NFL

CBear3
Posts: 7666
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2015 10:02 pm
Location: KC, MO

NFL

Postby CBear3 » Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:40 am

MWB, do you have a specific sequence that you think happened? Was there an email thread with 30 owners on it, where they all replied with a “co-sign”? A conference call? Do you think that Snyder and Jones got together and said, “I won’t if you won’t”?

I’m just not sure what realistic premise you’re positing. Or are you looking at the term “collusion” more loosely than us, where it’s just a couple owners having a couple casual conversations? Jerry Jones sending a one way message to the others saying, “guys...let’s not do this. Could be bad”?
Do you think the owners didn't sit down and discuss the anthem protests and what they could/should do? Do you think Kaep's name came up in those discussions as the origination of the anthem protests? Do you think owners of 9 digit properties like being forced to take a stand that could slice up their fan base?

I think there could certainly be a lot of hostility toward him, and I'm sure it was voiced openly in meetings. Whether somebody specifically said, "F this kid, he doesn't realize what a privilege it is to play in this league. If any of you sign this mfer I'm going kick your ass. He's the root of all our problems," would only be conjecture. If they put it in writing they're dumber than a doorknob.
I think this comes down to what your definition of collusion is. I don’t consider a meeting to discuss concerns about anthem kneeling and an informal consensus that company men are more desirable hires applies, to be honest. I know they’re the bosses. They have agency. They also are effectively part of a leadership team that sets cultural guidelines. Like any organization. The scenario you described is fine up until threats were made. I don’t understand how you think a business should run, otherwise.

They’re effectively partners in a business. They are allowed to agree. To disagree. To formally institute policy. To casually encourage policy. The only way Kaep has any case is if a specific team who wanted him was strong armed into not hiring him. And you’re getting into conspiratorial territory there. I’m not saying Jerry Jones definitely didn’t start making threats to other owners. He might have. But its not something that we can speculate. Or did I miss some piece of evidence?
I'm with you on pretty much everything you wrote. I don't think there's any way the owners are stupid enough to get caught in colluding in a proven illegal form. The previous posts gave me the idea that everybody was on the "He sucks, that's why he doesn't have a job. He's not worth the trouble," bandwagon. I think it's more than that. I believe he was the subject of conversation, and there was an agreement that everybody's life would be easier without him. That seems pretty reasonable. Where you have to take a leap is to believe that there was a threat from the group to any individual who wanted to step out line and sign him. While that's possible, any hard evidence is not going to exist.

shmenguin
Posts: 19041
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 2:37 pm
Location: people notice my car when its shined up

NFL

Postby shmenguin » Tue Feb 19, 2019 10:46 am

Ok then.

I think the thing that’s bugging me now is painting Kaep as a sympathetic figure. He made more money than he deserved. Then once his utility expired, he willfully pissed off his bosses. What fate do people think he deserves? I’d get fired if I did something comparable. I would say, “ah right. This is work. I can’t really be an activist at work and demand immunity from consequence”.

He took a risk. It failed. But he’s also a tycoon so who cares.

MWB
Posts: 8175
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 10:04 pm

NFL

Postby MWB » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:01 am

I don't view him as a sympathetic figure; I agree with what you said. I just also think there was some loose agreement to basically blackball him though. And I also think people who say he wasn't signed solely due to lack of talent are incorrect.

shmenguin
Posts: 19041
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 2:37 pm
Location: people notice my car when its shined up

NFL

Postby shmenguin » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:16 am

I don't view him as a sympathetic figure; I agree with what you said. I just also think there was some loose agreement to basically blackball him though. And I also think people who say he wasn't signed solely due to lack of talent are incorrect.
What are you basing that loose agreement on? A hunch? I guess the burden of proof is on both of us, but there’s nothing there, publically.

His accompanying circus turned away customers and created an unwanted distraction. Those are matters beyond lack of talent, but so? Proving twitter yokels wrong is one thing, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with the teams taking a pass for those reasons.

genoscoif
Posts: 1955
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 2:04 pm
Location: Suspiciously looking around...

