Kaepernick

[Joshua]

Barrett,

Didn't Kaep's girlfriend publicly equate Baltimore's owner and Ray Lewis as a slave owner and a house slave while they were considering signing him? What was the logic behind that? Expecting all of the players in this to behave perfectly rational and logical is a conspiracy theory in its own right. Right or wrong, Kaep would be a circus and all sorts of outlandish things will be said no matter how it plays out.

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by Joshua

Barrett,

Didn't Kaep's girlfriend publicly equate Baltimore's owner and Ray Lewis as a slave owner and a house slave while they were considering signing him? What was the logic behind that? Expecting all of the players in this to behave perfectly rational and logical is a conspiracy theory in its own right. Right or wrong, Kaep would be a circus and all sorts of outlandish things will be said no matter how it plays out.

So we could expect her to call the owner here and Rick Smith the same as the guys in Baltimore so no big deal. On the subject of kneeling I'm sympathetic and recognize that as their right but it surely is and will continue to be counterproductive for the players, all of the players.
But I agree with Barrett, why not the season is already a lost cause now with Watsons injury and signing Kaep would atleast be a way to redemption for the owner re his stupid remark.

[chuck]

I'll just add quickly that the 'journalist' who reported that McNeck had OK'd a workout was 'joking,' so we can all forget about Kaep and go back to posting on Infowars. See you guys over there.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

So we could expect her to call the owner here and Rick Smith the same as the guys in Baltimore so no big deal. On the subject of kneeling I'm sympathetic and recognize that as their right but it surely is and will continue to be counterproductive for the players, all of the players.
But I agree with Barrett, why not the season is already a lost cause now with Watsons injury and signing Kaep would atleast be a way to redemption for the owner re his stupid remark.

Easy for you to say. Do you own a company? If you do, would you hire someone who will very publicly call you a racist at the first opportunity? Seriously, who in their right mind volunteers for that? And for what, to go 7-9 instead of 5-11? The season is lost with or without Kaep.

As for rehabilitating McNair, let's do our own little science fair project right here. Do you think Chuck will quit calling McNair a neck and admit he was wrong if McNair signs Kaep? I'm sure Chuck will provide the answer but I'm not optimistic.

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by Joshua

Easy for you to say. Do you own a company? If you do, would you hire someone who will very publicly call you a racist at the first opportunity? Seriously, who in their right mind volunteers for that? And for what, to go 7-9 instead of 5-11? The season is lost with or without Kaep.

As for rehabilitating McNair, let's do our own little science fair project right here. Do you think Chuck will quit calling McNair a neck and admit he was wrong if McNair signs Kaep? I'm sure Chuck will provide the answer but I'm not optimistic.

McNair's Houston Texans is not the typical Mom&POP small business op but rather a very high-profile American sports franchise where PR is an important element to success and while the Texans' owner may be a steller numbers guy he is
stunningly uninformed an incompetent in PR for an NFL owner. He's the one who put himself in the situation he's now in and if he's interested in attracting, oh say, a potential franchise left Tackle in FA to protect his franchise QB he might want to take advantage of an opportunity to rid himself of the trrrible racist reputation he has with the rank & file of the NFLs players. And BTW I will always be grateful to Bob McNair for bringing the NFL back to Houston.
As far as to what the Chuckster would or wouldn't do I have no idea because he's person of great mystery to me, a man of many talents who travels in strange and intriguing ways.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

McNair's Houston Texans is not the typical Mom&POP small business op but rather a very high-profile American sports franchise where PR is an important element to success and while the Texans' owner may be a steller numbers guy he is
stunningly uninformed an incompetent in PR for an NFL owner. He's the one who put himself in the situation he's now in and if he's interested in attracting, oh say, a potential franchise left Tackle in FA to protect his franchise QB he might want to take advantage of an opportunity to rid himself of the trrrible racist reputation he has with the rank & file of the NFLs players. And BTW I will always be grateful to Bob McNair for bringing the NFL back to Houston.
As far as to what the Chuckster would or wouldn't do I have no idea because he's person of great mystery to me, a man of many talents who travels in strange and intriguing ways.

