Colin Kaepernick has been waiting patiently for his next NFL opportunity. His patience has now expired.

Kaepernick has filed a grievance against the NFL under the Collective Bargaining Agreement. The grievance alleges that the NFL’s teams colluded in not signing him to a contract, presumably due to his decision to kneel during the national anthem in 2016.

Kaepernick has retained outside counsel to handle the claim. The NFL Players Association will remain in touch with Kaepernick as the grievance proceeds; however, Kaepernick’s private counsel will be spearheading the effort.



I read he's hired very high-profile attorney ^Mark Geragos.

(continued)

Kaepernick became a free agent in March after opting out of the final year of his contract with the 49ers. (San Francisco G.M. John Lynch has said that the team would have cut Kaepernick if he hadn’t opted out.) The Seahawks brought Kaepernick in for a visit, but did not sign him. The Ravens were considering adding Kaepernick during training camp. Owner Steve Bisciotti publicly acknowledged that fans had expressed opposition to the possibility.

The last straw may have been the failure of the Titans to give Kaepernick a tryout after quarterback Marcus Mariota suffered an injured hamstring. The Titans instead brought in Brandon Weeden, Matt McGloin, Matt Barkley, and T.J. Yates, before signing Weeden.

Packers coach Mike McCarthy already has said that they won’t be adding a quarterback in the wake of the broken collarbone suffered by Aaron Rodgers. If the Packers were inclined to add a quarterback, Kaepernick could make sense. His grievance, however, could cause teams to view him differently (even though the filing of a grievance should not be held against him).

Source: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...ainst-nfl/

Regardless of how you feel about taking a knee during the anthem, I'm curious whether the football fans (and others) here feel that Kaep was discriminated and colluded against.

I've heard some football fans say he just sucks on the field and that's why he hasn't been picked up. I've watched him play a few times and he didn't suck, but that was a while back.

I've heard a lot of others say that he's way better than a bunch of the QBs playing now and it's clear that the teams just aren't willing to face public backlash to acquire his talent, or that the owners want to punish him for his silent political/social protest.

What do you think, does he have a solid case?

Read some on this guy and although he may have some talent I have not read anything that said he was all that.
Apparently he thought so, I think he is a whiny asshole

What is 'collusion' in this context?

The collective bargaining agreement between the league and the players' union prohibits teams from conspiring to make decisions about signing a player. But the CBA also says the mere fact that a player is unsigned and evidence about the player's qualifications to be on an NFL roster do not constitute proof of collusion.

For that reason, such cases are difficult to prove, according to legal experts.

"There has to be some evidence of an agreement between multiple teams not to sign a player," said Gabriel Feldman, the director of the sports law program at Tulane University. "Disagreement over personnel decisions, as obvious as it may seem to someone looking at this, does not provide evidence of collusion. There has to be some evidence of an explicit or implied agreement. There has to be proof of a conspiracy."

More here: http://www.capitalgazette.com/ct-kaepern...story.html

(10-15-2017, 09:07 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: What do you think, does he have a solid case?

I think he has some information that confirms his belief, emails, memos, recordings, things of that nature. He has something that is going to prove his case and I think he's probably had it for quite awhile.

Good luck to him, but I don't think he has a chance of winning his case.

As far as talent goes, he was an NFL quarterback who took his team to a Super Bowl. But that was 2012 and before he was injured. He was 2-6 in 2015 before being placed on IR and had shoulder surgery, then came back the following season and went 1-10. Then ad on to that his political protest and he's not a very attractive pick for any team.

Quarterbacks are usually leaders of the team. Most times they set the tone. NFL owners don't want to hire a leader that is toxic to either the locker room or the fan base. And they sure don't want to hire a quarterback who doesn't seem to have winning football games as their top priority. My opinion is that's why the owners/coaches don't want him - he appears to have lost a step, he'd likely be a distraction to the team, and wouldn't ad positively to the chemistry.

Collusion is exceedingly difficult to prove that's why I think he has something of substance and has probably had it for awhile.

legally he only needs two parties to prove collusion. He is a hot potato though and can only bring headache to any team that signs him if any do. What happens if someone hires him then only puts him out every once in a while or he gets sacked really hard and gets hurt or a coach bitches at him the wrong way. Tons of superficial baloney he could start and make it all about him.

He would have to have some swing to be able to see any phone calls or paperwork that would prove it. Today people should be smart enough to never write anything down or text anything or even a phone call if they do and get caught its really to bad for being so stupid.

(10-16-2017, 11:13 AM)Maggot Wrote: What happens if someone hires him then only puts him out every once in a while or he gets sacked really hard and gets hurt or a coach bitches at him the wrong way.

