(08-31-2016, 06:14 AM)McC Wrote: But they're just talking about the guy, which was his intention to begin with.  How are you missing that?

(08-30-2016, 03:47 PM)Sled21 Wrote: On the line, with your helmet in your left hand. Hell yes a team can punish him for it. You are wearing the teams jersey, you represent the team. I can tell you flat out if I owned a team and you represented my team and sat your on your ass during the National Anthem, you would not be wearing that jersey again. First Amendment means the Government cannot punish your freedom of speech. It has nothing to do with employers. Want to exercise you 1st Amendment right fine, find a job elsewhere. That's been the courts ruling over and over. I was on a Police Dept. for over 20 years.... think I had rules about what I could say and could not say while representing the dept? Hell Yes!!!!

(08-31-2016, 08:29 AM)JungleGal50 Wrote: EXACTLY!   If he had done it when he was relevant and was still at the top of his game with a HUGE platform to advocate for his "Cause".....then I would have respected him more.  I would still disagree with it....but hey....it's his right.....and would have been a noble effort to use his fame to fight for something he believed in so strongly.
 
Since he waited until he was completely irrelevant, and doesn't have much to risk anymore.......it just looks like a cheap stunt to grab some attention & stay in the spotlight.  (thru any means)

In other words....this cause wasn't a priority, and he made no mention of it.......... when he was flying high on the field and was a media darling.....but now that he has slipped into the NFL QB abyss......it suddenly means EVERYTHING to him....and he just has to make a stand!    uhmm.....yeah......Not buying it.

I do not think MB or ML would stand for it (and would STRONGLY discourage that type of behavior)....simply because a stunt like that is all about "I" and not about the team.......and it would be a major distraction.   

(08-31-2016, 02:56 PM)Daddy-O Wrote: No doubt.  I didn't see Krap stand up for women when his NFL brothers were beating them silly (see Ray Rice and the Dallas d-line dirt bag - can't think of his name right now).  Krap is nothing more than an opportunist.

(08-31-2016, 08:29 AM)JungleGal50 Wrote: EXACTLY!   If he had done it when he was relevant and was still at the top of his game with a HUGE platform to advocate for his "Cause".....then I would have respected him more.  I would still disagree with it....but hey....it's his right.....and would have been a noble effort to use his fame to fight for something he believed in so strongly.
 
Since he waited until he was completely irrelevant, and doesn't have much to risk anymore.......it just looks like a cheap stunt to grab some attention & stay in the spotlight.  (thru any means)

In other words....this cause wasn't a priority, and he made no mention of it.......... when he was flying high on the field and was a media darling.....but now that he has slipped into the NFL QB abyss......it suddenly means EVERYTHING to him....and he just has to make a stand!    uhmm.....yeah......Not buying it.

I do not think MB or ML would stand for it (and would STRONGLY discourage that type of behavior)....simply because a stunt like that is all about "I" and not about the team.......and it would be a major distraction.   

(08-30-2016, 02:43 PM)fredtoast Wrote: He is not breaking any rule.  They can't punish him.

What if he refused to take part in a team prayer?  Do you think he could be punished for that?

(08-31-2016, 05:14 PM)ShowMeUrTDs Wrote: As an attorney, you should know infringement on First Amendment Constitutional rights is only forbidden against government actors, legislation, or rulings and not private entities.

Second, the players signed a contract in the form of a collective bargaining agreement in which they agreed to let the NFL and their respective teams punish them for "conduct detrimental" which is a subjective standard. So, if they believe Kaepernick violated this agreed upon rule, then yes, they have the absolute power to exercise their contractual right. The question is will they? It doesn't look like they will, and it would be bad publicity.

This is just further evidence that:

A. You are not an attorney; or

B. A shitty one!

Because you have limited understanding of the law, both contracts and Constitutional law!

(08-31-2016, 12:40 PM)John Shaft Wrote: "THEY'RE just talking about THE GUY".
That would be on "them" wouldn't it, seeing as how he sat on a bench and responded when asked why. It's the media and the publics going through coniptions talking about him keeping this weak topic up front. Ok.....how did his sitting on the bench affect you personally ? A man sitting down quietly offended ? 
No, I doubt if any Bengal participate.

(08-31-2016, 05:27 PM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: Nowhere does it say that he must stand.  Good luck proving that by simply sitting down, by causing no disturbance at all, that you are taking part in conduct detrimental to the league.  And as far as any interviews he has given, he is simply exercising his right to free speech.  They could try to punish him, but I am certain it would end up before a judge.

For everyone saying that he should try to make a difference, are you certain that you know what community activities he takes part it?  There was a segment on NFL Network a couple nights ago where both Jim Brown and a USC professor praised him for the amount of research he has done on this subject.  He is not denigrating the military or veterans (neither the American Flag, nor the Star Spangled Banner are symbols of the military).  He is not saying that he hates America or wants to leave.  He has not asked that he be immune from backlash (in fact, he has said that he is not concerned if hurts him monetarily).  He is choosing not to stand for a song that if you look at all three verses actually celebrates the killing of black people.

I will end with this.  A friend of mine was a decorated Army soldier.  On this subject, he said that he never fought for a flag or a song, he fought for the rights and freedoms that this country gives.  That not only does he not have a problem with Kaepernick, but that there were times different soldiers at his base in Iraq would purposely skip the raising of the flag and the Star Spangled Banner because they did not agree with certain things.

(08-31-2016, 05:42 PM)ShowMeUrTDs Wrote: First, my point was not is support of, or against, Kaepernick. I simply responded to Fred's post because it shows a clear misunderstanding of the legal issues involved that only a legal "professional" would know, and such a big deal has been made on these boards over the years about Fred's "profession."