You raise an interesting question as to how McNair can help his image with the players. Don't know the answer to that. Maybe signing Kaep would help. Maybe not. I still can't quite wrap my head around the idea that an extremely common expression that I think most have heard/said multiple times in their life (and generally just means that the bosses, not the employees, should run the show) was taken as a literal comparison to inmates.

[chuck]

Originally Posted by Joshua

I still can't quite wrap my head around the idea that an extremely common expression that I think most have heard/said multiple times in their life (and generally just means that the bosses, not the employees, should run the show) was taken as a literal comparison to inmates.

I've never known you to be anything other than a thoughtful poster but this am radio take is mind boggling in its idiocy.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by chuck

I've never known you to be anything other than a thoughtful poster but this am radio take is mind boggling in its idiocy.

Surely you've heard the phrase "inmates running the asylum" in your life. What message did you think they were trying to convey? Did you think the person saying this was actually suggesting people are clinically insane?

I think it is abundantly evident that the point McNair was trying to make was that the success of their business, for good or bad, will be determined by the owners, not backup QBs.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by Joshua

Barrett,

Didn't Kaep's girlfriend publicly equate Baltimore's owner and Ray Lewis as a slave owner and a house slave while they were considering signing him? What was the logic behind that? Expecting all of the players in this to behave perfectly rational and logical is a conspiracy theory in its own right. Right or wrong, Kaep would be a circus and all sorts of outlandish things will be said no matter how it plays out.

Why would I care about Kaep's GF? I am perfectly capable of ignoring him if I choose, and I wouldn't even know how to hear his GF's rambling thoughts.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by barrett

Why would I care about Kaep's GF? I am perfectly capable of ignoring him if I choose, and I wouldn't even know how to hear his GF's rambling thoughts.

I was referring to your suggestion that everyone in this ongoing drama will behave logically and rationally. I used her past comments as evidence that this is highly unlikely.

[chuck]

My biggest problem with the owner is not that he gives tons of money to people and causes that embrace, cultivate and disseminate bigotry. He does, of course, but so do lots of other billionaires.

My biggest problem with him - and it's one that I identified many years ago and I have seen nothing to make me change my view, quite the opposite, in fact - is that he is not principally concerned with winning. I understand that his outlook may be born of a series of rational business decisions, but as a fan, I don't really care what his motivations are if he is not doing anything he reasonably can to win. Which he is not. If the team were to work out Kaepernick, that would signal to me that the team wants to win more than they want to punish a fellow whose peaceful protest they deliberately misrepresent. But they don't, and they won't.

And unless you think it's just looney old chuck ranting again, do a quick search on the word Kaepernick and you'll find countless articles written by a diverse group of people that largely do that for a living that believe that there is no football reason for the Texans not to look seriously at Kaepernick.

We all know what the reason is. But yes, if they did work him out or god forbid sign him, I would have no option but to re-evaluate my view regarding the owner's priorities. But they won't.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by chuck

My biggest problem with the owner is not that he gives tons of money to people and causes that embrace, cultivate and disseminate bigotry. He does, of course, but so do lots of other billionaires.

My biggest problem with him - and it's one that I identified many years ago and I have seen nothing to make me change my view, quite the opposite, in fact - is that he is not principally concerned with winning. I understand that his outlook may be born of a series of rational business decisions, but as a fan, I don't really care what his motivations are if he is not doing anything he reasonably can to win. Which he is not. If the team were to work out Kaepernick, that would signal to me that the team wants to win more than they want to punish a fellow whose peaceful protest they deliberately misrepresent. But they don't, and they won't.

And unless you think it's just looney old chuck ranting again, do a quick search on the word Kaepernick and you'll find countless articles written by a diverse group of people that largely do that for a living that believe that there is no football reason for the Texans not to look seriously at Kaepernick.

We all know what the reason is. But yes, if they did work him out or god forbid sign him, I would have no option but to re-evaluate my view regarding the owner's priorities. But they won't.

1) Which causes? I'm honestly curious.

