Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
It isn't that; I just don't think the protesting is the prime reason ... definitely a factor ... but not the prime reason.

I fully support his right to protest, at the same time NFL teams have a certain amount of 'brand' to protect and I don't think they should be forced to sign anyone that the team feels would do more harm than good. I think they would be more than willing to deal with the issues if his performance had not been on the decline before he started protesting. If the guy was a superstar, he could run over a bag of kittens and a team would likely sign him and deal with the fallout.
I think it is definitely a trade off of talent vs. ass pain. He is not good enough to overcome the grief.

I agree that if it were a more solid superstar, then some team would sign him. I also think that he is being somewhat blackballed and disagree with your assertion that absent the protest, he would be only on a practice squad.

Cant really say one of those factors is ‘primary’...it’s a trade off. I tend to think that the protest is why he is not even being considered, so that is probably primary. Absent the protest, he would undoubtedly be at least a backup on the active roster, maybe a starter for Bills, Redskins, a few other teams...but, I believe he is completely off the radar due to the politics.

I agree that each team and the NFL have a right to protect their brand, and as I said, I totally understand why they don’t sign him. I think it’s just dishonest to deny the reason and say it’s a scheme issue or talent issue. This year has made that more than obvious.

Thats not to say I like the guy or support his politics...but just be honest about it. Would probably gain respect on both sides. The NFL has fumbled this issue all around, make a stand one way or the other and be honest.

The problem they have is it is probably illegal to force an employee to stand for the National Anthem.