How willing would you be to sign Colin Kaepernick
by SixShutouts66 (2020-06-18 12:05:41)

if you were an NFL GM? There seems to be a good deal of pressure to have it happen, but it seems that the pressure will then lead to why isn't he started. It would seem that someplace like Tampa Bay or Indianapolis with a very good QB on his final years would be ideal, but I have to believe CK wants a starting job.


As long as he is willing to sign for
by 84david  (2020-06-21 08:44:53)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

veteran minimum and carry the clipboard
as a backup, sure.

I think he wants Aaron Rodgers money
and a starting job though. There arent too
many of those around.


Honestly I miss Al Davis -
by ndhouston  (2020-06-20 13:12:37)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The original AFL owners were real mavericks. Davis would have signed Kaepernick and told Trump to go to hell.


The last time he played was 1/1/2017
by 105Marquette  (2020-06-19 23:02:04)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

When's the last time a QB got signed after sitting out 3 seasons?


The Browns seem to always need a QB.
by 88_92WSND  (2020-06-19 12:45:23)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

They're supposedly looking at Cam Newton, too. THe trio of Mayfield, Newton, and Kaepernick would make for an entertaining off season, if nothing else. ESPN would just camp out there...


Don't know the skill level, but the sideshow that will
by other_guy  (2020-06-19 12:02:13)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

accompany him just may be too much to overcome.


It would depend on the contract
by Groundhog  (2020-06-19 00:07:06)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

If he's willing to take a deal commensurate with his abilities, then I'd be fine with it. If tries to demand starter's money, no thanks.


Unfortunately easier if you have black head coach
by SixShutouts66  (2020-06-18 23:29:22)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I have to believe that there's a lot of pressure from players and from the outside to sign Kaepernick. There's also a widespread belief that he was better than a number of other QBs when he was cut by the 49ers and that his protests made him unpalatable to a number of teams. It will be hard for him to regain his skills quickly after being away from the game for several years. As others have noted, not playing him or releasing him would appear to many as a continuation of the NFL blackball; and as unfair as it would be to the coach, having a black coach make that decision would lend more credence to the decision.

As a side note, CK's decreasing level of performance was probably due to the league starting to catch up to the read option play, moving Kaepernick to more of a pocket passer, and a sharp decline in the 49ers overall talent. From what I remember CK was not a divisive figure in the locker room. It's unclear to me whether the 49ers decided not to give him a big second contract, whether they knew they were in a rebuild mode, or whether they judged that he was an Andy Dalton-like skill level and wanted to move on.

It's not clear whether other teams passed on CK due to wide differences in salary expectation or wanting to use him as a backup. Given the controversy this has caused, I would have expected that any offers CK rejected would have been leaked.

An unfortunate truth in life, beyond FB and race, is that one can get away with certain behavious if you're good enough - but you can't if you just so so.

ND 27 Nevada Reno 0


Honestly, as a backup, sure
by Voisman  (2020-06-18 21:47:00)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Have there been more divisive players in the locker room? I have to think so at this point.


The NFL is in the entertainment business. As a GM, ...
by Barney68  (2020-06-18 18:09:30)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I'd be asking myself "does he increase revenue, decrease revenue, or have no effect?"

Since TV is independent of location, then one is asking about the local audience: will they show or cut back significantly? If Kaep gets the starting job, he's likely to be "the face of the franchise" so that would be part of the guesswork.

Summary: if my local audience is favorable or neutral, maybe. If negative in a significant way, probably not. If "maybe," does he make sense for our team, i.e., skills a good fit for the system, is he likely to be good in the locker room, etc? If "yes," how much will he cost?


I would be fine with it
by jt  (2020-06-18 17:20:49)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

and if he is better than the starter, he would deserve to play. If he's not, he won't. These things are decided on the field.

He's not likely to go into Seattle and beat out Russell Wilson just because other players like his stance, but it's not like the league is full of those guys. He could likely compete with a team like the Chargers, for instance.


The real issue is if you sign him you can't cut him.
by akaRonMexico  (2020-06-18 16:07:11)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Doesn't matter how bad he is, or whether it causes an issue in the locker room, once you sign him you pretty much have to keep him till the end of his contract or face the wrath of the PC Mob.


I don't agree with this
by jt  (2020-06-18 17:23:13)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

again, if he falls on his face people will recognize that. The NFL is a meritocracy.

Also, I doubt that he would be in demand for a big money contract anyway.


The decision on #2 qb is typically highly subjective
by Doggie  (2020-06-19 21:06:14)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

It is often quite messy over the choice of #2 and often a financial based one. Sure, if he outright stinks it will be easy to cut him. But there is a good chance that it won't be a clear cut choice especially if he can rack up good looks/stats vs 2nd and 3rd team scrubs. We all know the instant stars born in pre-season who can't tie their shoes when it counts.

On top of that, one of the jobs of the #2 guy is getting the #1 guy ready every week. Is CK good at that and/or would he accept that role? Sure, it is easy to back up a Tom Brady/Aaron Rodgers type but what if he ends up backing up at Jacksonville /Tennessee /Bronco/Redskins'Chargers where the second the starter struggles, there will be instant questioning/demand by some that CK be given a shot.

I'm betting if he gets a chance and gets cut, there will still be those that will say that he got screwed/didn't get a fair chance because of his social stances. Any team that cuts him will end up having to bend over backwards to justify a decision that most people wouldn't even question. I'd hate to be the guy who makes the team in front of him because folks will have the microscope on him.


