Jump to content

Signing Kaepernick, Another Veteran or Stick with Sudfeld as #2?


Nabbs4u

Recommended Posts

The winning brought a circus, the weird, fun and the controversial stories were already a part of the locker room. Players getting sued for adultery, team celebrations, the Players Coalition. Kap would be an insurance policy at the QB position, I can't imagine he'd start unless Foles went down. Even then you add players to make the team better who cares about your personal issues.  

Now that I said all that, I don't think Kap wants to sign anywhere anyway. He wouldn't get paid what he wants, he's not guaranteed to start. Why would he grab a check just to sit on the sideline?

As much as I hate Romo I could say the same thing, no way he plays. He retired because he couldn't physically continue. He had places to go. 

I see either Matt McGloin being brought back into the fold or Josh Johnson. If we have to go to Sudfield they might as well pack it up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, AZ_Eaglesfan said:

Why on Earth would we ever sign Kaep. He isn't good at football and he could literally ruin all the chemistry we have built this year. That would be a disaster, no thanks.

C'mon, this is ridiculous.

If you don't like a guy for his views of how he acts, that's fine. But even on a terrible team, he managed a 16/4 TD/INT ratio with Chip Kelly running a team full of dead bodies into the ground. He's an average NFL QB, much better than Nate Sudfeld or Matt McGloin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not worth the drama it would bring. IF Foles gets hurt in the next 3 weeks, then I'd have no problem bringing in Kaep. In the hypothetical scenario that Foles does get hurt sometime in the next 3 weeks, I think the cons of having had Kaep the entire time as a backup (media circus) outweigh the benefits (Kaep being with the team a couple extra weeks, still a minuscule amount).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, nlesthought said:

Just like there's no way to be sure about this

"He isn't good at football and he could literally ruin all the chemistry we have built this year. That would be a disaster, no thanks."

 

Did you counter my point to your ridiculous statement with someone else's ridiculous statement? 

tenor.gif?itemid=5310208

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jlash said:

C'mon, this is ridiculous.

If you don't like a guy for his views of how he acts, that's fine. But even on a terrible team, he managed a 16/4 TD/INT ratio with Chip Kelly running a team full of dead bodies into the ground. He's an average NFL QB, much better than Nate Sudfeld or Matt McGloin.

He isn't good at football. If he was good at football he would be in SF starting as a franchise QB regardless of the off the field stuff. He has to use his legs to make plays and he is very inaccurate from the pocket. Comparing him to career backups that should never see the field doesn't change my stance on that.

And lets be real here, signing him would be a complete disaster for this team. All anyone would talk about is when is Kaep gunna see the field, it could completely wreck any chemistry we have going. There are other options that can be explored for a backup QB that wouldn't bring a circus to town.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...