Kaepernick collusion case proving that teams viewed him as a starting quarterback

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
Bushed
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
338,367
Reputation
-35,013
Daps
641,675
Reppin
The Deep State


https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...t-teams-viewed-him-as-a-starting-quarterback/

Kaepernick collusion case proving that teams viewed him as a starting quarterback
Posted by Mike Florio on May 21, 2018, 5:55 AM EDT
Posted by Mike Florio on
gettyimages-630215582-e1526896522136.jpg

Remember when quarterback Colin Kaepernick initially went unsigned after becoming a free agent in March 2017? Remember the false and overstated concerns that were being pushed to justify the position that he was unemployed for football reasons? Remember when some said that was all a bunch of crap?

As it turns out, it was.

If the subtle-on-the-surface shift that happened last July, when Kaepernick’s status went from being about only football to being about non-football considerations, wasn’t enough to prove that the “all about football” narrative amounted to nonsense, the ongoing collusion case is establishing that multiple teams viewed Kaepernick as a starting NFL quarterback in 2017, and that they continue to view him that way. Per a source with knowledge of the situation, internal franchise documents generated as part of the free-agency evaluation process and testimony from witnesses harvested via depositions in the collusion litigation has established that teams viewed Kaepernick as being good enough not simply to be employed by an NFL team, but to be a starting quarterback for an NFL team.

So why wasn’t he?

The real reason has been obvious for more than a year, and if anyone still believes that Kaepernick’s unemployment arose from the belief that he couldn’t perform at a sufficiently high level, that’s just simply not the case. (Although at this point there’s no chance anyone’s long-made-up mind will be changing on anything related to Kaepernick, facts notwithstanding.) The deeper question becomes whether Kaepernick and his lawyers can prove coordination among the teams and/or through the league office in connection with the decision to steer clear of Kaepernick based on his role at the forefront of protests that occurred during the national anthem.

Whether coordination can or can’t be proven, the collusion case will conclusively prove one thing, regardless of whether anyone wants to believe it: Multiple teams believed that Colin Kaepernick was still good enough to play after becoming a free agent more than a year ago. Which means that, at least as to Kaepernick, the notion that teams make decisions based only on trying to win football games doesn’t hold water.
 

Imyremeshaw

كن التغير الذي تريد أن تراه في العالم
Joined
Jun 28, 2012
Messages
1,738
Reputation
385
Daps
5,268
Reppin
NULL
Whats so disingenuous about this situation is the cacs posting comments on the article and moving goal post, first it was:

1. Kapernick couldn't play and wasn't a good player
2. Kapernick wouldn't accept a backup role or take less pay( bullshyt by meeting with the Seahawks and Ravens)
3. Now its he is bad for business after the NFL has employed many shyt owners(Jim Irsay) and players ) Josh Brown)


THe NFL is a shyt organization, fukk them :mindblown:
i
 

the cac mamba

Banned
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
111,880
Reputation
14,210
Daps
317,031
Reppin
NULL
This case is looking like a slam dunk.
:dead: no fukkin way

look, we all know why they didnt sign him. each and every owner has a fanbase made up of racist whites, so signing him was a bad business move. ive never even seen this as an indictment of the NFL, but of america itself

how do you prove it in court, when no one is obligated to hire anyone for a job? how do you prove collusion when none of these owners needed a meeting to decide that none of them were gonna sign him?

id love to see him win, but :yeshrug: i dont see a case being proven in court with hard evidence
 

BaldingSoHard

Banned
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
25,097
Reputation
7,423
Daps
111,368
:dead: no fukkin way

look, we all know why they didnt sign him. each and every owner has a fanbase made up of racist whites, so signing him was a bad business move. ive never even seen this as an indictment of the NFL, but of america itself

how do you prove it in court, when no one is obligated to hire anyone for a job? how do you prove collusion when none of these owners needed a meeting to decide that none of them were gonna sign him?

id love to see him win, but :yeshrug: i dont see a case being proven in court with hard evidence

That's why collusion was so smart. It doesn't matter why they colluded. All that needs to be proven is that there was a narrative among owners to lock him out. Even if they found that the owners, from a business standpoint, didn't believe he could cut it as a starting quarterback in the NFL, if they worked together to prevent him from getting a contract, that's collusion.

This is basically a matter of subpoenaing the information on their exchange servers.
 

Ethnic Cleansing

Fucc Slobks and Crabks
Joined
May 14, 2012
Messages
5,983
Reputation
2,782
Daps
25,163
That's why collusion was so smart. It doesn't matter why they colluded. All that needs to be proven is that there was a narrative among owners to lock him out. Even if they found that the owners, from a business standpoint, didn't believe he could cut it as a starting quarterback in the NFL, if they worked together to prevent him from getting a contract, that's collusion.

This is basically a matter of subpoenaing the information on their exchange servers.
So does T.O. have a retroactive case :jbhmm:
 

panopticon

Superstar
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
5,435
Reputation
2,142
Daps
26,487
So does T.O. have a retroactive case :jbhmm:
Depends on the statute of limitations for collusion :manny:

If he's still within that window, he might have an even better case than Kaepernick. :krs:

They weren't so careful with email in the late 00s and early 10s...:pachaha:

If he gets himself a fukkin :demonic::demonic::demonic: for a lawyer...he might get himself a nice check too :banderas:
 

panopticon

Superstar
Joined
Nov 28, 2016
Messages
5,435
Reputation
2,142
Daps
26,487
That's why collusion was so smart. It doesn't matter why they colluded. All that needs to be proven is that there was a narrative among owners to lock him out. Even if they found that the owners, from a business standpoint, didn't believe he could cut it as a starting quarterback in the NFL, if they worked together to prevent him from getting a contract, that's collusion.

This is basically a matter of subpoenaing the information on their exchange servers.
All they need is just 1 email between 2 different team representatives...:banderas:
Could be between two low-level staffers within the GM's office of their respective teams :lolbron:

Two "college bros" just talking shyt about how their bosses would never sign Kaepernick :scust:

That's all it would take...the circumstantial evidence would handle the rest and take this one across the goal line :blessed:

When Kaepernick's people find that email...watch how quickly the NFL puts together a settlement offer :russ:
 
Top