I think this lawsuit is an admission that he knows he's never going to work as a QB again.

(10-16-2017, 12:17 PM)Duchess Wrote:
I think this lawsuit is an admission that he knows he's never going to work as a QB again.

For sure. He's done.

(10-15-2017, 09:07 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: I've heard some football fans say he just sucks on the field and that's why he hasn't been picked up. I've watched him play a few times and he didn't suck, but that was a while back.

What do you think, does he have a solid case?

His last four years as a niner went right down the toilet. Picked passes, blown reads, and somehow he lost his ability to stretch the play with his legs. It's almost as if he just said fuck it after that loss to the Seahawks in 2013. I wouldn't even want him as a backup riding the pine.

I don't think he has a leg to stand on, but he can always take a knee.

HOT OFF THE PRESS:
The league has been trying to find a way to resolve the issue of their players protesting during the anthem and will meet with their owners, players and the players association over the next few weeks to address the issue.

One way to do so would be to address the inequalities the players are protesting and extending the NFL's platform to help provide solutions. The league attaching its name to criminal justice reform would seem to be a step towards that effort.

In a memo in August, that idea along with a social awareness month akin to Breast Cancer Awareness month were among the many suggestions that Seahawks defensive end Michael Bennett, Philadelphia Eagles safety Malcolm Jenkins and wide receiver Torrey Smith and retired wide receiver Anquan Boldin put forth.

Others including community outreach, meetings with local, state and federal leaders and various reforms such as decriminalizing poverty and reforming the bail system among others.

A resolution where the NFL supports in a real way fixing inequality in the U.S. while the players put the anthem controversy to bed by standing seems to be a solution the players could accept, as their protest would have led to real change in the status quo.

That was always their end goal.

Well maybe the players with all their money could get together and make a commercial or something, they must understand that it looks like they are disrespecting the flag and the vets kneeling during the anthem. They need a better venue and should pay for it themselves not the league.That is if they are so enamored with it.

(10-16-2017, 03:52 PM)Blindgreed1 Wrote: I don't think he has a leg to stand on, but he can always take a knee.

Effin' corny Gunnar, but pretty funny. ")

You shin be making jokes about something so serious though!

(10-16-2017, 09:54 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:

(10-16-2017, 03:52 PM)Blindgreed1 Wrote: I don't think he has a leg to stand on, but he can always take a knee.

Effin' corny Gunnar, but pretty funny. ")

You shin be making jokes about something so serious though!

NOT too soon.

It doesn't bother me that Kaepernick and other athletes take a knee in silent and peaceful protest of social injustice and police brutality. I get it.

It's more bothersome to me that the President of the United States has latched onto and exploited false accusations that it's a case of 'non-patriotism' to rile up the base and interfere in private business.

But, in all seriousness, Kaepernick doesn't have a leg to stand on unless he and his attorney can produce tangible evidence, like what Duchess mentioned, that two or more team owners colluded to blackball him over it.

I also think the fact that Kaepernick wore those stupid socks with pigs in police caps early on really worked against him.

(10-17-2017, 10:11 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: It doesn't bother me that Kaepernick and other athletes take a knee in silent and peaceful protest of social injustice and police brutality. I get it.

It's more bothersome to me that the President of the United States has latched onto and exploited false accusations that it's a case of 'non-patriotism' to rile up the base and interfere in private business.

But, in all seriousness, Kaepernick doesn't have a leg to stand on unless he and his attorney can produce tangible evidence, like what Duchess mentioned, that two or more team owners colluded to blackball him over it.

I also think the fact that Kaepernick wore those stupid socks with pigs in police caps early on really worked against him.

It is non-patriotism and disrespect, but as Malcom Jenkins pointed out, by design, protests aren't pretty, warm and fuzzy feel good displays. It's supposed to grab your attention. Well, it got attention. From the POTUS none the less. It shouldn't bother anyone who is fighting for change because it's publicity for the cause and any publicity is good publicity. Trump did BLM a favor by calling attention to it.

I understand your opinions but disagree with all of your points, Gunnar.

I think the players are more qualified to tell us how they feel and their motives than are you or the President.

And, the President COULD have turned the controversy into a productive discussion. But, he instead jumped on one side, the side his base predominantly holds, and used the issue to recommend owners firing their employees, labeling people as being unpatriotic when they've made clear that's not the place they're coming from, etc..........

I don't believe Trump has done BLM any favors, but I don't think he's hurt their cause any either. He's just playing off his own biases and successfully playing to his base, in my opinion.