Kaepernick's grievance against NFL owners is actually all about . . . Donald Trump?

When I first heard Colin Kaepernick was filing a collusion grievance against NFL owners because none of them have signed him this year, I figured his case seemed pretty weak on the surface but I wondered if maybe his camp had something they considered evidence that might give them a reason to think they could win. Phone transcripts, perhaps, of the Raiders calling the Steelers and the Chiefs calling the Eagles, where all of them agree not to touch Kap because he needs to be punished for his anti-American apostasy. That seems highly implausible, but if it did exist and you had it, I guess I can see why you might give the grievance a shot.

Then again, if you don't have anything like that, but you were determined to file the grievance anyway, you might concoct a completely insane proposition to explain why you still aren't on an NFL roster. And if you did that, it would probably be an indication that your case is weak and you know it. So, what have you got there, Kap? Oh, you not having a job is the fault of Donald Trump? I think that tells us everything we need to know about the strength of your case:

The influence and power of President Donald Trump will be a central element in Colin Kaepernick's collusion grievance against the NFL, according to a source with knowledge of the situation, identifying the culture fostered by the leader of the free world as a factor in teams failing to extend a contract offer for work-out invitation to the former Super Bowl quarterback since he became a free agent in March. Given the stipulations within the collective bargaining agreement about collusion, some have focused on the need to provide evidence of communications between owners and/or the league office to win damages. However, Kaepernick's case might focus on the tweets and other communications of the president, according to the source, noting numerous instances where Trump expressed his influence over owners in this manner. Per the CBA language on collusion: "No Club, its employees or agents shall enter into any agreement, express or implied, with the NFL or any other Club, its employees or agents to restrict or limit individual Club decision-making ... "

---

In this instance, Kaepernick could argue, in addition to "express" collusion -- generally emails, text messages or written/oral arrangements among clubs or the league office -- that some or all NFL clubs/owners also had an "implied" agreement with the league and/or each other based on messages received from President Trump, which the president publicly discussed on Twitter and in speeches to restrict decision-making regarding signing Kaepernick.

So let me see if I have this straight: The same owners who encouraged their players to kneel because Trump said they were SOBs for not doing so are the guys who are afraid to sign Colin Kaepernick because Trump keeps saying on Twitter that he doesn't want them to? Of all the theories I've heard in my time, that's one of them. Publicly going against Donald Trump is hardly a risky move in America 2017. It gets you plaudits from the media and from Hollywood, and no one really believes that the president will punish an NFL team because it signs a player who irritates him, nor does he have the ability to do so. If anything, Trump would probably enjoy having Kaepernick to flog on a weekly basis. Regardless, if this is all Kaepernick's case consists of, it's not going to take long for it to be dismissed in the owners' favor. We explained in detail here why it's exceedingly rational for any NFL team to take a pass on Kaepernick. He simply doesn't offer enough on the field to be worth all the nonsense that comes with him. Owners don't have to collude to figure that out. If you think through the personnel needs of your football team, it's obvious.

---

Support Canada Free Press

---

By the way, I wonder how Kaepernick thinks he's helping himself with a move like this. He's already created a massive headache for the owners by starting this anthem-kneeling nonsense, and now he's becoming a legal adversary on top of that? What owner looks at all this and decides he just can't wait to add Colin Kaepernick to his team? Not one with a brain in his head, that's for sure. The bottom line is this: If Kaepernick was such a good quarterback that he would help a team win more games than it's winning now, he'd be giving some owner or general manager a reason to consider whether he's worth the trouble. His last two years with the 49ers he was definitely not that type of quarterback. Defenses figured out his tendencies and game-planned very effectively to stop him. Kaepernick failed to make adjustments and his effectiveness declined significantly. If I were Kaepernick, I'd shut up about the political crap and try to get on some kind of roster somewhere, maybe in the CFL, maybe in a semi-pro league. Does arena football still exist? I don't care enough to check but maybe Kapernick should. Show what you can do and then maybe someone will want you. Taking legal action against the people from whom you'd like a job is not likely to succeed. Then again, maybe no one wants the fan blowback they would get by putting a guy on the field who has slandered the police and disrespected the country, and is unrepentant about having done so. If that's the case, Kaepernick can't blame team owners and he certainly can't blame Donald Trump. He can only blame himself.