NFL

Postby genoscoif » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:23 am

I don't view him as a sympathetic figure; I agree with what you said. I just also think there was some loose agreement to basically blackball him though. And I also think people who say he wasn't signed solely due to lack of talent are incorrect.
I think it's just as likely (maybe a little more likely) that each of the owners came to the conclusion on their own that Kaep, at his current talent level, wasn't worth the additional baggage. Whether he 'deserved' the baggage is a completely separate argument...but no one can deny that it existed. That would negate collusion.

I don't think it was a loose agreement... I think it was more of a 'hey, anyone thinking of signing this guy?' that was met with 32 rich guys laughing hysterically. I don't think it ever reached a need to collude.

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

NFL

Postby dodint » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:24 am

I don't view him as a sympathetic figure; I agree with what you said. I just also think there was some loose agreement to basically blackball him though. And I also think people who say he wasn't signed solely due to lack of talent are incorrect.
I think you're misunderstanding. It's not purely lack of talent. It's that he has backup QB talent but diva WR level baggage. People have said all along that an owner would suck it up for a Tom Brady, but CK is just not good enough.

The Browns cut a linebacker for insider trading. There just isn't a lot of room for bullshit when you're not a national level star in the NFL.

shmenguin
Posts: 19041
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 2:37 pm
Location: people notice my car when its shined up

NFL

Postby shmenguin » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:26 am

I’m gonna go puke all this libertarian out of me.

MWB
Posts: 8175
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 10:04 pm

NFL

Postby MWB » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:51 am

I'm not misunderstanding, I just wasn't clear enough, or didn't specify the right people. I'm not saying anyone ITT is saying he wasn't signed solely because of talent; I was speaking in more general terms. That there are people who said he just sucks and that's the only reason he wasn't signed. I'm well aware that there is another, more logical group of people who say it was a combination of talent/distraction. I get that.

My loose agreement is just a hunch, yes. I obviously have no insider knowledge. Like I said previously, I think the whole thing about protests came up in meetings, and Kaep came up. I think it's certainly possible that some owners talked to each other and said that it would probably be a good idea if he wasn't in the league, and that would be the best way to just keep this out of the spotlight as much as it could be. I also think it's possible that both things are true... the owners, to some extent, agreed that he shouldn't be in the league, and that many or even all wouldn't have signed him anyway.

CBear3
Posts: 7666
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2015 10:02 pm
Location: KC, MO

NFL

Postby CBear3 » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:57 am

The Browns cut a linebacker for insider trading. There just isn't a lot of room for bullshit when you're not a national level star in the NFL.
And signed a guy who was kicking a chick in his hallway, while having basically a 1,000 yd rusher in the backfield already.

So they brought in a poor excuse for a human to back-up a skill position, but 32 teams wouldn't bring in Kaep? I suppose it could all come down to money, Hunt knew he needed a second chance after doing something despicable so he'd take a pay cut. Kaep didn't do anything "wrong" so he still expects to get paid at least Chase Daniel money to back-up somebody.

shmenguin
Posts: 19041
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 2:37 pm
Location: people notice my car when its shined up

NFL

Postby shmenguin » Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:02 pm

I'm not misunderstanding, I just wasn't clear enough, or didn't specify the right people. I'm not saying anyone ITT is saying he wasn't signed solely because of talent; I was speaking in more general terms. That there are people who said he just sucks and that's the only reason he wasn't signed. I'm well aware that there is another, more logical group of people who say it was a combination of talent/distraction. I get that.

