Woke is white arrogance

[Jimmy Higgins]

I agree he was not fired. But do you know if he was offered any contracts? I ask because Kaepernick accused the NFL of colluding to keep him from receiving an offer, and he and the NFL ended up settling his lawsuit.

Full Disclosure:
I couldn't care less about football. I live in central Indiana and couldn't name the head coach of the Colts. When someone asks me some opinion on football I often respond, "Football? Is that the brown pointy one or the big orange one?"

As far as I know, there were never any talks serious enough to qualify as an offer. However, all the teams having the same opinions about his value isn't the same as being black balled. Considering the astronomical salary he had been getting, would he consider an offer of a lousy $1M/year seriously? Hard to say.

But at the time, when he was big news, some football pundits were opining that he wasn't likely to get a new contract anyway. His performance just didn't justify his salary. Even people who supported his political stance were suggesting that the on field behavior was to change the focus from his stats to his political issues. I'm not claiming to know, but I read things like it a lot.

Tom

So the NFL settled with him over his claim, just for the heck of it. Look, the guy was a decent QB, who played for an awful 49ers team. Plenty of worse QBs have made decent careers in the NFL. The only issue was some teams were nervous that shit stains like Trump wouldn't drop it! In the EPL, teams are all bending knees before the start of the game (they don't play the national anthem), and the Earth didn't stop spinning. In the US, endless whining was made by Trump. They didn't want endless attacks on social media drowning out the NFL season.

In other words, the teams took the wrong stand. Kaepernick's protest couldn't really have been much more laid back ad non-assuming.

The nerve of the man bringing politics into sports... umm.... during the national anthem.

 

[ZiprHead]

He's supposed a scholar, but he can't even name his source--like TRump pulling stuff out of his butt--same with the black scholars Zizek ostensibly and ostentatiously refers to; BTW, this is his form of virtue signalling in this video.

He doesn't need a source. The examples stands on it's own. It's not argument from authority (the authority of the offended party). It's argument from internal logical consistency. It doesn't matter whether his native American friend (who he may have made up) really prefers the term Indian or not. Anyone can follow the logic of the statement.

Remember, Zizek isn't woke. He doesn't care who is offended. He doesn't care how many Native Americans are or aren't offended by his jokes. Their offence carries no weight for his behaviour. Only in the woke world do people bend over backward in order not to offend various groups.

As far as sources for his philosophical views, he also doesn't need that. He is a Lacanian. But he's done enough work, and introduced enough unique thought now, to stand on his own.

Wokes often try to dismiss him on moral grounds. But it's obvious (to me) that it's intellectual laziness. Following Zizeks trains of thought requires actual effort and usage of brainpower. Kneejerk reactions and feelings is much easier. So wokes often go with that. But there's no thinking going on. If you want to dismiss him, you'll have to actually make an effort. Sorry about that.

Why does this remind me of the right-wing phrase "An armed society is a polite society"?

 

[TomC]

I agree he was not fired. But do you know if he was offered any contracts? I ask because Kaepernick accused the NFL of colluding to keep him from receiving an offer, and he and the NFL ended up settling his lawsuit.

Full Disclosure:
I couldn't care less about football. I live in central Indiana and couldn't name the head coach of the Colts. When someone asks me some opinion on football I often respond, "Football? Is that the brown pointy one or the big orange one?"

As far as I know, there were never any talks serious enough to qualify as an offer. However, all the teams having the same opinions about his value isn't the same as being black balled. Considering the astronomical salary he had been getting, would he consider an offer of a lousy $1M/year seriously? Hard to say.

But at the time, when he was big news, some football pundits were opining that he wasn't likely to get a new contract anyway. His performance just didn't justify his salary. Even people who supported his political stance were suggesting that the on field behavior was to change the focus from his stats to his political issues. I'm not claiming to know, but I read things like it a lot.

Tom

Thank you for the long-winded version of "I believe it but I don't know it". The naivete that all 26 teams
independently assessed a healthy first string quarterback as unworthy of even an offer for a 2nd or 3rd string quarterback is truly heart-warming.

Thank you for condensing the problem into such a short post.

You completely ignored the real issue and focused on the victim status of a super rich, good looking, celebrity who agrees with you.

What Kaep was worth as a quarterback I have no idea. I think everyone like him is grossly overpaid. It's as bad as CEO pay. Maybe he could have returned, demoted a bit, to football. I dunno.

