If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
There is little to no evidence he alienated customers. The TV decline originally cited was consistent with overall broadcast TV ratings decline for football and was in fact less decline than the rest of TV suffered.
This isn’t about paying customers. This is about PR problems and no team wanting to defend political speech that isn’t as reflexively popular as veterans on the field holding the flag.
The NFL acknowledged this by giving players an option to not go out on the field early. Had they come to that sensible solution in Year 1, it isn’t an issue.
And even less evidence it would be an issue now. People and players have kind of moved on. A couple of years ago you had POTUS weighing in on the issue in his own inimitable fashion. I doubt that would be the case now.
Having said that, the way Kap handled this weekend might cause some to think he's more motivated by creating publicity than by getting a chance to play football. That may scare some teams off. Rad suggested maybe he'll end up in Vince McMahon's new league. That might be a better fit.
I can't run no more
With that lawless crowd
While the killers in high places
Say their prayers out loud
But they've summoned, they've summoned up
A thundercloud
They're going to hear from me - Leonard Cohen
Ok, that's an interesting statement - do you feel he alienated the shit out of NFL fans? To the point that they'd stop attending/watching?
It's the opposite of the way yetisnowman feels, and I wonder if you're right. Follow the money, the only explanation I can come up with for this is him in the league would hurt their bottom line.
Myself, I'm surprised that one of the 31 egotistical fiercely independent billionaires didn't decide he was going to win them some games, flip the rest of the league the finger and sign him.
Do you recall the pulled sponsors? I kinda do. That's cash money.
So where is Tank? Seems this would be in his wheelhouse.
Maybe.
Yes?
No?
He's busy flipping burgers for minimum wage.
I can't run no more
With that lawless crowd
While the killers in high places
Say their prayers out loud
But they've summoned, they've summoned up
A thundercloud
They're going to hear from me - Leonard Cohen
Hey Madtown, it seems like you're encouraging the turning of this thread into FYI material hahahahaha.
I'll just say, the despicable shit Kaepernick did and said is old business now. If he's willing to settle down and be normal, then he should be judged on how he can play football.
I saw the Lions/Cowboys game today, and Detroit got a lot of mileage out of a similar player - Driskel. I'd rather have somebody like him who can do some running than an immobile guy, noodle armed or not. That is especially true given the O Line that we have that can barely protect on a good day. As I think I said in a different thread, using Kaepernick like the Niners used him when he was second string would be a wise move.
Bottom line: I wouldn't mind the Packers getting him - although I strongly doubt that will happen.
What could be more GOOD and NORMAL and AMERICAN than Packer Football?
Daniel Wallach @WALLACHLEGAL
Sunday edition of Commercial Law 101: If you’re Colin Kaepernick, under no circumstances do you sign this Release, which could operate as a backdoor waiver of any future collusion claims. Read paras. 2 and 7 together, and you’ll see the problem. (h/t @ProFootballTalk)
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
"losses (including death)" is metaphorically killing me.
Surprised they did not specifically mention "news leak". Though indemnifying "partners" covers anyone with rights to broadcast games.
Daniel Wallach @WALLACHLEGAL
Cliffs Notes version:
“Player... agrees to indemnify and hold harmless... the National Football League... from ANY and ALL claims... related directly or INDIRECTLY to the Workout...”
@WALLACHLEGAL
The “directly or indirectly” language in paragraph 7 is the key. If NFL was acting in good faith, it would have agreed to carve-out language (e.g., “Notwithstanding the foregoing” or “provided, however”) that expressly excluded any collusion claims from the scope of the release.
Brad_OTC @BradOTC
Had the exact same thought.
Even the beginning of paragraph 7 gives me pause with the mention of “consideration for the opportunity”
That reads to me as: to be granted this workout opportunity, you release the NFL from all future liability
Omar Kelly @OmarKelly
And this contract was specifically written for Colin Kaepernick.....it isn’t standard.
So where is Tank? Seems this would be in his wheelhouse.
Maybe.
Yes?
No?
I mistakenly assumed PBMax was the typical forum moderator: an uptight, shortsighted, narrow-minded hypocrite, as Yoko's late husband used to say. Reading this thread, I've discovered that PB is kinda cool.
Thus, I am yielding this fight to him.
Besides, y'all know that I've been kneeling with Kap since we knelt together during the damn anthem prior to the boring shareholder meeting at Lambeau, summer of '13.
Asked Kap why he ain't at the 69ers' camp. He was like, dude, I own the Packers! I was like, word - although that abomination Mr. Hyde spotted ya one.
Kap was like, lol, Hyde couldn't catch a cold standing naked with the majestic Polar Bears on the North Pole.
Capitalism is an iron trap
Capitalists are inhumane saps
Vive le Kap! Vive le Kap!
Comment