My loose agreement is just a hunch, yes. I obviously have no insider knowledge. Like I said previously, I think the whole thing about protests came up in meetings, and Kaep came up. I think it's certainly possible that some owners talked to each other and said that it would probably be a good idea if he wasn't in the league, and that would be the best way to just keep this out of the spotlight as much as it could be. I also think it's possible that both things are true... the owners, to some extent, agreed that he shouldn't be in the league, and that many or even all wouldn't have signed him anyway.
What we’re saying is that’s neither collusion nor unethical. But maybe that was clear.

tifosi77
Posts: 51511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

NFL

Postby tifosi77 » Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:48 pm

Speaking to the Redskins in particular again: At issue is a guy kneeling for the national anthem, and we're questioning the decision tree of a franchise owner whose team is based in the nation's capital ten miles up the road from where Air Force One lives, and who seems to favor one party over the his donation history (altho he does have a history - like most business people - of donating to both parties) came to the conclusion Kaep was too much of a hassle.

shafnutz05
Posts: 50378
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 7:27 pm
Location: A moron or a fascist...but not both.

NFL

Postby shafnutz05 » Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:51 pm

His accompanying circus turned away customers and created an unwanted distraction. Those are matters beyond lack of talent, but so?
This is really the crux of the matter for me, and there's no need to over-complicate things.

willeyeam
Posts: 39564
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 12:49 pm
Location: hodgepodge of nothingness

NFL

Postby willeyeam » Thu Feb 21, 2019 10:56 am

It feels great that Bell news is NFL and non-Steeler related now

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/leve ... m-the-nfl/
via http://cbssportsapp.com


willeyeam
Posts: 39564
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 12:49 pm
Location: hodgepodge of nothingness

NFL

Postby willeyeam » Fri Feb 22, 2019 11:58 am

Robert Kraft charged with soliciting prostitution

Troy Loney
Posts: 27516
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 3:03 pm

NFL

Postby Troy Loney » Fri Feb 22, 2019 11:59 am

lol, today I saw on twitter something about Kraft being in an "unholy alliance" with Meek Mill on criminal justice reform. My thought was that I bet Kraft is breaking the law.

tifosi77
Posts: 51511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

NFL

Postby tifosi77 » Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:03 pm

Wasn't it just announced Brady was going renegotiate his contract?

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

NFL

Postby dodint » Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:05 pm

A misdemeanor. Good use of gov funds, imo.

tifosi77
Posts: 51511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

NFL

Postby tifosi77 » Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:13 pm

There is video evidence lol

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

NFL

Postby dodint » Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:17 pm

Yeah, I laughed at the 'body cam' bit.

NailedPenguin
Posts: 7629
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 5:32 pm
Location: The biggest post, in the biggest thread, in the biggest forum in town. Wooooo!

NFL

Postby NailedPenguin » Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:18 pm

Image

Viva la Ben
Posts: 11089
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 5:08 pm
Location: Location: Location

NFL

Postby Viva la Ben » Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:21 pm

I wonder if any politicians who are friends with Bob Kraft are involved in this :thonking:

tifosi77
Posts: 51511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

NFL

Postby tifosi77 » Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:21 pm

A misdemeanor. Good use of gov funds, imo.
There are something like 200 Johns being rounded up in this, which is attendant to a larger racketeering, money laundering, and human trafficking ring. There was one report that suggested something like 2,500 people have been arrested in the last 24 hours in this sting, across multiple states, but that is a number that sort of seems like a typo, so I share it with a big fat caveat that this is early days in the story.

Gaucho
Posts: 49571
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 5:31 pm
Location: shootzepucklefraude

NFL

Postby Gaucho » Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:24 pm

Image

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

NFL

Postby dodint » Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:27 pm

A misdemeanor. Good use of gov funds, imo.
There are something like 200 Johns being rounded up in this, which is attendant to a larger racketeering, money laundering, and human trafficking ring. There was one report that suggested something like 2,500 people have been arrested in the last 24 hours in this sting, across multiple states, but that is a number that sort of seems like a typo, so I share it with a big fat caveat that this is early days in the story.
Right, I was speaking a bit tongue-in-cheek. Kraft isn't a human trafficker (maybe?) but that's what will get the clicks. Meanwhile we'll never hear if they actually caught anyone actually trafficking.

Just doing my usual media-cynic shtick.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Pavel Bure and 117 guests