Colin Kaepernick

[steelcurtain29]

1 minute ago, OleXmad said:

That is literally what quite a few news articles are nowadays. 

Tim Tebow hasn't been in the league for 2 years and now the Dolphins consider signing him? Total b.s written up for clicks.

Neither has Orton, and he was apparently considered as well. Another poster here mentioned it was because all three (Cutler included) know Gase's offense. 

I mean, the Ravens may need a QB and their idea was to sign some unknown AFL QB. 

[sp6488]

22 hours ago, steelcurtain29 said:

Neither has Orton, and he was apparently considered as well. Another poster here mentioned it was because all three (Cutler included) know Gase's offense. 

I mean, the Ravens may need a QB and their idea was to sign some unknown AFL QB. 

Those are camp arms... 

[ET80]

23 hours ago, steelcurtain29 said:

Don't ask me. Just going by sources I checked out. Even NBC SPORTS reported it. I doubt they'd just jump on rumors for the sake of causing controversy.

This is EXACTLY why they jump on rumors. Causing controversy, getting clicks, etc.

That source took two of the most click-bait worthy names and turned it into a single story. That reporter is going to get a raise.

[steelcurtain29]

6 hours ago, sp6488 said:

Those are camp arms... 

To be fair, they signed one after camp started and after their star QB was reportedly expected to miss some time; potentially in the regular season.

 

Although that is unlikely; what if it's not? 

 

I find it hard to believe Kaepernick is unsigned. I won't bring up why I feel he is, but for the sake of football; he's clearly talented enough to be a backup at the very least. He's a starter on a team that needs a safety net for a QB, if you ask me. (Ala a team with an elite defensemen and talent otherwise, but needs someone with some starting potential as a QB).

 

Maybe I'm just biased, but I refuse to believe that he's not good enough to be signed. 

[43M]

I cant stand Kaep, and I would take him as a backup on the Steelers.

I think he will get signed eventually, but I think people are going overboard.   Its a reward vs headache type of thing.    Is he worth the headache based on the quality of QB he is?   I guess thats a matter of opinion, but clearly, alot of teams dont think so and would rather exhaust every option rather than sign him.....and I dont fault them for that either.    But again, I think some team will eventually bite the bullet.

[Xmad]

42 minutes ago, FourThreeMafia said:

I cant stand Kaep, and I would take him as a backup on the Steelers.

I think he will get signed eventually, but I think people are going overboard.   Its a reward vs headache type of thing.    Is he worth the headache based on the quality of QB he is?   I guess thats a matter of opinion, but clearly, alot of teams dont think so and would rather exhaust every option rather than sign him.....and I dont fault them for that either.    But again, I think some team will eventually bite the bullet.

You just want Landry Jones off the team. It really is remarkable Landry Jones has a job still.

[Tugboat]

I think it still really just comes down to the fact that type of limited read option/running QB isn't well-suited to a backup role.  Combined with the unnecessary media spotlight it brings to a position where you really don't want or need the headache.  Essentially the same reason Tebow could never really catch on once he clearly flunked out as a starter.

 

If you're a team looking for a backup, most want a few things first and foremost:

1)A "safe" game manager who can go in if needed and play a low-risk game, leaning on the strength of the rest of the team.  If a guy is good enough to actually drive a team, he'd be starting somewhere and doing it well.  If a guy isn't good enough to do that, you don't really want them driving your team into the ditch...just put it on cruise control.

2)A guy who is going to be able to run your offense (albeit at a lesser level); not requiring a custom-tailored system where you're re-writing swaths of the playbook, flipping around the execution details, and forcing the rest of the team to adapt to what the backup QB needs to perform adequately.

3)A reliable player who plays a style that isn't going to put them at undo risk of potential injury.  You DO NOT want to have to suddenly jump to your 3rd string QB.  The prospect of having to carry a 3rd QB as insurance in case your backup gets himself injured while running around with the football is not attractive in the slightest.

4)A good clipboard holder.  And i mean that in the sense that teams want a guy who is going to have a firm grasp on the playbook, concepts, be able to break down what's going on and explain things, point things out, be an extra set of eyes and an extra voice on the sidelines when needed.  Low maintenance and a quick study.  Not someone who is going to need their hand held on the sideline.  More important things to do, and much better to have a guy who can actually do some hand-holding themselves for other players.

5)Someone who isn't going to rock the boat.  In any way.  You don't want fans chanting for the backup to come in.  You don't want giant media scrums poking at what your backup QB is up to every day and why they're not starting.  You don't want any drama.  Low maintenance and low key is what you want from a position you hope never sees the field.