But he brought his personal issues to the field. In a way that negatively impacted corporate profits. He deliberately alienated a huge chunk of NFL consumers. Those consumers buy the tickets and watch the commercials and pay ridiculous money for swag that makes NFL profitable. Subtracting his damage to profitability from his value as a player probably left him a net liability.

You may not care about any of this. Neither do I, if NFL went away completely I wouldn't know about it until someone told me. But the bottom line remains Kaep made a choice. It cost the teams a lot of money. Kaep has never pretended he wouldn't do it again. He doesn't need a job. I doubt he'll ever be willing to play for the NFL again.

Because, as an asset to team profits, he's not worth much. Maybe less than nothing. That doesn't matter to you, apparently because you've got your Woke blinders on.


Tom

 

[TomC]

So the NFL settled with him over his claim, just for the heck of it.

Lots of deep pocketed people settle frivolous claims because it's better for business to do so than fight.
Tom

 

[Swammerdami]

Remember, Zizek ... doesn't care who is offended. He doesn't care how many Native Americans are or aren't offended by his jokes. Their offence carries no weight for his behaviour. Only in the woke world do people bend over backward in order not to offend various groups.

Is Zizek an Ayn Rand fan? Are you, Dr. Z?

 

[Politesse]

Is Zizek an Ayn Rand fan? Are you, Dr. Z?

A Randian socialist? That'd be a new one. If you want to understand Žižek, you need to read Hegel, not Ayn Rand.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So the NFL settled with him over his claim, just for the heck of it.

Lots of deep pocketed people settle frivolous claims because it's better for business to do so than fight.
Tom

Deep pocketed people kept Josh McCown (98 TD / 70 INT / 79.7 rating) employed as a QB for nearly two decades, and his stats were never remotely on level with Kaepernick (72 TD / 30 INT / 88.9 rating).

 

[Gospel]

Not to mention why they'd think it better for businesses to settle than fight if they are right. The American people would support their fight and poor a shit ton of money into the NFL as a result. They were wrong and wanted it to go away as fast as possible is my thoughts.

 

[TomC]

So the NFL settled with him over his claim, just for the heck of it.

Lots of deep pocketed people settle frivolous claims because it's better for business to do so than fight.
Tom

Deep pocketed people kept Josh McCown (98 TD / 70 INT / 79.7 rating) employed as a QB for nearly two decades, and his stats were never remotely on level with Kaepernick (72 TD / 30 INT / 88.9 rating).

I have no idea how your response might be relevant to my post.

Who is Mr McCown? Did he file a lawsuit against the NFL? Was he Wokester who thought his personal issues deserved air time, paid for by his employer?
Tom

 

[blastula]

Remember, Zizek ... doesn't care who is offended. He doesn't care how many Native Americans are or aren't offended by his jokes. Their offence carries no weight for his behaviour. Only in the woke world do people bend over backward in order not to offend various groups.

Is Zizek an Ayn Rand fan? Are you, Dr. Z?

Above all, Zizek and DrZ are both hottakeists.

 

[TomC]

Not to mention why they'd think it better for businesses to settle than fight if they are right. The American people would support their fight and poor a shit ton of money into the NFL as a result. They were wrong and wanted it to go away as fast as possible is my thoughts.

The American people would support them?

What kind of nonsense is that?

The NFL consumers didn't support Kaep's politics. That's the problem. Maybe the NFL could have started a GoFundMe page to pay for Kaep's politics.

But Kaep could have done that too.

With his name recognition and wealth, he could have rented the stadium and hosted a conciousness/fund raising rally. He'd have drawn zillions of people and raised zillions of dollars. Without pissing off the people who already pay him.

But he chose not to do that.
Why not?
Tom

 

[Gospel]

Not to mention why they'd think it better for businesses to settle than fight if they are right. The American people would support their fight and poor a shit ton of money into the NFL as a result. They were wrong and wanted it to go away as fast as possible is my thoughts.

The American people would support them?

What kind of nonsense is that?

The NFL consumers didn't support Kaep's politics. That's the problem. Maybe the NFL could have started a GoFundMe page to pay for Kaep's politics.

But Kaep could have done that too.

With his name recognition and wealth, he could have rented the stadium and hosted a conciousness/fund raising rally. He'd have drawn zillions of people and raised zillions of dollars. Without pissing off the people who already pay him.

But he chose not to do that.
Why not?
Tom

You must be talking about the National Fools League cause the National Football League supports BLM.

Well, not Derec's or your BLM but the social justice the real BLM is calling for.

 

[TomC]

Not to mention why they'd think it better for businesses to settle than fight if they are right. The American people would support their fight and poor a shit ton of money into the NFL as a result. They were wrong and wanted it to go away as fast as possible is my thoughts.

The American people would support them?

What kind of nonsense is that?

The NFL consumers didn't support Kaep's politics. That's the problem. Maybe the NFL could have started a GoFundMe page to pay for Kaep's politics.

But Kaep could have done that too.

With his name recognition and wealth, he could have rented the stadium and hosted a conciousness/fund raising rally. He'd have drawn zillions of people and raised zillions of dollars. Without pissing off the people who already pay him.

But he chose not to do that.
Why not?
Tom

You must be talking about the Nation Fools League cause the National Football League supports BLM.

Then why is Kaep not top of his field?

Have I mistaken the brown pointy one for the big orange one, again?
Tom

 

[Gospel]

You must be talking about the Nation Fools League cause the National Football League supports BLM.

Then why is Kaep not top of his field?

Have I mistaken the brown pointy one for the big orange one, again?
Tom

Nah you good. You just think the NFL is fixing to lose a lot of money and vanish as an organization. Because they openly support social justice (what the real BLM is about not your's fox news or CNN's BLM) while their consumers don't.

 

[TomC]

You must be talking about the Nation Fools League cause the National Football League supports BLM.

Then why is Kaep not top of his field?

Have I mistaken the brown pointy one for the big orange one, again?
Tom

Nah you good. You just think the NFL is fixing to lose a lot of money and vanish as an organization. Because they openly support social justice (what the real BLM is about not your's fox news or CNN's BLM) while their consumers don't.

What?

I'm confident that the NFL isn't willing to lose money fixing any social issues.
But without consumers, the NFL isn't anything. It's just some guys playing. With their, and other guys, balls.
Really, the homoeroticism of the NFL is kinda huge. Big, burly, dudes. Sticking their hands up into other guy's crotches, chasing each other around, jumping into big piles, shaking their booty in the end zone when they score...

I must stop posting right now. I have a need to take care of.
Tom

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Nah you good. You just think the NFL is fixing to lose a lot of money and vanish as an organization. Because they openly support social justice (what the real BLM is about not your's fox news or CNN's BLM) while their consumers don't.

What?

I'm confident that the NFL isn't willing to lose money fixing any social issues.
But without consumers, the NFL isn't anything. It's just some guys playing. With their, and other guys, balls.
Really, the homoeroticism of the NFL is kinda huge. Big, burly, dudes. Sticking their hands up into other guy's crotches, chasing each other around, jumping into big piles, shaking their booty in the end zone when they score...

I must stop posting right now. I have a need to take care of.
Tom

So what do you have against guys kneeling again?

 

[Gospel]

Nah you good. You just think the NFL is fixing to lose a lot of money and vanish as an organization. Because they openly support social justice (what the real BLM is about not your's fox news or CNN's BLM) while their consumers don't.

What?

I'm confident that the NFL isn't willing to lose money fixing any social issues.
But without consumers, the NFL isn't anything. It's just some guys playing. With their, and other guys, balls.
Really, the homoeroticism of the NFL is kinda huge. Big, burly, dudes. Sticking their hands up into other guy's crotches, chasing each other around, jumping into big piles, shaking their booty in the end zone when they score...

I must stop posting right now. I have a need to take care of.
Tom

BTW - You have not mistaken "the brown pointy one for the big orange one," again. But you are mistaken as to why Kaeptain-Woke isn't with the NFL anymore. I'll give you a hint. It had little to do with BLM or social justice and more to do with a failure to reach an agreement during contract nagotiations.

 

[Gospel]

I honestly wonder when people like TomC will realize that they are the minority. the NFL will do just fine because the Majority of their white fan base doesn't have an issue with social justice.

 

[TomC]

Nah you good. You just think the NFL is fixing to lose a lot of money and vanish as an organization. Because they openly support social justice (what the real BLM is about not your's fox news or CNN's BLM) while their consumers don't.

