Kaep vs. Manwich

I'd like to point out a couple things here. There's no evidence he's unemployed because of his political beliefs, he's unemployed because he's an average at best QB who's a PR nightmare. He's a divisive figure, politically, socially, and I imagine in the locker room as well, and for an employer whose best interest is to not appear to choose sides politically or otherwise, them not wanting anything to do with him seems like a no-brainer. The NFL is a football monopoly, not a political monopoly, CK wasn't hired for his political opinion, he was hired to play football. Maybe he should apply at MSNBC? Why is he protesting on NFL time and not his own time anyway? The NFL hasn't prevented him from doing that, they've asked him to not do it on their time. Seems more than reasonable to me. Anyone else in this country would lose their job for doing the same thing, as we've seen recently with the Vikings ....

Now lets quickly review your stance on the Wobby firing since it's very closely related. Here are 3 statements I pulled from that thread that seem to be in direct contrast to your stance on CK.

Without the context you almost wouldn't know if you were talking about Wobby or CK, so why do you have 2 very different opinions about 2 different guys who have been fired for the same reason? CK's job was to play football on the football field, not act like a tool. Tool being subjective here.

Once again, switch up the names and it's the same thing. CK is welcome to protest, that's his right, just as it's the right of the NFL and it's 32 teams to fire his ass and hire someone who won't irritate half their fan base.

When I asked the pro-CK crowd about the apparent double standard, you gave this response:

How is the nature of what CK does different than Wobby? Or what does that even mean? Because I see no difference. CK was hired to be a soulless football player, and to pimp football for the league, not social justice. Where do you see the difference other than you happen to agree with one of them politically?

I say both deserved to be fired, if they were hired to do a specific job, and were given plenty of warning to not deviate from that job and do what their employer asked them not to do on company time, and they did it anyway. That seems more than fair to me. Both are unemployed due to their own stupid selfish reasons, and only have themselves to blame. Both were given opportunities to save their jobs, but both chose unemployment.

I don't see why anyone thinks collusion was necessary. Like 32 billionaires aren't smart enough to independently figure out a guy is bad for business. So what's the difference if they all agree together or independently? When a store like Walmart fires someone, is it collusion if no other Walmart will hire them? Why were you fired by the other store? Because I like to sh*t on the floor and they didn't want me sh*tting on the floor. Will you sh*t on the floor here? Yep. Sorry it's not in our best interest to hire someone who will be sh*tting on the floors. COLLUSION!!!

Bingo! It's amazing how many people need to be reminded of that when they try to hide behind free speech. I can say whatever I want and you can't punish me lol. No, that's not how it works. Not in the private sector anyway. A TV station can kick you off their channel if they don't agree with the message you're trying to broadcast. The NFL doesn't have to give you a platform to voice your divisive political opinions. As private entities it's their right to take away your platform if they determine your free speech to be harmful to their brand.

If the rumors are true that CK said he won't stop protesting on NFL time, then the case closed. He's not a victim, this is "Darwinism for a dumb employee".

Wobby is not employed by a government sanctioned monopoly. Hence 85% of your post is irrelevant.

The NFL owners have employed a host of PR nightmares, some like the defensive end in Dallas were fringe starters.  Kareem Hunt didn't play for 10 weeks this year.  Joe Mixon hadn't played a down in the NFL.  I could go on, but the point is rather obvious: you don't have to be a star to get the NFL to take the temporary PR hit.  This was different.  So the question is why.  IMO - They specifically went after this guy for this issue and it seems rather obvious why: they get huge sponsorship money from the military and didn't want to upset that applecart.  Not an irrational choice, but call a spade a spade.

However, because they are a monopoly, colluding to keep one person out IS a violation.  Which is why they had to pony up when he sued them. This isn't the case of being blacklisted in your profession because you screwed up or getting fired because you screwed up, the monopoly the NFL is allowed to have changes the hiring/firing dynamics drastically.  Kaepernick sued, and for all intentions won, but the relationship is still the same.  That's what makes it so unique.  

If Wobby is colluded against by the NFL owners and subject to collective bargaining....let me know.  Then you have a fair comparison.  Or if some above average NBA player who wears a "Blue Lives Matter" arm band and the league colludes to keep him out....then come talk to me.  So far as I know there is no such situation, Kaepernick's is pretty damn unique.

I'd love to compare those saying CK deserves a chance to those who have been talking down about Cousins the last two years. Just to see if any of them are the same people.

Where is it written that the NFL is a government sanctioned monopoly? Are they officially recognized as such, or is that only what they seem to be?

So you're saying every player in the NFL is protected by this monopoly clause, and they're free to be a bunch of ass-clowns who cost their employer money? On what grounds could a "monopoly" ever fire or ban someone?

As you pointed out, there are other jobs available for Wobby, but last time I checked, there were other jobs available besides football player. Where is it written anyone is entitled to play football? In fact CK managed to find gainful employment (as if he's destitute) when Nike hired him to do what he apparently loves more than football, make political/social statements. That kind of hurts his case doesn't it? He also passed up opportunities for the job of football player in other leagues, which also hurts his case in my opinion.

You've already agreed he's a PR nightmare, which means he would cost his employer money, and he's not a victim based on the fact that he said he would continue protesting on company time, so I don't know why half the fan base is bending over backward looking for every excuse to get him back in the league. Why are CK fans so desperate to get such a cancer on their football team? Is his political message more important than the circus it would bring to your football team? Why do we watch football again? Ignore everything else, that's the question stuck in my craw.

Even if he had a political or social message I personally agreed with, but would be a distraction to my football team, I would say no thanks. Nobody can even guarantee that'd he'd help the team, or be any good, so you basically just want to invite a potential problem to your team for sh*ts and giggles. What's the upside?

As far as the Vikings go, what would it do to Cousins if CK were breathing over his shoulder? He's finally playing well and has us in sniffing distance of a first round bye. Why would we want to mess around with that, unless CK can and is willing to play corner lol?

It tells me everything I need to know that everyone's opinion about CK boils down to their own personal political alignment, and not football.

There are? What are the other 3 professional football leagues out there besides NFL, XFL, and Arena league? And why doesn't anyone care about them?

What you're saying is this. You want to be a commercial airline pilot. None of the airlines want to hire you. And then thousands of strangers comment on your situation saying he could drive Uber instead. Granted, Uber doesn't pay what Southwest Airlines does.... Or United. Which hasn't called you back. Tells me something! 

no one is guaranteed a job in the NFL. Fact is CK is below 60% passer. There aren't any QBs in the NFL that last long with those type of numbers. Heres the ultimate question. Would replace Cousins straight up for Kaep?