Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Denver Post)   Let's spin the "Kaepernick Would Be Better" wheel, and we have another loser   (denverpost.com) divider line
    More: Fail, Broncos linebacker Von, Los Angeles Chargers, Denver, quarterback Philip Rivers, locker room, losing locker room, StubHub Center orange, Denver television reporter  
•       •       •

1284 clicks; posted to Sports » on 23 Oct 2017 at 9:35 PM (1 year ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



18 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2017-10-23 07:17:12 PM  
Would kaep be any worse?
 
2017-10-23 09:39:09 PM  
No, Kaepernick couldn't possibly lead a team with a really good defense and some decent talent on offense to any kind of success.

He was average with one of the worst organizations in the league, therefore he's not good enough to be in the NFL.
 
2017-10-23 09:40:10 PM  
Colin Sackorpick.
 
2017-10-23 09:47:17 PM  
No way, Elway is a huge trumper anyways and Derek Wolfe is crazy enough to probably attack the guy if he showed up.
 
2017-10-23 10:03:33 PM  
Don't they already have 3 qbs on the roster osweiler Simeon Lynch

Also word was Kaep didn't want to come to Denver when they tried/failed to trade for him last year or was it 2 years ago
 
2017-10-23 10:04:00 PM  
Looking more likely that Elway lucked out in Peyton Manning signing and has no extraordinary skills in signing QBs.
 
2017-10-23 10:10:01 PM  

deadsanta: Looking more likely that Elway lucked out in Peyton Manning signing and has no extraordinary skills in signing QBs.


He's just waiting for Luck to opt out of Indy like all good Denver QB's do.
 
2017-10-23 10:14:35 PM  
Elway already had Tebowing.  I doubt he wants Kaepernicking.  Guess they'll just stick with Defecating.
 
2017-10-23 10:43:33 PM  
Oh lawdy, someone greenlit a Mark Kiszla article?  He's the Stephen A. Smith/Skip Bayless segment of the Denver Post.
 
2017-10-23 10:53:32 PM  

farbekrieg: Don't they already have 3 qbs on the roster osweiler Simeon Lynch

Also word was Kaep didn't want to come to Denver when they tried/failed to trade for him last year or was it 2 years ago


They have three QBs that don't belong in the NFL (and weren't even particularly great in college).
 
2017-10-24 02:13:23 AM  
The legal standard is different from the practical standard, but you can't possibly claim he is not blackballed from the league. There are already several teams who are hot garbage and it's in their best interest to tank the season. If he really can't play any more, there you go, mission accomplished, you lost out and got the #1 draft pick. If you want to sabotage him because not even the unholy spawn of Bradshaw, Montana, and Brady could succeed under such conditions, offer him a deal. Hell, even a good team he would literally never play for could sign him to clipboard duty and make this all go away.

But the NFL, as a wise man once said, are who we thought they were.
 
2017-10-24 04:38:34 AM  
I get not wanting to hire him, but not even giving him a workout is just blatant malpractice and/or collusion
 
2017-10-24 08:09:47 AM  

Lost Thought 00: I get not wanting to hire him, but not even giving him a workout is just blatant malpractice and/or collusion


Why would you workout a guy when YOU get why they already don't want to hire him?
 
2017-10-24 09:19:13 AM  

Bruce Campbell: Lost Thought 00: I get not wanting to hire him, but not even giving him a workout is just blatant malpractice and/or collusion

Why would you workout a guy when YOU get why they already don't want to hire him?


Because the reason they don't want to hire him violates antitrust laws. However, if they worked him out and proved that he didn't have the skillset required anymore, then the antitrust lawsuit vanishes. The only reason not to work him out is fear that he might actually look decent and then their cover story is blown
 
2017-10-24 09:35:03 AM  

Lost Thought 00: Bruce Campbell: Lost Thought 00: I get not wanting to hire him, but not even giving him a workout is just blatant malpractice and/or collusion

Why would you workout a guy when YOU get why they already don't want to hire him?

Because the reason they don't want to hire him violates antitrust laws. However, if they worked him out and proved that he didn't have the skillset required anymore, then the antitrust lawsuit vanishes. The only reason not to work him out is fear that he might actually look decent and then their cover story is blown


No.  It doesn't.  It only proves that all of the NFL owners don't want a distraction with which 65% of their fan base disagrees.   The water company doesn't have to interview an asshole that was good at his job, but the public disliked.
 
2017-10-24 09:38:11 AM  

Lost Thought 00: Bruce Campbell: Lost Thought 00: I get not wanting to hire him, but not even giving him a workout is just blatant malpractice and/or collusion

Why would you workout a guy when YOU get why they already don't want to hire him?

Because the reason they don't want to hire him violates antitrust laws. However, if they worked him out and proved that he didn't have the skillset required anymore, then the antitrust lawsuit vanishes. The only reason not to work him out is fear that he might actually look decent and then their cover story is blown


The NFL isn't a charity. They don't get have to hire someone that will likely lose them money.
 
2017-10-24 10:58:23 AM  

Bruce Campbell: Lost Thought 00: Bruce Campbell: Lost Thought 00: I get not wanting to hire him, but not even giving him a workout is just blatant malpractice and/or collusion

Why would you workout a guy when YOU get why they already don't want to hire him?

Because the reason they don't want to hire him violates antitrust laws. However, if they worked him out and proved that he didn't have the skillset required anymore, then the antitrust lawsuit vanishes. The only reason not to work him out is fear that he might actually look decent and then their cover story is blown

No.  It doesn't.  It only proves that all of the NFL owners don't want a distraction with which 65% of their fan base disagrees.   The water company doesn't have to interview an asshole that was good at his job, but the public disliked.


When they have a monopolistic control over the employment market, they do in fact have to
 
2017-10-24 11:17:29 AM  

Lost Thought 00: Bruce Campbell: Lost Thought 00: Bruce Campbell: Lost Thought 00: I get not wanting to hire him, but not even giving him a workout is just blatant malpractice and/or collusion

Why would you workout a guy when YOU get why they already don't want to hire him?

Because the reason they don't want to hire him violates antitrust laws. However, if they worked him out and proved that he didn't have the skillset required anymore, then the antitrust lawsuit vanishes. The only reason not to work him out is fear that he might actually look decent and then their cover story is blown

No.  It doesn't.  It only proves that all of the NFL owners don't want a distraction with which 65% of their fan base disagrees.   The water company doesn't have to interview an asshole that was good at his job, but the public disliked.

When they have a monopolistic control over the employment market, they do in fact have to


LOL, did you just create that rule or law?
 
Displayed 18 of 18 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report