What?

I'm confident that the NFL isn't willing to lose money fixing any social issues.
But without consumers, the NFL isn't anything. It's just some guys playing. With their, and other guys, balls.
Really, the homoeroticism of the NFL is kinda huge. Big, burly, dudes. Sticking their hands up into other guy's crotches, chasing each other around, jumping into big piles, shaking their booty in the end zone when they score...

I must stop posting right now. I have a need to take care of.
Tom

So what do you have against guys kneeling again?

Heh.
I wish TFT had a good <evil smirk> emoji.

Bottom line remains. Kaep picked this. He decided to be an unemployed Wokester. He can well afford to, my vague recollection is that his last contract paid him $25M.

It's the Woke premise that Kaep is the victim. He's not.

Somebody that rich and famous could have supported his social beliefs without making himself valueless as a top NFL quarterback.

Honestly, I think Kaep not only cost himself a job with the NFL. He also cost BLM supporters. He could have done things differently, in a way that would get more of those NFL consumers on board with his views. Instead, he alienated them.
Tom

 

[TomC]

I honestly wonder when people like TomC will realize that they are the minority. the NFL will do just fine because the Majority of their white fan base doesn't have an issue with social justice.

So,
Is Kaep now a top quarterback on an NFL team?

You say he's great.
You say NFL supports BLM.
Kaep obviously supports BLM.

Why isn't Kaep starting quarterback for $5M a year like he used to be?
Tom

 

[Emily Lake]

Have you watched any TV commercials lately?

Nope. I don't think I've seen a TV commercial in about seven years

If you didn't know any better you would assume blacks are about 70% of the population. When in reality, its more like 13%. I doubt its an accident that the actors auditioning for and being hired for the spots just happened to be black. I think what's actually happening is advertisers are trying to outwoke each other, and we've gotten to sorta absurd levels of wokeness.

So... this gets to a bit of a derail. But I'll roll the dice anyway.

I actually support temporary over-representation of many groups in fiction and representational entertainment. One of the challenges with society is that our map for how the world works gets set when we're fairly young, and is very strongly influenced by visual stimuli and what we observe of the interactions from adults. Part of shifting subconscious stereotypes lies in exposing young children to scenarios that defy those stereotypes. To do this in a way that can impact existing social stereotypes about black people or hispanic people or women requires that enough black and hispanic and female characters get shown to build a framework that doesn't tie race or sex to specific types of roles. But given the limited number of actual bodies involved in most representational fiction... you end up by necessity over-representing some subsegments.

It should be temporary, if it works. Once that stereotype is removed, once there's no longer that association, I think it would revert back to population norms.

 

[Emily Lake]

To my best information Native Americans prefer that term. Until I hear something different, I'm going with that.

I had a discussion here, I can't remember with who, who had a problem with me using the "word" transexual and explained that only ignorant bad people used that term. The new approved term is "transgender". Or whatever it was. I can't remember. That's what I'm talking about.

For those playing at home, yes, same person said those quotes... in the same post... and appeared to be completely and utterly seriously unaware of the polar positions taken by said poster in those statements.

They are only polar positions if you snip out the middle... which you did.

That doesn't make me superior to those using the term "Indian". I'm cool with people saying "Indian"

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Deep pocketed people kept Josh McCown (98 TD / 70 INT / 79.7 rating) employed as a QB for nearly two decades, and his stats were never remotely on level with Kaepernick (72 TD / 30 INT / 88.9 rating).

I have no idea how your response might be relevant to my post.

You were speaking of the lawsuit. You brought up Kaepernick wasn't that good (or that people were saying it). I brought McCown whose stats were flat compared to Kaepernick and still played 17 or so years.

Who is Mr McCown? Did he file a lawsuit against the NFL? Was he Wokester who thought his personal issues deserved air time, paid for by his employer?
Tom

You mean, kneeling during the political national anthem? Players were kneeling and a bunch of loudmouths complained a lot about it, like Janet Jackson's breast. I don't it is quite as simple as saying NFL consumers were against it. I know plenty either didn't care or supported the extremely brief form of protest that didn't impact play on the field one iota.

 

[ZiprHead]

You were speaking of the lawsuit. You brought up Kaepernick wasn't that good (or that people were saying it). I brought McCown whose stats were flat compared to Kaepernick and still played 17 or so years.

