New York Police Officers Rally in Support of Colin Kaepernick

[CaliCat 3,957]

The alt-right loses again.

New York Police Officers Rally in Support of Colin Kaepernick

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/19/sports/football/colin-kaepernick-nypd-rally.html?module=WatchingPortal&region=c-column-middle-span-region&pgType=Homepage&action=click&mediaId=thumb_square&state=standard&contentPlacement=18&version=internal&contentCollection=www.nytimes.com&contentId=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2017%2F08%2F19%2Fsports%2Ffootball%2Fcolin-kaepernick-nypd-rally.html&eventName=Watching-article-click

 

Dozens of current and retired officers from the New York Police Department rallied on Saturday morning in support of Colin Kaepernick, the former San Francisco 49ers player lionized and reviled for refusing to stand during the national anthem.

The gathering in Brooklyn Bridge Park was organized by Sgt. Edwin Raymond and attended by about 80 officers who wore black T-shirts emblazoned with “#IMWITHKAP.” Frank Serpico, a former officer who exposed corruption in the New York Police Department in the 1970s, attended.

Speakers, including City Councilman Jumaane D. Williams, Democrat of Brooklyn, linked the backlash against Kaepernick’s gesture — no team has signed the quarterback for this season — to the violence last weekend during a white nationalist march in Charlottesville, Va., and more generally to issues of police accountability.

[IAMX 3,055]

Kaepernick remains unsigned.. huge win for everyone, especially the 49ers. 

Edited August 21, 2017 by IAMX

[Dashinka 24,419]

I fail to see how this is relevant.  Was anyone trying to say he didn't have a right to do what he did?  Sure there were many that said it was in poor taste, but whatever, to my knowledge the NFL has no rule barring such action by him, but they also have no guarantee that a player will get a contract either.  He may want to consider the CFL.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

 

   NFL teams don't want controversy, especially from someone who's talent level is more in line with a backup QB at this stage. 

 

   Earlier, most of the risk in signing Kaepernick was backlash from the people who were against his actions. The support for Kaepernick shows owners that there is also controversy involved with not giving him a chance. There have been threats of boycotts too, but it probably won't be enough. 

 

   Talent wise he should be on a team. If he had Tom Brady's skill set, or even Tom Savage's, he would be playing. The NFL doesn't care what someone did or says if they can play. I like Kaepernick and support his right to protest as he did, but I think he's suffering from the same thing as any other celebrity when it comes to the first amendment. If you are among a talented few, you can say anything. If you are not, well .....

[Dashinka 24,419]

9 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   NFL teams don't want controversy, especially from someone who's talent level is more in line with a backup QB at this stage. 

 

   Earlier, most of the risk in signing Kaepernick was backlash from the people who were against his actions. The support for Kaepernick shows owners that there is also controversy involved with not giving him a chance. There have been threats of boycotts too, but it probably won't be enough. 

 

   Talent wise he should be on a team. If he had Tom Brady's skill set, or even Tom Savage's, he would be playing. The NFL doesn't care what someone did or says if they can play. I like Kaepernick and support his right to protest as he did, but I think he's suffering from the same thing as any other celebrity when it comes to the first amendment. If you are among a talented few, you can say anything. If you are not, well .....

If you look back at many of the superstar athletes from the 80's and 90's you rarely saw one take on politically charged topics regardless of their personal politics.  Take a Michael Jordan, he knows that people of all politics buy his endorsed merchandise, so why alienate one side or the other.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

If you look back at many of the superstar athletes from the 80's and 90's you rarely saw one take on politically charged topics regardless of their personal politics.  Take a Michael Jordan, he knows that people of all politics buy his endorsed merchandise, so why alienate one side or the other.

 

    I think most athletes avoid controversy while they are playing for that reason. Kaepernick wanted to make his point, his choice. At any rate, he made enough money that he's not hurting that way. I agree he might want to look at the CFL, the same advice they gave Tim Tebow, who was also controversial in his own way. Work on your skill set and then you can say/do what you want.

 

  Most NFL owners don't care about politics, they care about the bottom line. If a player can put more people in the seats than they keep out of them, they'll have a job.

[IAMX 3,055]

20 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

If you look back at many of the superstar athletes from the 80's and 90's you rarely saw one take on politically charged topics regardless of their personal politics.  Take a Michael Jordan, he knows that people of all politics buy his endorsed merchandise, so why alienate one side or the other.

