#1
|
|||
|
|||
Kaepernick
Like it or not, Rick Smith was on the phone with the agent for Kaepernick around 5:15 this evening. He was asking about whether the comments from McNair would prevent him from coming in for a tryout or potentially sign. BOB thinks they can use pretty much the same offense that Watson was running if Kaepernick is in playing shape. Going to get interesting. Stay tuned...
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
I'm not a fan of him as a player but it'd be a great move in a lost season. It instantly erases any ill will from McNair's comment. That's bigger than anything else we could accomplish in this lost season.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Apparently the owner gave his OK to a workout. Kaep is the best fit for the offense assuming he can still play. Maybe he can't, who knows. If he can, though, signing him would be a win win win for all sides. Plus, the local idiots would lose their minds and that would be a nice bonus for me, give me some small reason to keep watching.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Off the field, it would be "Michael Sam, part 5". The media would be on an orgy of political questions (they'll forget he called for Hillary Clinton's imprisonment roughly a year ago). His girlfriend will come along spouting all her Hate Whitey crap.
If you sign him and don't play him, it will be because or racism. If you do play him, the second you bench him it will be because of racism. If you don't re-sign him and start him next year, it will be because of racism. Regardless the validity of any of his comments or how nice he may be once you understand him, the hangers-on will concoct a racist conspiracy behind every move and won't STFU. On the field, it makes perfect sense. Off it, it make about as much sense as a Maxine Waters press conference. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Bob, the conspiracy theories you've created don't even make sense. If you sign a guy because your star BLACK QB is injured, you will have no issues when you let him go next year. San Francisco didn't even catch flak for moving on from him to Brian Hoyer. The NFL as a whole gets attacked for him not playing but the only teams I've seen called out are teams like the Dolphins who decided plan C Matt Moore was a better option. As for media questions, yes, if you sign him you run the risk of the media distractions taking away from what was already a lost 3-4 season and is now destined for 5-11 territory. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Kaep still in play but less likely....especially with TJ Yates coming in. Except the QB group to be a revolving door for a while.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
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. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
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.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
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. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
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.
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
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? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
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. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
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.
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
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. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
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. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|