Who is Mr McCown? Did he file a lawsuit against the NFL? Was he Wokester who thought his personal issues deserved air time, paid for by his employer?
Tom

You mean, kneeling during the political national anthem? Players were kneeling and a bunch of loudmouths complained a lot about it, like Janet Jackson's breast. I don't it is quite as simple as saying NFL consumers were against it. I know plenty either didn't care or supported the extremely brief form of protest that didn't impact play on the field one iota.

IIRC, the players used to remain in the locker room while the national anthem was played. This changed when the military branches started purchasing ads during the games. The NFL wanted to rah rah the US for more ad bucks. The players were, and are still, being used as props.

 

[TomC]

You were speaking of the lawsuit. You brought up Kaepernick wasn't that good (or that people were saying it). I brought McCown whose stats were flat compared to Kaepernick and still played 17 or so years.

Who is Mr McCown? Did he file a lawsuit against the NFL? Was he Wokester who thought his personal issues deserved air time, paid for by his employer?
Tom

You mean, kneeling during the political national anthem? Players were kneeling and a bunch of loudmouths complained a lot about it, like Janet Jackson's breast. I don't it is quite as simple as saying NFL consumers were against it. I know plenty either didn't care or supported the extremely brief form of protest that didn't impact play on the field one iota.

Before I go through your list of strawman arguments,

How did Janet Jackson's boobs get involved?
Sorry if I'm not straight enough to understand, but I'm not. Please explain it, clearly.
Tom

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You were speaking of the lawsuit. You brought up Kaepernick wasn't that good (or that people were saying it). I brought McCown whose stats were flat compared to Kaepernick and still played 17 or so years.

Who is Mr McCown? Did he file a lawsuit against the NFL? Was he Wokester who thought his personal issues deserved air time, paid for by his employer?
Tom

You mean, kneeling during the political national anthem? Players were kneeling and a bunch of loudmouths complained a lot about it, like Janet Jackson's breast. I don't it is quite as simple as saying NFL consumers were against it. I know plenty either didn't care or supported the extremely brief form of protest that didn't impact play on the field one iota.

Before I go through your list of strawman arguments,

How did Janet Jackson's boobs get involved?
Sorry if I'm not straight enough to understand, but I'm not. Please explain it, clearly.
Tom

I need to ask, were you born yesterday? Because if so, I'll stop making references to recent history.

Janet Jackson matters because a group of 100 or so people were able to make it appear that millions were complaining about her breast making a very brief appearance in the Super Bowl halftime show. IE, just because there is noise, doesn't mean there is broad consensus that people give a fuck.

You claimed, without reference that the average NFL consumer did like Kaepernick's behavior. Well, certainly a number of people made their opinion heard, and how they were going to turn the dial. However, that didn't quite happen. So there is little evidence that the average NFL consumer cared or thought Kaepernick was causing harm by kneeling during a political anthem. The NFL was worried about the loud mouths who wouldn't shut up. Just like the Janet Jackson situation and all those flooding complaints to the FCC from not lots of people but a handful.

Concerns regarding Kaepernick's playing were more coming along with his further and further away from the field situation, ie rust. Kaepernick wasn't Tom Brady. But he wasn't Josh McCown, who played a lot of football at QB.

 

[TomC]

You claimed, without reference that the average NFL consumer did like Kaepernick's behavior.

I said nothing like that.

Enough NFL consumers didn't like Kaep's behavior on the field to cost the team money. Nothing about majority. It's all about the money. If the people who support Kaep's politics buy enough stuff to offset the people who don't, "Yay! The NFL supports BLM!"

If that were true though, why isn't Kaep being offered contracts so big and lucrative that he takes one?
Tom


P.s. ~I'm assuming that you misposted in the post I quoted. You posted "did", when you meant "didn't". Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[blastula]

Regardless of its merits, Kaepernick's method of protest was poorly chosen. He made it too easy to confuse his message. It upset people even sympathetic to his cause. I can appreciate just wanting to keep any politics out of sports, I was annoyed when Tebow knelt too. If CK did something outside the game instead, he probably would have gotten more support and could have played longer.