 

Guys like Kaepernick are really none of those things.  If you're desperate and need a stopgap starter, maybe they're a marginally better option.  But at that point, odds are your season is a writeoff anyway.  At which point...best case, you eek out an extra win...maybe even two.  But you're still having a garbage throwaway season.  What are you really accomplishing there other than potentially worsening your draft pick?  Is that marginal upgrade worth it?  Worth the various headaches?

[AlexGreen#20]

1 hour ago, Tugboat said:

I think it still really just comes down to the fact that type of limited read option/running QB isn't well-suited to a backup role.  Combined with the unnecessary media spotlight it brings to a position where you really don't want or need the headache.  Essentially the same reason Tebow could never really catch on once he clearly flunked out as a starter.

 

If you're a team looking for a backup, most want a few things first and foremost:

1)A "safe" game manager who can go in if needed and play a low-risk game, leaning on the strength of the rest of the team.  If a guy is good enough to actually drive a team, he'd be starting somewhere and doing it well.  If a guy isn't good enough to do that, you don't really want them driving your team into the ditch...just put it on cruise control.

2)A guy who is going to be able to run your offense (albeit at a lesser level); not requiring a custom-tailored system where you're re-writing swaths of the playbook, flipping around the execution details, and forcing the rest of the team to adapt to what the backup QB needs to perform adequately.

3)A reliable player who plays a style that isn't going to put them at undo risk of potential injury.  You DO NOT want to have to suddenly jump to your 3rd string QB.  The prospect of having to carry a 3rd QB as insurance in case your backup gets himself injured while running around with the football is not attractive in the slightest.

4)A good clipboard holder.  And i mean that in the sense that teams want a guy who is going to have a firm grasp on the playbook, concepts, be able to break down what's going on and explain things, point things out, be an extra set of eyes and an extra voice on the sidelines when needed.  Low maintenance and a quick study.  Not someone who is going to need their hand held on the sideline.  More important things to do, and much better to have a guy who can actually do some hand-holding themselves for other players.

5)Someone who isn't going to rock the boat.  In any way.  You don't want fans chanting for the backup to come in.  You don't want giant media scrums poking at what your backup QB is up to every day and why they're not starting.  You don't want any drama.  Low maintenance and low key is what you want from a position you hope never sees the field.

 

Guys like Kaepernick are really none of those things.  If you're desperate and need a stopgap starter, maybe they're a marginally better option.  But at that point, odds are your season is a writeoff anyway.  At which point...best case, you eek out an extra win...maybe even two.  But you're still having a garbage throwaway season.  What are you really accomplishing there other than potentially worsening your draft pick?  Is that marginal upgrade worth it?  Worth the various headaches?

Excellent post and within the confines of the rules. Well done

[ET80]

2 hours ago, Tugboat said:

A guy who is going to be able to run your offense (albeit at a lesser level); not requiring a custom-tailored system where you're re-writing swaths of the playbook, flipping around the execution details, and forcing the rest of the team to adapt to what the backup QB needs to perform adequately.

This is huge in regards to this discussion. Can you see Kaepernick running a Bill Belicheck pre-snap read offense? 

By and large, Kaepernick was always viewed as a very scheme limited QB. Single read option was his strength and not every team utilizes single read. Signing him means you have to commit to some of that in the event he hits the field due to injury.

[y2lamanaki]

On 8/4/2017 at 2:24 PM, PapaShogun said:

And I've seen Tom Brady make a similar error when not seeing a receiver without a man on him. Brady should have recognized this an immediately snapped the ball on this play: 

I can't help but note that the difference on these plays is that Brady did throw the ball to the wide open receiver who dropped it (which is the problem of that play) in a drive that ultimately ended up in a field goal, whereas Kaepernick did not even notice the uncovered player and did not throw the ball in a drive that ultimately ended up in a safety...largely because he had a prime chance to gain quick yards. The problem for the 49ers on that play was that it was Torrey Smith wide open jumping up and down. In 2015, Anquan Boldin was the 49ers #1 receiver, which means Kaepernick was never going to see Torrey Smith no matter how wide open he was at any point in time, because Kaepernick would always hyperfocus on one receiver.

[Thomas5737]

11 hours ago, FourThreeMafia said:

I cant stand Kaep, and I would take him as a backup on the Steelers.