2) if you're main complaint is lack of winning, why do you constantly call him a neck and insinuate or sometimes flat out call him a racist. Shouldn't you just call him a loser? Why do you constantly talk in racially inflammatory terms if simply losing is your true gripe?

3) he runs a business. It would be malpractice to not consider how Kaep would impact the business. And while Kaep might be a marginal improvement over who we currently have, it's not like we become a winner with him (Didn't he lose every game he started last year?). The question McNair has to answer is whether it's worth potentially alienating a nontrivial portion of his fan base/customers (and any personal risk he runs in being branded a racist when things inevitably sour) to bring in a guy that might win an extra game or 2. Put differently, in order to gain your approval, McNair must bear any cost whatsoever (both personal and professional) for an extra game or so?

[barrett]

Originally Posted by Joshua

1) Which causes? I'm honestly curious.

2) if you're main complaint is lack of winning, why do you constantly call him a neck and insinuate or sometimes flat out call him a racist. Shouldn't you just call him a loser? Why do you constantly talk in racially inflammatory terms if simply losing is your true gripe?

3) he runs a business. It would be malpractice to not consider how Kaep would impact the business. And while Kaep might be a marginal improvement over who we currently have, it's not like we become a winner with him (Didn't he lose every game he started last year?). The question McNair has to answer is whether it's worth potentially alienating a nontrivial portion of his fan base/customers (and any personal risk he runs in being branded a racist when things inevitably sour) to bring in a guy that might win an extra game or 2. Put differently, in order to gain your approval, McNair must bear any cost whatsoever (both personal and professional) for an extra game or so?

To answer #2 it's because Chuck is consumed with prejudice. He likes to evaluate groups based on caricatures of the group. McNair's a 'Neck' because he's southern and white, while Rick Smith is an Uncle Tom because he's black and doesn't hold the opinions that Chuck thinks black people should hold.

And your #3 is blown way out of proportion. The fans who will walk over Kaep will walk whether he plays for Houston or not. They will walk whether people stand for the anthem or not. They are hypocrites and liars. They complained about the anthem and then they booed just as loudly when the kneeling was before the anthem and then they stood for the anthem.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by barrett

To answer #2 it's because Chuck is consumed with prejudice. He likes to evaluate groups based on caricatures of the group. McNair's a 'Neck' because he's southern and white, while Rick Smith is an Uncle Tom because he's black and doesn't hold the opinions that Chuck thinks black people should hold.

And your #3 is blown way out of proportion. The fans who will walk over Kaep will walk whether he plays for Houston or not. They will walk whether people stand for the anthem or not. They are hypocrites and liars. They complained about the anthem and then they booed just as loudly when the kneeling was before the anthem and then they stood for the anthem.

What is truly ironic is McNair's greatest failing as it relates to winning is his affection and loyalty to Smith. So, he's branded a racist for sticking with an African American.

And I may be overreacting, but the owners seem extremely concerned by the impact on their business and I presume they have better data than me.

[chuck]

Originally Posted by barrett

To answer #2 it's because Chuck is consumed with prejudice. He likes to evaluate groups based on caricatures of the group.

Misanthropy rather than prejudice. And you have the second bit backwards. I carefully evaluate and then, largely to amuse myself, create flamboyant caricatures. I could be more measured in my commentary I suppose but at the end of the day I'm arguing about sports with rednecks over the internet. This is not exactly a scholarly journal.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by Joshua

I was referring to your suggestion that everyone in this ongoing drama will behave logically and rationally. I used her past comments as evidence that this is highly unlikely.

I never meant to suggest anything like that. I simply said in this context you could get rid of Kaep no problem. As I pointed out, SF got rid of him without trouble even without a better option or a black replacement. We could kick him to the curb in 10 games and never look back.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by barrett

I never meant to suggest anything like that. I simply said in this context you could get rid of Kaep no problem. As I pointed out, SF got rid of him without trouble even without a better option or a black replacement. We could kick him to the curb in 10 games and never look back.

You may be right but I don't think that's a given. Kaep has become a cause de jour.