 

[TomC]

Regardless of its merits, Kaepernick's method of protest was poorly chosen. He made it too easy to confuse his message. It upset people even sympathetic to his cause. I can appreciate just wanting to keep any politics out of sports, I was annoyed when Tebow knelt too. If CK did something outside the game instead, he probably would have gotten more support and could have played longer.

Bingo!

I don't support BLM. But that's not my point.

Kaep could do whatever he wanted to do on his own dime. And he had a lot of dimes, $25M worth.
Instead, he insisted on doing it on the NFL's dime.

And now nobody wants to pay him to promote his personal agenda. And The Woke consider him a victim, because nobody wants to pay him $25M.
Tom

 

[laughing dog]

Thank you for the long-winded version of "I believe it but I don't know it". The naivete that all 26 teams
independently assessed a healthy first string quarterback as unworthy of even an offer for a 2nd or 3rd string quarterback is truly heart-warming.

Thank you for condensing the problem into such a short post.

You are most welcome.

You completely ignored the real issue and focused on the victim status of a super rich, good looking, celebrity who agrees with you.

No, I did not. I asked you about the basis for your claim of knowledge.

But he brought his personal issues to the field. In a way that negatively impacted corporate profits. He deliberately alienated a huge chunk of NFL consumers. Those consumers buy the tickets and watch the commercials and pay ridiculous money for swag that makes NFL profitable. Subtracting his damage to profitability from his value as a player probably left him a net liability.

Since the NFL makes most of its revenue from its TV contract, I seriously doubt Mr. Kaepernick's protest affected the profits of the NFL at all. Do you have any actual evidence to support your claim about the profitability or for that matter, his alienation of a huge chunk of NFL consumers?

Mr. Kaepernick made a choice. He vastly underestimated the negative reactions to his almost imperceptible act of protest by fans, the human shitpost that was POTUS and the cowardice of the NFL ownership.

Do I care what happened? Not really. But that does not mean I should blindly accept the kneejerk NFL apologia as fact.

 

[JohnG]

I think it should be noted that the media sources that complains about "woke" culture are some of the stupidest messaging outlets out there.

Carry on

 

[TomC]

You are most welcome.

You completely ignored the real issue and focused on the victim status of a super rich, good looking, celebrity who agrees with you.

No, I did not. I asked you about the basis for your claim of knowledge.

But he brought his personal issues to the field. In a way that negatively impacted corporate profits. He deliberately alienated a huge chunk of NFL consumers. Those consumers buy the tickets and watch the commercials and pay ridiculous money for swag that makes NFL profitable. Subtracting his damage to profitability from his value as a player probably left him a net liability.

Since the NFL makes most of its revenue from its TV contract, I seriously doubt Mr. Kaepernick's protest affected the profits of the NFL at all. Do you have any actual evidence to support your claim about the profitability or for that matter, his alienation of a huge chunk of NFL consumers?

Mr. Kaepernick made a choice. He vastly underestimated the negative reactions to his almost imperceptible act of protest by fans, the human shitpost that was POTUS and the cowardice of the NFL ownership.

Do I care what happened? Not really. But that does not mean I should blindly accept the kneejerk NFL apologia as fact.

Your Woke blinders are remarkable.

If Kaep was a great player and loved by the fans, the NFL would have offered him a bigger, better, contract. They do this for the money.

That's the evidence that Kaep wasn't worth much. The NFL wasn't willing to pay him enough to get him to sign a deal.

And frankly, your use of the term "almost imperceptible", is laughable. Even I heard about it. And even now, I'm hearing about it. Kaep managed to punch through my utter disinterest in NFL long enough to give me an even worse impression of BLM.

Sorry, super rich celebrities talking about how much of a victim they are is nauseating, to me. Too much like Trump complaining about how misunderstood he is by the nasty liberals.
Tom

 

[Derec]

I think it should be noted that the media sources that complains about "woke" culture are some of the stupidest messaging outlets out there.

Not nearly as stupid as "woke" outlets themselves!

 

[untermensche]

Regardless of its merits, Kaepernick's method of protest was poorly chosen. He made it too easy to confuse his message. It upset people even sympathetic to his cause. I can appreciate just wanting to keep any politics out of sports, I was annoyed when Tebow knelt too. If CK did something outside the game instead, he probably would have gotten more support and could have played longer.

Bingo!

I don't support BLM. But that's not my point.

Kaep could do whatever he wanted to do on his own dime. And he had a lot of dimes, $25M worth.
Instead, he insisted on doing it on the NFL's dime.

And now nobody wants to pay him to promote his personal agenda. And The Woke consider him a victim, because nobody wants to pay him $25M.
Tom

He quietly knelt during the national anthem.

Anybody who has a problem with it is a sick hyper-authoritarian scumbag.

 

[TomC]

Regardless of its merits, Kaepernick's method of protest was poorly chosen. He made it too easy to confuse his message. It upset people even sympathetic to his cause. I can appreciate just wanting to keep any politics out of sports, I was annoyed when Tebow knelt too. If CK did something outside the game instead, he probably would have gotten more support and could have played longer.

Bingo!

I don't support BLM. But that's not my point.

Kaep could do whatever he wanted to do on his own dime. And he had a lot of dimes, $25M worth.
Instead, he insisted on doing it on the NFL's dime.

And now nobody wants to pay him to promote his personal agenda. And The Woke consider him a victim, because nobody wants to pay him $25M.
Tom

He quietly knelt during the national anthem.

Anybody who has a problem with it is a sick hyper-authoritarian scumbag.

And now the NFL doesn't want to pay him enough to get him to play.

I don't care about any of this. It's the Wokesters who seem upset. I see them as the sick hyper-authoritarian scumbags. YMMV
Tom

 

[untermensche]

He quietly knelt during the national anthem.

Anybody who has a problem with it is a sick hyper-authoritarian scumbag.

And now the NFL doesn't want to pay him enough to get him to play.

I don't care about any of this. It's the Wokesters who seem upset. I see them as the sick hyper-authoritarian scumbags. YMMV
Tom

The NFL blackballed him because almost all the owners are old white men.

 

[Emily Lake]

You were speaking of the lawsuit. You brought up Kaepernick wasn't that good (or that people were saying it). I brought McCown whose stats were flat compared to Kaepernick and still played 17 or so years.

Who is Mr McCown? Did he file a lawsuit against the NFL? Was he Wokester who thought his personal issues deserved air time, paid for by his employer?
Tom

You mean, kneeling during the political national anthem? Players were kneeling and a bunch of loudmouths complained a lot about it, like Janet Jackson's breast. I don't it is quite as simple as saying NFL consumers were against it. I know plenty either didn't care or supported the extremely brief form of protest that didn't impact play on the field one iota.

Before I go through your list of strawman arguments,

How did Janet Jackson's boobs get involved?
Sorry if I'm not straight enough to understand, but I'm not. Please explain it, clearly.
Tom

I don't think straight/gay has anything to do with it. Seems like two events that occurred in relation to american football that some people got mad about is the only connection. Janet's areolas have zero bearing on this discussion.

Although, really, I'm also kinda of the opinion that Colin's knees have no real bearing on the discussion either, so maybe I'm the one who's missing something.

 

[Emily Lake]

He quietly knelt during the national anthem.

Anybody who has a problem with it is a sick hyper-authoritarian scumbag.

And now the NFL doesn't want to pay him enough to get him to play.

I don't care about any of this. It's the Wokesters who seem upset. I see them as the sick hyper-authoritarian scumbags. YMMV
Tom

The NFL blackballed him because almost all the owners are old white men.

Which is why there are so very few black NFL players, I assume?

Honestly, what does the color of the owners have to do with this? I rather suspect that the only color they care about is green.

 

[TomC]

He quietly knelt during the national anthem.

Anybody who has a problem with it is a sick hyper-authoritarian scumbag.

And now the NFL doesn't want to pay him enough to get him to play.

I don't care about any of this. It's the Wokesters who seem upset. I see them as the sick hyper-authoritarian scumbags. YMMV
Tom

The NFL blackballed him because almost all the owners are old white men.

Meaning, they aren't in it for the money? What?

Or is this one of those vague racist assertions, "they're White so they have to be racist. All White people are racist. Everybody knows that!"

Tom

 

[ZiprHead]

He quietly knelt during the national anthem.

Anybody who has a problem with it is a sick hyper-authoritarian scumbag.

And now the NFL doesn't want to pay him enough to get him to play.

Was he actually offered a contract that he refused?

 

[TomC]

He quietly knelt during the national anthem.

Anybody who has a problem with it is a sick hyper-authoritarian scumbag.

And now the NFL doesn't want to pay him enough to get him to play.