I think he will get signed eventually, but I think people are going overboard.   Its a reward vs headache type of thing.    Is he worth the headache based on the quality of QB he is?   I guess thats a matter of opinion, but clearly, alot of teams dont think so and would rather exhaust every option rather than sign him.....and I dont fault them for that either.    But again, I think some team will eventually bite the bullet.

Yeah for the reward to be worth the headache I think he has to be a starter. There are plenty of capable backups that come without the controversy. If a starter goes down and that team doesn't have a capable backup for the remaining 10 games or whatever that is when he could sign somewhere.

 

He did this to himself. He could have said he was protesting specific instances instead of saying he wouldn't stand for the flag of a country that he doesn't respect. Blaming the whole for the issues of some is likely what caused some of the issues to begin with and was the wrong way to deal with the situation. I will say I have no issue with kneeling and getting word out that you believe wrongs are being committed. Just don't spit on the whole crowd when there was just one guy in the crowd that deserved it.

[sp6488]

14 hours ago, steelcurtain29 said:

To be fair, they signed one after camp started and after their star QB was reportedly expected to miss some time; potentially in the regular season.

 

Although that is unlikely; what if it's not? 

 

I find it hard to believe Kaepernick is unsigned. I won't bring up why I feel he is, but for the sake of football; he's clearly talented enough to be a backup at the very least. He's a starter on a team that needs a safety net for a QB, if you ask me. (Ala a team with an elite defensemen and talent otherwise, but needs someone with some starting potential as a QB).

 

Maybe I'm just biased, but I refuse to believe that he's not good enough to be signed. 

They signed David Olson and released him three days later to sign Josh Woodrum.  They considered signing Kaep when it seemed like there was a chance of him missing regular season time.  That is now apparently not a concern.  The guys they brought in recently are supposed to just be camp arms.  I doubt that's something that would make sense for Kaep to be, particularly given the hubbub around signing him.  Putting aside whether it even makes sense for the team, how would you react if they brought him in to fulfill the camp arm role and cut him in two weeks?  

You're really reading way too much into this.  Further, the fact that you're taking issue with the Ravens, when they're the team that was actually considering bringing him in, only further proves that there will be additional off-field baggage with bringing him in.  It's much like the Tebow situation.  He was almost assuredly one of the best 80 QBs available at one point in time, but eventually no team wanted to deal with the scrutiny of answering questions for possibly cutting a 2nd/3rd string QB.

[Oregon Ducks]

On 8/4/2017 at 10:20 AM, DeSean Jackson said:

If I'm an owner I'm not signing Kap either. I'm signing someone that can be a good leader to our team not disgrace our country. Kneeling during the anthem to disrespect our troops is horrible and not the right way to show him protesting. He got national exposure for this and I don't want that for my team. Bring your protesting outside the football field not bring it with you.i would  Sign someone that can help coach Up my starter like Wentz. Not be a huge distraction to my team. He's probably asking an insane amount of money too knowing he wouldn't take a pay cut. I want my backup to help my starter game plan, see what he sees on the football field not worry about protesting. 

lol ironic username is ironic.

I agree with Richard Sherman btw.

[Thelonebillsfan]

"Media circus" please.

We'd forget all the nonsense that the NFL generated themselves by focusing on it after three weeks. If that.

[Deadpulse]

16 hours ago, EliteTexan80 said:

18 hours ago, Tugboat said:

A guy who is going to be able to run your offense (albeit at a lesser level); not requiring a custom-tailored system where you're re-writing swaths of the playbook, flipping around the execution details, and forcing the rest of the team to adapt to what the backup QB needs to perform adequately.

This is huge in regards to this discussion. Can you see Kaepernick running a Bill Belicheck pre-snap read offense? 

By and large, Kaepernick was always viewed as a very scheme limited QB. Single read option was his strength and not every team utilizes single read. Signing him means you have to commit to some of that in the event he hits the field due to injury.

The good coaches can adapt the offense in that scenario though. You bring up BB and the pre-snap read offense. They didn't do that when they went with Jacoby Brisset. Granted that game plan was extremely dumbed down for him, but it still catered to him. When it was Cassels show in 08, a lot of the offense went more towards the single read and more boot legs and QB motion. 

It probably isn't the preferred option to have to change an offense on the fly due to injury (well that situation in general is never the preferred option) and I can understand a team wanting a guy more in the mold of what @Tugboat had. However, I just don't think this is enough reason not to have a guy with talent like his unsigned. John Harbough seemed to want him on the squad (at least from what I read), but the owner was the roadblock. I don't think this is a football decision in most cases. Then again with the Harbough connection, maybe his want of Kaep doesnt stem from a football decision either.