Second, I did not say that there is a rule anywhere requiring him to sit or stand for the Anthem. What I said was, the "conduct detrimental" provision of the CBA gives both the NFL and the teams the contractual right to act if they feel such conduct is detrimental. This is an open and subjective interpretation.

I respect your opinion, but it is not a legal one because you also do not understand the Constitutional legal implications and whom they are enforceable upon. 

(08-31-2016, 02:56 PM)Daddy-O Wrote: No doubt.  I didn't see Krap stand up for women when his NFL brothers were beating them silly (see Ray Rice and the Dallas d-line dirt bag - can't think of his name right now).  Krap is nothing more than an opportunist.

(08-30-2016, 06:51 PM)Benton Wrote: Jeff fisher also said he'd make decisions on his QB. That didn't work out in Tennessee.

(08-31-2016, 06:06 PM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: Are you an employment law attorney?  I am not, but run a successful executive placement firm and know a fair amount of employment law.  Yes, "conduct detrimental" is a wide ranging clause, but what has Kaepernick done that is detrimental to the league? 

I am not saying you're wrong, but think the union and any number of qualified attorneys would love to face off against the NFL on this subject.

(08-31-2016, 05:27 PM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: Nowhere does it say that he must stand.  Good luck proving that by simply sitting down, by causing no disturbance at all, that you are taking part in conduct detrimental to the league.  And as far as any interviews he has given, he is simply exercising his right to free speech.  They could try to punish him, but I am certain it would end up before a judge.

For everyone saying that he should try to make a difference, are you certain that you know what community activities he takes part it?  There was a segment on NFL Network a couple nights ago where both Jim Brown and a USC professor praised him for the amount of research he has done on this subject.  He is not denigrating the military or veterans (neither the American Flag, nor the Star Spangled Banner are symbols of the military).  He is not saying that he hates America or wants to leave.  He has not asked that he be immune from backlash (in fact, he has said that he is not concerned if hurts him monetarily).  He is choosing not to stand for a song that if you look at all three verses actually celebrates the killing of black people.

I will end with this.  A friend of mine was a decorated Army soldier.  On this subject, he said that he never fought for a flag or a song, he fought for the rights and freedoms that this country gives.  That not only does he not have a problem with Kaepernick, but that there were times different soldiers at his base in Iraq would purposely skip the raising of the flag and the Star Spangled Banner because they did not agree with certain things.

(08-31-2016, 06:30 PM)ShowMeUrTDs Wrote: Let's just say I'm in the "profession." If you deal frequently in employment law, then you know that most of it is contract based, and some legislative/administrative. The NFL CBA's "conduct detrimental" policy was purposely designed to give them wide discretion, and the players agreed to it. All the 49ers, or the NFL would have to say is his actions have disturbed the operations of the team and could take any number of actions from fining him to a dismissal, the contract is that opaque. This is why so many have issues with "God"dell and what they say are inconsistent decisions because he has the authority under the contract to do what he wants when it comes to player conduct.

I agree many attorneys would love to take it up with the NFL, and I think the NFL or team owners won't do anything about it either.

As far as the Constitutional right to free speech and expression, only protects us from the Government from infringing upon those rights, not private companies. Private individuals and companies also have the right to contractually waive rights they would otherwise have. There are laws that require employers to act in a certain manner(mostly in the hiring process), such as, the Civil Rights Acts and the Equal Opportunity Act, but none requiring a private entity to afford you freedom of speech or expression.

(08-31-2016, 06:51 PM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: Agreed, but I think some of that would get really murky. 

I think his goal was to spur conversation, which he has done.  Unfortunately, I think there are many who don't want to talk about the issue and try to pivot away from it.  Claiming that he is anti military, that he is disrespecting the troops, that he is not active in his community (I personally don't know how active he is or isn't).  I think it is easy to try to change the subject because it is a difficult one to have.  Unfortunately, I think it is one that needs to take place with open minds.

(08-31-2016, 06:51 PM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: Agreed, but I think some of that would get really murky. 

I think his goal was to spur conversation, which he has done.  Unfortunately, I think there are many who don't want to talk about the issue and try to pivot away from it.  Claiming that he is anti military, that he is disrespecting the troops, that he is not active in his community (I personally don't know how active he is or isn't).  I think it is easy to try to change the subject because it is a difficult one to have.  Unfortunately, I think it is one that needs to take place with open minds.

(08-30-2016, 02:15 PM)John Shaft Wrote: All he did was sit down on a bench. Everyone else having a hissy fit about it is comical. How does a man sitting on a freaking bench affect anyone's life ?
What fools these mortals be.
WS

(08-31-2016, 07:05 PM)ShowMeUrTDs Wrote: As far as my opinion, I fully support him and what he is doing. I think more players should do it too. He is exercising in non-violent protest to raise awareness, it has successfully garnered attention, and has people talking!! While we are talking about it hopefully we talk about the injustices occurring in our country that is supposed to be the beacon of freedom and rights around the globe. 

(08-31-2016, 07:22 PM)Derrick Wrote: John, you have been sitting on your shaft too long. IT IS ALL ABOUT RESPECT FOR THE FLAG AND OUR COUNTRY. That A**hole is getting big bucks from the people in this country and he had better appreciate it!!!

There are too many people in this country (some are even here legally) who don't appreciate what it took to become the USA. As far as I am concerned, if anyone tolerates or supports this crappy behavior they should go somewhere else. Somewhere in the middle east would be my suggestion - while it still exists. Semper Fi.