discrimination in the workplace.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Bonds cheated. He took performance enhancing drugs. Everybody knows that.

Kaepernick has not engaged in any behavior that is illegal or disrespectful.

Each owner is free to draw his own conclusion about whether Kaepernick's behavior is disrespectful. Your opinion is irrelevant. In both the Bonds and Kaepernick cases, an owner could decide not to hire because of HIS opinion about the behavior, or because of the possible negative reaction of that team's fans to a hiring. Neither supports a finding of collusion.

What is odd about Kaepernick is that he was lost before Trump got into things. These days, an owner can say that signing Kaepernick will be a distraction. Trump has elevated this non-controversy into a huge fake controversy. So the media will be on it, Trump will be on it, and instead of trying to deal with how to win games, the Head Coach will be talking about politics.

But this wasn't the case last year or early in the season. As time passes, it is easier to justify not signing Kaepernick. But originally? Kaepernick in November 2016, who had complained about oppression was wearing a Fidel Castro t-shirt. Now, it should be remembered that under Castro, Cuba was a bit better off in many aspects. The previous leader (the US supported) was a tyrant. However, one aspect that wasn't better was the oppression of the Cuban people when it came to dissent! This would make Kaepernick look like a person that has an opinion, but not a well thought out one, and certainly having no ability to present it. I don't know whether he is suffering from collusion, from grandeur as to his value to a team, from being too rusty to sign to a massive contract and an owner has to wait and see if Kaepernick is going to implode and do something else. Granted, NFL contracts aren't guaranteed, so the gamble might not be too bad, but Kaepernick will likely want something up front, and he might not be worth the gamble.

I originally thought it was a bad idea to switch him in for Alex Smith so quickly. And Alex Smith is proving my thoughts right. Granted, Kaepernick played well as a QB and was unfairly removed from the starting position, being a scapegoat for a shitty defense. So who knows.

I just think it'll be hard to demonstrate collusion.

 

[dismal]

Each owner is free to draw his own conclusion about whether Kaepernick's behavior is disrespectful. Your opinion is irrelevant. In both the Bonds and Kaepernick cases, an owner could decide not to hire because of HIS opinion about the behavior, or because of the possible negative reaction of that team's fans to a hiring. Neither supports a finding of collusion.

No they are not.

His conduct was clearly not disrespectful.

To quietly kneel or sit is not disrespectful.

The owners are not allowed to turn reality on it's head.

- - - Updated - - -

I'd say a notable difference between Kaepernick and Bonds is that 2008 would have been his 22nd season. Where as Kaepernick is in his prime, age wise.

The relevant difference is the skill level of the two individuals. Bonds was still one of the best hitters in baseball, and would have made an excellent designated hitter. Kaepernick's skills seem to have deteriorated steadily since his Super Bowl performance.

The issue is Kaepernick's skill level compared to the skill level of people who are getting the jobs.

Do you actually understand the meaning of the word "collusion"? It has absolutely nothing to do with any arguments you are making.

And the agreement he is suing the Owners for having breached specifically forbids arguments of the form "but I'm better than this guy so there must be collusion".

To repeat with dwindling hope reality can penetrate: He will need to demonstrate actual evidence of collusion.

 

[untermensche]

The distraction is the reaction of morons to a man silently kneeling.

You cannot blame a man, or punish them, when a bunch of morons get upset because they don't like people kneeling.

The owners do not get to side with the morons.

 

[dismal]

There are approximately 7 billion people not in the NFL today. There are probably even a couple hundred that were in the NFL last year and are not now.

To show collusion, you're going to need more evidence than those people have.

You have the resume of somebody being passed over and the resumes of people being hired.

It is no different from trying to prove racial discrimination in the workplace.

Other than the Agreement specifically prohibiting this form of argument as evidence in the relevant section?

Why not give it a shot. It's always great lawyering not to be bound by the very document you are suing someone for breaching.

 

[Harry Bosch]

I'd say a notable difference between Kaepernick and Bonds is that 2008 would have been his 22nd season. Where as Kaepernick is in his prime, age wise.

The relevant difference is the skill level of the two individuals. Bonds was still one of the best hitters in baseball, and would have made an excellent designated hitter. Kaepernick's skills seem to have deteriorated steadily since his Super Bowl performance.

Yea, his deteriorating skills is really what hurt him. He's a running QB not well suited for the west coast offense or traditional offense. He's not a pocket passer. He's more suited for the spread - which is in decline in the NFL. Secondly, he has developed a reputation of not being a team player, not willing to work extra hard, not willing to study up on plays, not wanting to lead the players as a team. The QB is by far the most important player on the team. Everyone looks up to him to set the guidance and cadence of the team. There are backups in the NFL who have less talent than Kap. But there are other traits that make a good QB besides talent: leadership, sacrifice, willing to support the starter, willingness to backup management and coaching staff, willingness to be quiet, willingness to make a scene, and etc. Teams don't want backup QBs to be loud and dramatic.