Was he actually offered a contract that he refused?

We discussed this way back. I responded on post #146.

Part of the problem is "What does offering a contract" mean. If all the teams agree that Kaep isn't worth more than $50K/year, and that will require some stringent on field restrictions he is unlikely to agree to, so nobody offers so much as a meeting,


Has Kaep been blacklisted, or just priced himself so far out of the market that nobody makes an offer?
Tom

 

[untermensche]

Was he actually offered a contract that he refused?

We discussed this way back. I responded on post #146.

Part of the problem is "What does offering a contract" mean. If all the teams agree that Kaep isn't worth more than $50K/year, and that will require some stringent on field restrictions he is unlikely to agree to, so nobody offers so much as a meeting,


Has Kaep been blacklisted, or just priced himself so far out of the market that nobody makes an offer?
Tom

Nobody has entered negotiations with him. Nobody will invite him to camp.

He has been blackballed.

 

[untermensche]

The NFL blackballed him because almost all the owners are old white men.

Which is why there are so very few black NFL players, I assume?

Honestly, what does the color of the owners have to do with this? I rather suspect that the only color they care about is green.

What does the color of people have to do with how they feel about Kaepernick and his legitimate protest?

He is a hero in the black community.

Blackballed by old white men who run the show.

 

[TomC]

Was he actually offered a contract that he refused?

We discussed this way back. I responded on post #146.

Part of the problem is "What does offering a contract" mean. If all the teams agree that Kaep isn't worth more than $50K/year, and that will require some stringent on field restrictions he is unlikely to agree to, so nobody offers so much as a meeting,


Has Kaep been blacklisted, or just priced himself so far out of the market that nobody makes an offer?
Tom

Nobody has entered negotiations with him. Nobody will invite him to camp.

He has been blackballed.

How do you know this?

You're making some strong, but implausible, assertions.
Tom

 

[ZiprHead]

Was he actually offered a contract that he refused?

We discussed this way back. I responded on post #146.

Part of the problem is "What does offering a contract" mean. If all the teams agree that Kaep isn't worth more than $50K/year, and that will require some stringent on field restrictions he is unlikely to agree to, so nobody offers so much as a meeting,


Has Kaep been blacklisted, or just priced himself so far out of the market that nobody makes an offer?
Tom

So basically he was never offered a contract and was never even allowed to sit down and negotiate. So basically everything you are saying about this is being pulled from your nether regions.

 

[ZiprHead]

Nobody has entered negotiations with him. Nobody will invite him to camp.

He has been blackballed.

How do you know this?

You're making some strong, but implausible, assertions.
Tom

Pot, meet kettle.

 

[TomC]

Was he actually offered a contract that he refused?

We discussed this way back. I responded on post #146.

Part of the problem is "What does offering a contract" mean. If all the teams agree that Kaep isn't worth more than $50K/year, and that will require some stringent on field restrictions he is unlikely to agree to, so nobody offers so much as a meeting,


Has Kaep been blacklisted, or just priced himself so far out of the market that nobody makes an offer?
Tom

So basically he was never offered a contract and was never even allowed to sit down and negotiate. So basically everything you are saying about this is being pulled from your nether regions.

No. But I'm sure it makes you feel woke to say so.

The fundamental premise here is that the NFL owners are more motivated by irrational racism than profit. Does that make sense to you?
Tom

 

[ZiprHead]

So basically he was never offered a contract and was never even allowed to sit down and negotiate. So basically everything you are saying about this is being pulled from your nether regions.

No. But I'm sure it makes you feel woke to say so.

The fundamental premise here is that the NFL owners are more motivated by irrational racism than profit. Does that make sense to you?
Tom

No, it's not.

 

[TomC]

So basically he was never offered a contract and was never even allowed to sit down and negotiate. So basically everything you are saying about this is being pulled from your nether regions.

No. But I'm sure it makes you feel woke to say so.

The fundamental premise here is that the NFL owners are more motivated by irrational racism than profit. Does that make sense to you?
Tom

No, it's not.

Please explain why you think that Kaep never accepted an offer.
Tom

 

[laughing dog]

No, it's not.

Please explain why you think that Kaep never accepted an offer.
Tom

The point is that Mr Kaepernick was not made an offer to play football by anyone in the NFL. There was nothing for him to reject.