I have two business degrees and nowhere in my education was I ever taught to alienate such a high amount of customers by having the business take controversial political sides. It made no sense anyways. We sell products. Why get involved in politics anyways?

 

This idea of taking controversial political stances is a novelty, but moreover, by businesses who are either left wing themselves, or those who are scared of leftist nuts throwing fits.

 

The left don't respect freedom of expression, whining about non-existent fascism against them while in fascist-fashion attacking others for expressing dissenting opinion. It's at a point now where neutrality, for the left = sides with Nazis/whatever other imaginary demons they can concoct. 

 

These businesses have effectively endorsed this behavior by giving them what they want, and thus should not complain about the left wanting more and more. They're now at the behest of children at adult age who are hellbent on escalating conflict until they get everything they want, and nothing less. The worst elements of society to cater to.

Edited August 22, 2017 by IAMX

[spookyturtle 9,465]

He needs a Belichick to straighten him out. His problem isn't sitting during the National Anthem, he's a locker room distraction.

Edited August 22, 2017 by spookyturtle

[Steeleballz 7,550]

23 minutes ago, spookyturtle said:

He needs a Belichick to straighten him out. His problem isn't sitting during the National Anthem, he's a locker room distraction.

 

  That is part of the reason. It's also that he still can't go through his progressions or read what the defense is doing. Many gifted and talented athletes had shorter careers for the same reason.

 

  I think a team would take a chance if he looked like he might develop as a QB. It's just too many issues for a backup to have.

[Dashinka 24,419]

45 minutes ago, spookyturtle said:

He needs a Belichick to straighten him out. His problem isn't sitting during the National Anthem, he's a locker room distraction.

The same could have been said of Michael Sam.  I highly doubt he was the first gay player in the NFL, but he was the first that seemed to decide it was more important to court the media attention.  I am not sure if that was a smart move on his part.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

21 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

The same could have been said of Michael Sam.  I highly doubt he was the first gay player in the NFL, but he was the first that seemed to decide it was more important to court the media attention.  I am not sure if that was a smart move on his part.

Probably not a good move on his part. He should have let his playing speak for him. 

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

13 minutes ago, spookyturtle said:

Probably not a good move on his part. He should have let his playing speak for him. 

That's racist and homophobic of you, how dare you talk in such a way. But it's true

Edited August 22, 2017 by cyberfx1024

[spookyturtle 9,465]

13 minutes ago, cyberfx1024 said:

That's racist and homophobic of you, how dare you talk in such a way. But it's true

But I live in Massachusetts, so I must be a lefty liberal Democrat. But I'm pro Second Ammendment and anti abortion, so I can't be. 

[IAMX 3,055]

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

The same could have been said of Michael Sam.  I highly doubt he was the first gay player in the NFL, but he was the first that seemed to decide it was more important to court the media attention.  I am not sure if that was a smart move on his part.

The only reason Michael Sam even made it to the NFL was because of being gay. Was pretty terrible. Waste of a draft pick, and an awful publicity stunt.

 

Kaepernick on the other hand is very much like the story of Tebow.. a genuine athlete that showed significant promise, but in the end above average "athleticism" was not enough to cover for lackluster essential variables at the QB position.

 

Also, as an aside, Tebow gathered a lot of controversy for doing little that was controversial. Kaepernick on the other hand has pissed off quite a lot of people doing stupid stuff and overall acting like an idiot. It's amazing how much negative attention Tebow drew for simply displaying his religious beliefs, with no negative overtones whatsoever, whereas Kaepernick disrespects a ton of people, no less important than law enforcement and US military, and gets this unity message from other idiot NFL players across the league.

 

The QB position is one of leadership, and any leadership that alienates people or distracts from the premise of the job (given that Kaepernick used his job as a way of protesting rather than when off the field) makes a terrible leader. 

 

So what would teams want to sign him for, besides to send a political message? Would be quite an expensive message. And it's been proven the NFL doesn't want that kind of attention given their partnerships.

Edited August 22, 2017 by IAMX

[OriZ 3,157]

2 hours ago, spookyturtle said:

But I live in Massachusetts, so I must be a lefty liberal Democrat. But I'm pro Second Ammendment and anti abortion, so I can't be. 

You just have a bit of a complex