I support Kap's political position. I'm with BLM. But there's only one thing that NFL teams care about: and that's winning.

 

[dismal]

The distraction is the reaction of morons to a man silently kneeling.

You cannot blame a man, or punish them, when a bunch of morons get upset because they don't like people kneeling.

The owners do not get to side with the morons.

And....that's got nothing to do with "collusion".

Bzzzzt, next case.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'd say a notable difference between Kaepernick and Bonds is that 2008 would have been his 22nd season. Where as Kaepernick is in his prime, age wise.

The relevant difference is the skill level of the two individuals. Bonds was still one of the best hitters in baseball, and would have made an excellent designated hitter. He could have been signed to a 1-year contract. Kaepernick's skills seem to have deteriorated steadily since his Super Bowl performance.

The stats don't say that. He had a 4 to 1 TD to INT ratio and a QB rating of 90. Not hall of fame numbers, but better than plenty of starting QBs. The 49'er defense has been awful, which is why, even without Kaepernick, they are currently 0-6. The 49'ers have won one game since Kaepernick was removed as the starter (1-10). I think the bigger concern are mental flops in the future, Luis Suarez and Mario Ballotelli come to mind.

 

[untermensche]

Do you actually understand the meaning of the word "collusion"? It has absolutely nothing to do with any arguments you are making.

And the agreement he is suing the Owners for having breached specifically forbids arguments of the form "but I'm better than this guy so there must be collusion".

To repeat with dwindling hope reality can penetrate: He will need to demonstrate actual evidence of collusion.

Bullshit.

If a person is racially discriminated against in the workplace there are ways to detect it.

You can look at hiring and promotions. You can see if standards were uniform.

You're talking out your ass.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The relevant difference is the skill level of the two individuals. Bonds was still one of the best hitters in baseball, and would have made an excellent designated hitter. Kaepernick's skills seem to have deteriorated steadily since his Super Bowl performance.

Yea, his deteriorating skills is really what hurt him. He's a running QB not well suited for the west coast offense or traditional offense. He's not a pocket passer. He's more suited for the spread - which is in decline in the NFL. Secondly, he has developed a reputation of not being a team player, not willing to work extra hard, not willing to study up on plays, not wanting to lead the players as a team. The QB is by far the most important player on the team. Everyone looks up to him to set the guidance and cadence of the team. There are backups in the NFL who have less talent than Kap. But there are other traits that make a good QB besides talent: leadership, sacrifice, willing to support the starter, willingness to backup management and coaching staff, willingness to be quiet, willingness to make a scene, and etc. Teams don't want backup QBs to be loud and dramatic.

I support Kap's political position. I'm with BLM. But there's only one thing that NFL teams care about: and that's winning.

Clearly not the case in Cleveland. They traded for an expensive QB for a 2nd round pick and then waived him.

 

[dismal]

Do you actually understand the meaning of the word "collusion"? It has absolutely nothing to do with any arguments you are making.

And the agreement he is suing the Owners for having breached specifically forbids arguments of the form "but I'm better than this guy so there must be collusion".

To repeat with dwindling hope reality can penetrate: He will need to demonstrate actual evidence of collusion.

Bullshit.

If a person is racially discriminated against in the workplace there are ways to detect it.

You can look at hiring and promotions. You can see if standards were uniform.

You're talking out your ass.

BZZZT, not "collusion". Next.

- - - Updated - - -

The relevant difference is the skill level of the two individuals. Bonds was still one of the best hitters in baseball, and would have made an excellent designated hitter. He could have been signed to a 1-year contract. Kaepernick's skills seem to have deteriorated steadily since his Super Bowl performance.

The stats don't say that. He had a 4 to 1 TD to INT ratio and a QB rating of 90. Not hall of fame numbers, but better than plenty of starting QBs. The 49'er defense has been awful, which is why, even without Kaepernick, they are currently 0-6. The 49'ers have won one game since Kaepernick was removed as the starter (1-10). I think the bigger concern are mental flops in the future, Luis Suarez and Mario Ballotelli come to mind.

Hmm, maybe the tendency of the silly to make this sort of silly argument is exactly why the Agreement prohibits just this sort of silly argument.

 

[untermensche]

Bullshit.

If a person is racially discriminated against in the workplace there are ways to detect it.

You can look at hiring and promotions. You can see if standards were uniform.

You're talking out your ass.

BZZZT, not "collusion". Next.

It is collusion if the timing of the discrimination is simultaneous and ubiquitous.

It is collusion if nobody has a legal cause to do it.

 

[ZiprHead]

NFL owners, players meeting Tuesday to discuss protests