These arguments are so silly
by jt  (2020-06-22 20:35:05)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Pretending to know what is in another man's mind, trying to justify not signing him because of a perceived backlash if he gets cut, etc.

It's decided on the field. Guys are cut all the time.


Seconded. The players know. * *
by Voisman  (2020-06-18 21:48:30)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


His salary expectations need to match his contribution
by knutesteen  (2020-06-18 19:33:25)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

If he plays well enough to be a starter, he should be so paid. I would never have hesitated to sign him if he could help my team win games. That being said, perhaps his contract needs to be incentive-laden to allow reality to match compensation.

Of course, I'm of the opinion that US pro sports need to stop playing the National Anthem at the beginning of entertainment events...we don't have them at rock concerts, Broadway shows (do we?), so why at sporting events? That would render the entire controversy moot. If our National team is playing another country, that's one thing, but if the Giants are playing the 49ers, who cares if the National Anthem is played? What does that have to do with what will ensue on the field?


Perhaps they do
by jt  (2020-06-22 20:41:36)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Also, don't forget that whomever signs him is going to immediately have the #1 selling jerseys (including alternate). There is definitely upside financially for the team.


My wild speculation is that many teams fear this.
by tdiddy07  (2020-06-18 15:07:26)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

For a team that thinks it has a chance to contend, why add a backup quarterback that could sew division, either from complaining about playing time or from bringing divisive issues to the attention of the team. That's pretty similar to the Tim Tebow phenomenon a few years ago. However, like you said, a team with an entrenched qb and a backup need would be willing to have him compete in training camp.

But you'd think there are enough teams that are bad enough that it's worth seeing if he can return to old form and who can use a shot of publicity. The problem is that in the past couple of years, Cincinnati was one of those teams. But it has a conservative fan base for which the signing probably would've harmed attendance.


The big money in the NFL is TV and that is equally shared by
by Tex Francisco  (2020-06-18 15:37:55)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

all teams, as is most other revenue. Almost every NFL game is a sellout or darn close. Compared to a sport like baseball where so much revenue is local, there just isn't a lot of financial upside for an NFL team to take on a sideshow like Kaepernick or Tebow. Even with the Bengals, they weren't making those moves to generate attendance and viewership. By signing players with baggage, they were hoping to get a competitive edge by getting A-level talent at B-level prices.


Irsay, owner of Colts, displays a high level of
by jbrown_9999  (2020-06-18 14:36:49)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

respect for military and the flag. They have a seating section reserved for active duty military, an empty seat in support of POW-MIA, a flag the size of the football field for the national anthem.

They also cut a player who took a knee 2 or 3 years ago.

I would be very surprised if the signed Kaepernick.


32yo and out of the league for a bit?
by Wooderson  (2020-06-18 14:34:10)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

He's worth low risk money, but he's not Tom Brady at 32.


His passing wasn't good before he was benched.
by G.K.Chesterton  (2020-06-18 13:24:11)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

He had/has an awkward motion (to my eye) on the short/medium passes. He absolutely stoned the Packers in 2012 and 2013. I think his ship has sailed, but you only need one team out of 32 to go after him.


I've seen a cut up of some of his passing plays from 2016
by jt  (2020-06-18 17:22:13)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

after he got healthy--given his supporting cast, he actually did a really good job.

He needs to be in the right type of system, but if you pair him with some good players on the outside he can be dangerous.


He got benched in 2015 for Gabbert, who was already the
by G.K.Chesterton  (2020-06-18 18:49:55)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

the worst QB of the decade and won the prize going away (confirmed last week by Football Outsiders). Kaepernick must have really stunk up the joint to do that and maybe it was too big of a hill to climb to come back.

I can still see Eric Walden whiffing on Kaepernick in the playoffs.


he was injured
by jt  (2020-06-22 23:19:19)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

he had two surgeries that offseason. That said, yes, he was terrible in 2015.

He beat Gabbert out the next year and played pretty well on an awful team. I could link to that, but my guess is that you can find it yourself.

I can still see an awful lot of Green Bay Packers whiffing on him in the playoffs (twice).

Nobody is saying that he's a sure fire hall of famer, but if you're going to compare him to Blaine ("that's not a name, that's an appliance!") Gabbert, you could at least be honest and include the entire story. The truth is that for the majority of his career he was an above average to very good qb. In the right system, he likely could have continued along that path. As to right now, I don't know how ready he would be as it has been a few years.


I am/was fine with the kneeling,
by Tex Francisco  (2020-06-18 12:53:25)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

but he was a mediocre QB with baggage even before the kneeling. He lost his starting QB job to Blaine Gabbert. He had several chances to win it back with new coaches and couldn't.


Exactly this. Then add in the absolute media circus
by Steelhop  (2020-06-18 15:58:24)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

he would bring into the locker room, he's going to get a lot of lip service but I doubt a team signs or even brings him in. Don't add in the fact, if his talent has degraded to the point you have to cut him...that headline just writes itself for negative publicity.


Right, and there are some leagues where a media circus
by Tex Francisco  (2020-06-18 20:22:02)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

translates into money, like it did with the LA Galaxy and David Beckham or the Birmingham Barons and Michael Jordan. With the NFL's revenue sharing model, it is on the far other end of the spectrum. A media circus does almost nothing for the team at the center of the circus.


It is now hip to kneel in the NFL
by RJD  (2020-06-25 16:19:37)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

so if he can help your team, media circus is a poor excuse.

With respect to kneeling, I always supported the kneelers.

Just look to the words of the anthem:

Land of the Free- that is all of us.
and the Home of the Brave- that is for the soldiers.

So the song doesn't just belong to people who served.