Jump to content

Seattle postpones Kaepernick workout b/c of kneeling?


Jobot

Recommended Posts

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000926234/article/seahawks-postpone-workout-for-colin-kaepernick

 

So I read this article that Seattle had planned to bring in Kaepernick for a workout, but they are postponing because they want to know if he will continue his kneeling during the anthem...

 

Regardless of where you stand on for or against what he's doing....This sounds like it will seriously bolster any case Kaepernick has about being black-balled... Not sure what they were thinking with letting this information get out.  As an employer, this would clearly be seen as discrimination based on a constitutional right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jobot said:

 

Regardless of where you stand on for or against what he's doing....This sounds like it will seriously bolster any case Kaepernick has about being black-balled... Not sure what they were thinking with letting this information get out.  As an employer, this would clearly be seen as discrimination based on a constitutional right.

No it wouldn't. He is not an employee of theirs and they can choose not to employ him for any reason that they want. It doesn't violate any rights.

  • Like (+1) 6
  • Thank you (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, buffaloboyinATL said:

No it wouldn't. He is not an employee of theirs and they can choose not to employ him for any reason that they want. It doesn't violate any rights.

 

Not true... you can't legally discriminate based on religion, sex, age, race, etc.... the problem is proving that this had occurred.  Seattle basically said they aren't going to work out Collin because of his stance during the anthem.

 

That would be like me saying I'm not going to hire any 'gun owners' to my business because I don't believe in the second amendment (this is not true, just an example)

Edited by Jobot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jobot said:

Not true... you can't legally discriminate based on religion, sex, age, race, etc.... the problem is proving that this had occurred.  Seattle basically said they aren't going to work out Collin because of his stance during the anthem.

None of those things are being discriminated against. The Seattle Seahawks are not obligated to hire someone who's actions once they are an employee may hurt their sales or reputation. They didn't cancel because of his thoughts, they canceled because he wouldn't promise to control his actions.

  • Like (+1) 6
  • Thank you (+1) 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would Seattle want to answer questions after every game about the back up QB who didnt play?  Does he want to be a justice warrior or play football?  Personally, his kneeling has no affect on me.  It does not bother me in the slightest.  However, when you start something like that and has now cut down party lines there is some accountability and consequence for your media whirlwind that follows.  Its a multi billion dollar industry that makes there living and money off advertisements and public viewership.  If those actions results in 1 fan not watching or one advertiser to drop out that has now cost the organization money.  No team wants to have a media circus following them to every city and every game because of there backup QB. 

Edited by Mat68
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 No issue with him protesting on his time, his dime.

 

Big issue with any employee protesting when they are working in an official capacity during work hours.  If this was not the NFL there would not be a debate that it is inappropriate in a business environment.

  • Like (+1) 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mat68 said:

Why would Seattle want to answer questions after every game about the back up QB who didnt play?  Does he want to be a justice warrior or play football?  Personally, his kneeling has no affect on me.  It does not bother me in the slightest.  However, when you start something like that and has now cut down party lines there is some accountability and consequence for your media whirlwind that follows.  Its a multi billion dollar industry that makes there living and money off advertisements and public viewership.  If those actions results in 1 fan not watching or one advertiser to drop out that has not cost the organization money.  No team want to have a media circus following them to every city and every game because of there backup QB. 

You know they have Russell Wilson right?

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, buffaloboyinATL said:

No it wouldn't. He is not an employee of theirs and they can choose not to employ him for any reason that they want. It doesn't violate any rights.

Choosing to kneel does not make you a member of a protected class, therefore it does not provide him any special rights.

 

People have a pretty wide misunderstamding of how this works...basically in almost all states you can be fired for "any reason or no reason, just not an illegal reason."

 

Employer doesnt like your haircut. They can fire you. Doesnt like what you are wearing. They can fire you(unless its soemthing that makes you part of a special class like a religious garment). Dont like your cologne or perfume...fired.

 

These are extreme examples but they illustrate that you dont have a right to just keep a job because you are currently employed.

  • Like (+1) 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jobot said:

Not true... you can't legally discriminate based on religion, sex, age, race, etc.... the problem is proving that this had occurred.  Seattle basically said they aren't going to work out Collin because of his stance during the anthem.

 

That would be like me saying I'm not going to hire any 'gun owners' to my business because I don't believe in the second amendment (this is not true, just an example)

 

More like if someone applied to your company but said they would publicly protest during business hours about something political.

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

None of those things are being discriminated against. The Seattle Seahawks are not obligated to hire someone who's actions once they are an employee may hurt their sales or reputation. They didn't cancel because of his thoughts, they canceled because he wouldn't promise to control his actions.

 

Okay so i guess the ongoing lawsuit of him being black-balled has no basis???  Proving the collusion has been the issue all along.  Seattle just blatantly admitted to this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

You know they have Russell Wilson right?

Yes Kaepernic would not play a single snap.  After every game Pete Carrol's first question will be, how do you feel about Colins kneeling?  The media circus is not worth it for a player that is noting more than an insurance policy to Russell Wilson.  

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, matter2003 said:

Choosing to kneel does not make you a member of a protected class, therefore it does not provide him any special rights.

 

People have a pretty wide misunderstamding of how this works...basically in almost all states you can be fired for "any reason or no reason, just not an illegal reason."

 

Employer doesnt like your haircut. They can fire you. Doesnt like what you are wearing. They can fire you(unless its soemthing that makes you part of a special class like a religious garment). Dont like your cologne or perfume...fired.

 

These are extreme examples but they illustrate that you dont have a right to just keep a job because you are currently employed.

 

I wrote an example up further, but would someone be legally be allowed to not hire a gun owner if he didn't believe in the second amendment?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, buffaloboyinATL said:

No it wouldn't. He is not an employee of theirs and they can choose not to employ him for any reason that they want. It doesn't violate any rights.

The type of people concerned about Kaepernick's "rights" suddenly become capitalists when Youtube, Twitter, FB, etc. Start censoring people they disagree with. 

 

But we're to believe a football team asking it's players to do their political protesting when they're not on company time offends their deeply held principled support of free speech.

Edited by Rob's House
  • Like (+1) 5
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BillsVet said:

 

More like if someone applied to your company but said they would publicly protest during business hours about something political.

I get this but in a league where winning should be your top concern and you have a bunch of scumbags on Nfl rosters (hi Rueben Foster on Kap’s old team), it’s a bad look to ban a guy for kneeling quietly. IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...