LSHMEAB Posted August 19, 2019 Share Posted August 19, 2019 7 hours ago, DC Tom said: It's not even "antics." He's good enough for a backup...but because of the "controversy" surrounding him, he becomes an instant QB controversy if any team signs him as a backup. No franchise will willingly court that sort of instant roster mess. VERY, VERY different issues, but not wholly unlike Tebow. Kaep is a much better QB than Tebow and the distraction they represent couldn't be more different, but I believe after his stint in Denver, no team wanted to have someone that popular who wasn't good enough to start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted August 19, 2019 Share Posted August 19, 2019 On 8/18/2019 at 12:07 AM, StHustle said: Has nothing to do with being a distraction. Its about the owners feeling they may lose money from the backlash. My whole point is the "not good enough" to play in the league argument is BS. But yes, for an owner to gamble on the backlash he would have to be a player actually contributing on Sundays. I get that. The racist dollar is powerful. And yes if you are that upset years later about this man kneeling, EVEN THOUGH HE SAID HE WOULDNT KNEEL ANYMORE, and you are simply that unforgiving over the victimless "crime" it was, then you have some deep rooted issues that go beyond what you're willing to admit to. Can’t really claim that it’s a business decision not to offer the guy a job, and then discount that assessing the value he brings to the feild vs his polarizing approach to making a statement while using his employer as a platform isn't part of the business decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts