Kaepernick Files A Grievance Against The NFL

[PrincetonTiger]

3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I figured Huntley but I miss Romo playing, he was Good.

Sorry it is Hundley not Huntley like Chet

[ReMeDy]

9 hours ago, Chrisaaron1023 said:

A very good coach (IMO) stretched his skillset and got much more out of him than expected. 

 

I bet the 49'ers are regretting they lost that certain coach that they probably are too afraid to mention. Went from a losing Superbowl team to literally the 31st ranked team in the league, and would be 32nd if the Browns weren't so bad.

[lance_m8]

5 minutes ago, ReMeDy said:

 

I bet the 49'ers are regretting they lost that certain coach that they probably are too afraid to mention. Went from a losing Superbowl team to literally the 31st ranked team in the league, and would be 32nd if the Browns weren't so bad.

49ers aren't terrible I think they are the only team in history to lose 5 straight games by 3 points or less 

[PrincetonTiger]

8 minutes ago, ReMeDy said:

 

I bet the 49'ers are regretting they lost that certain coach that they probably are too afraid to mention. Went from a losing Superbowl team to literally the 31st ranked team in the league, and would be 32nd if the Browns weren't so bad.

Kelly was a bad hire

[RockThatBlue]

This would probably be laughed out of court. Quite frankly, this is dumb.

 

Wasn't it reported like a month or so ago that the Ravens nearly signed him? Then they backed off because of something crazy his GF said. 

[BR-549]

3 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

They don't have to say it's a football decision.  All they have to say is that they did not make an agreement with another team to not sign him.

 

Other then that they are free to say that they didn't sign him because they feared losing fans.  

 

There is no rule that they can't take his protests into account when signing.  Just that they can't make an agreement with another team to not sign him.  

 

 

I'm sorry I still call nonsense on this.  You look at his stats from his last year and you try to tell me that he isn't better then Scott Tolzien or any one of several backups and journeymen that are on NFL rosters right now.  Passer rating a shade over 90, 16 TD's only 4 Int's.  That's bull crap.  No one's saying he's a franchise guy. . . But he's certainly better then most backups.

 

But again there is no rule that they can't take his protests into account.  It's clear that he's a lightning rod and signing him might cost an NFL team some fans.  And backup even a high quality one isn't worth that.  

 

I'm ok with him not getting signed, not because I have a problem with his protest but because that is for a lot of people not just football players the cost of protesting or standing up for something.  That's just reality. Free speech can cost you employment opportunity.  

 

But we shouldn't lie to ourselves and pretend he's not playing just cause he's not good enough to be in the NFL.  He's better then most backups and probably a couple of starters.  His stats prove it.  But he's certainly not good enough to risk losing fans over.  

 

He's going to lose this because there was no collusion.  The teams can all say we didn't sign him because of the protests and as long as they didn't have an agreement between them on that then there is nothing there.

 

 

Compare his stats with Scott Tolzien and several other backups.  He's better then most.  

 

 

This is exactly it.  Too many problems, not enough talent to justify trying to handle those problems.  

 

But you take away his protest. . . Yeah he'd be on a team. 

No worries bro... you have very good points and I understand what you are saying.  We just see it in different ways and have differing opinions.  I tried to stay away from any of these threads because of the nature of them.  I am not an NFL evaluator so I can't say without a doubt he isn't an NFL talent.  But I can say that if GM's felt he belonged on a team I would think they could figure out a way to sidestep the negative aspects of signing him.  

 

I just know that he hasn't been signed and that his talent is questionable and that it was questionable even before all the political issues came up. I feel like he is grasping at straws here.  But that is just me.  It would be my guess that his unique style would need to be adjusted for regardless of the team he played for.... 

[Narcosys]

23 hours ago, King Colt said:

Kaepernick started something that grew much larger than he intended resulting in him being left out in the cold for what appears to be until he is too old to play and now he is suing. Maybe he does not quite understand what is being done to him. What will come of the suit? More important what will become of Kaepernick?  He should get used to knocking on doors that don't open.

 

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork/CBS News/AP) — Colin Kaepernick filed a collusion grievance against NFL team owners Sunday, alleging collusion to keep him from being signed by a team.

Many have claimed that the NFL owners have blackballed the former 49ers quarterback because of his social justice protest last season of kneeling during the national anthem.

Idk how he will justify it, he's been offered contracts from two different teams.

[King Colt]

2 hours ago, Narcosys said:

Idk how he will justify it, he's been offered contracts from two different teams.

He spoke with Seattle but no deal was made and the Ravens I believe was the other team but I don't know what transpired there.

[Narcosys]

2 hours ago, King Colt said:

He spoke with Seattle but no deal was made and the Ravens I believe was the other team but I don't know what transpired there.

 

The dolphins were another, and before he was dropped, Denver was interested in a trade if kaep took a pay cut.

[aaron11]

calling it now, this lawsuit will fail, and kap will never play in the league again

 

its pretty simple, he is better than most backups, but teams dont feel the distraction is worth it.  if he was a talent like mike vick, he would have a job but kap is nothing special 

[King Colt]

I don't get this collusion charge unless it is demanding he get hired. If teams talked to him and don't want him what can he possible achieve in court? A conspiracy? Again, prove it. He is digging a deeper hole for himself. Just goes to show, "Be careful what you ask for as you just might get it."

[Valpo2004]

On 10/16/2017 at 8:09 PM, BR-549 said:

No worries bro... you have very good points and I understand what you are saying.  We just see it in different ways and have differing opinions.  I tried to stay away from any of these threads because of the nature of them.  I am not an NFL evaluator so I can't say without a doubt he isn't an NFL talent.  But I can say that if GM's felt he belonged on a team I would think they could figure out a way to sidestep the negative aspects of signing him.  

 

I just know that he hasn't been signed and that his talent is questionable and that it was questionable even before all the political issues came up. I feel like he is grasping at straws here.  But that is just me.  It would be my guess that his unique style would need to be adjusted for regardless of the team he played for.... 

 

You can't sidestep this problem.  He started the sitting/kneeling thing and so he's the face and the symbol of it.  People would feel that by signing him you are endorsing his protest, which is going to cost you fans.  That's just the reality of it.

 

He is grasping at straws, he's hurt either emotionally or financially by the fact that he's not playing.  A couple weeks ago he promised that he would stand for the anthem if he was signed.  Now he's doing this.  

 

But he can't go back now.  That's just the way he is.  He stood up for something and now he's going to pay for it.  It's not any different with anyone else.  Taking a stand on something controversial, no matter how right or wrong you are can cost you.  

[Valpo2004]

On 10/16/2017 at 4:48 PM, Coffeedrinker said:

I disagree with the premise that he is better than most back-ups and some starters.  He is not a good QB and he lasted as long as most below average back-ups lasts... 5 years.  The real truth is, if it weren't for Harbaugh, Kap would have been out of the a few years ago.  The NFL is not really a place for QBs that can't read a defense, can't go through progressions, has accuracy issues and is mistake prone.  I don't have time to go through all the QB, but I would be willing to bet there are no QBs in the league that have more than 5 years of starting experience and less than a 60% career completion percentage.  Derek Anderson maybe because his early years were really bad and he played for the Browns.

 

http://www.nfl.com/player/andrewluck/2533031/careerstats

 

Andrew Luck's career completion percentage is 59.2%

 

You are making too big of a deal over completion percentage.  You can get a great completion percentage by checking the ball down all the time.  But that isn't always the best thing for your team either.  Yards per attempt is probably a better measure here to consider.  That factors in both your completion percentage and the aggressiveness of the throw.  

 

[Valpo2004]

On 10/16/2017 at 4:40 PM, 21isSuperman said:

You can counter it too many ways.

 

The Colts liked Tolzien more because he was in the same system for a year, so they were more comfortable with him.

The Browns like their guys more because they want to develop the young guys they have.

The Jets like Hackenberg more because he's been on the team since 2016 and they maybe see some potential in him.

 

Point is, it's too easy to counter the stats argument with several other football-related arguments.  I think it's far too difficult to prove any collusion took place

 

You are missing my point.  It is difficult to prove collusion took place.  In fact I'm pretty sure that no actual collusion took place.  That's because collusion requires two or more teams agreeing not to sign Kap.  

 

What's more likely is each team looked at him and decided he wasn't worth the possibility of losing fans because of his protests.  That's not collusion.  

 

I just disagree strongly with this idea that he's not signed because he's not good enough even to be a backup.  Bull crap his stats show him out to be better then a lot of backups, probably most.  

 

There is nothing wrong with a team deciding that because of the protests he's not worth it.  But I think you would have to be foolish to think that the protest thing isn't being taken into account and his lack of a job is entirely due to football decisions.  That's quite frankly silly.  

[Valpo2004]

On 10/16/2017 at 4:34 PM, chad72 said:

 

That is why it surprised me why he opted out leaving money on the table. Whoever was his agent did him no favors there.

 

He had no guaranteed money left on the contract and the 49er's where probalby going to release him anyways.  And that would have been a football decision because he was getting paid like a franchise QB and he didn't have franchise QB level abilities.

 

I don't think he lost a dime by doing that.  

 

That having been said I think it's insanely ignorant to think that he isn't good enough to be a backup in the league.  

 

Shoot teams are seeing QB's go down to injury and they are signing players like Brandon Weeden and arn't even working Kap out.  But it has nothing to do with the protests??? Give me a break.

 

Again none of this is collusion and teams have the right to not sign a player because of political protests.  But don't try to tell me that he can't even get a backup job, or in many cases a backup to the backup (because the starter is hurt) job because he doesn't have the talent for that.  You can't sit here and watch Scott Tolzien play and say that Tolzien is a better QB.  

[2006Coltsbestever]

He should've just left this alone, more people are now disliking him. He has no chance of winning this case IMO. I cant see any team ever picking him up again.

[2006Coltsbestever]

15 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

http://www.nfl.com/player/andrewluck/2533031/careerstats

 

Andrew Luck's career completion percentage is 59.2%

 

You are making too big of a deal over completion percentage.  You can get a great completion percentage by checking the ball down all the time.  But that isn't always the best thing for your team either.  Yards per attempt is probably a better measure here to consider.  That factors in both your completion percentage and the aggressiveness of the throw.  

 

IMO QB Rating and completion % are the 2 most overrated things to judge a QB on. I go by TD's/Yards/and clutch play in the 4th Qtr and Andrew is Very Good when it comes to those things.

[mikey287]

I mean, for starters, Luck has played in a mostly one-dimensional vertical offense since he's been in the league. Kap has been in anything but...so I would expect a QB that only has to throw it 6 yards per play to have a moderately higher completion percentage almost regardless of talent. Speaking of talent, Kap does not have very much. Though he is a good athlete...those are not the same thing, of course.

[21isSuperman]

1 hour ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

You are missing my point.  It is difficult to prove collusion took place.  In fact I'm pretty sure that no actual collusion took place.  That's because collusion requires two or more teams agreeing not to sign Kap.  

 

What's more likely is each team looked at him and decided he wasn't worth the possibility of losing fans because of his protests.  That's not collusion.  

 

I just disagree strongly with this idea that he's not signed because he's not good enough even to be a backup.  Bull crap his stats show him out to be better then a lot of backups, probably most.  

 

There is nothing wrong with a team deciding that because of the protests he's not worth it.  But I think you would have to be foolish to think that the protest thing isn't being taken into account and his lack of a job is entirely due to football decisions.  That's quite frankly silly.  

I don't think we are disagreeing or missing each other's points.  The last line of the post of mine that you quoted was "I think it's far too difficult to prove any collusion took place".  We're on the same page here.  This lawsuit is likely to go nowhere

[chad72]

1 hour ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

He had no guaranteed money left on the contract and the 49er's where probalby going to release him anyways.  And that would have been a football decision because he was getting paid like a franchise QB and he didn't have franchise QB level abilities.

 

I don't think he lost a dime by doing that.  

 

That having been said I think it's insanely ignorant to think that he isn't good enough to be a backup in the league.  

 

Shoot teams are seeing QB's go down to injury and they are signing players like Brandon Weeden and arn't even working Kap out.  But it has nothing to do with the protests??? Give me a break.

 

Again none of this is collusion and teams have the right to not sign a player because of political protests.  But don't try to tell me that he can't even get a backup job, or in many cases a backup to the backup (because the starter is hurt) job because he doesn't have the talent for that.  You can't sit here and watch Scott Tolzien play and say that Tolzien is a better QB.  

 

There is a subjective part of evaluation that no one is privy to. Whatever goes into that subjective part of the evaluation, the owner and team doing that evaluation have the right to deem that. Tolzien, by knowing the Colts' system longer, was a more sure thing in hand, at least that is what they thought till Brissett came along as an option.

 

It is like someone making a choice for dating someone. Another person outside the one chosen may very well be better than their mate based on a number of objective criteria that you can put forth but it is still the right of that person to choose the mate they feel most comfortable with to make that decision. Same thing with the owners and coaches, they CAN CHOOSE not to like Kaepernick, it is their prerogative, and they can choose whatever criteria they want to, to make their decision. You can't demand employment, you can't demand someone to choose you, no matter where, which realm of life etc. and choice is a two way street. 

 

Fair or not, that is life, and it doesn't take collusion to make such subjective decisions, just takes the right of choice of a club's owner or coaches. Just my two cents. 

[BR-549]

4 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

You can't sidestep this problem.  He started the sitting/kneeling thing and so he's the face and the symbol of it.  People would feel that by signing him you are endorsing his protest, which is going to cost you fans.  That's just the reality of it.

 

He is grasping at straws, he's hurt either emotionally or financially by the fact that he's not playing.  A couple weeks ago he promised that he would stand for the anthem if he was signed.  Now he's doing this.  

 

But he can't go back now.  That's just the way he is.  He stood up for something and now he's going to pay for it.  It's not any different with anyone else.  Taking a stand on something controversial, no matter how right or wrong you are can cost you.  

So you are saying that if someone such as the Colts signed him and he started winning games (like the ones we have recently lost) and he did as he said and stood up for the Anthem that people wouldn't soon forget all about it?  That is what I meant by sidestepping it.

 

Problem is, like I said earlier, he isn't good enough to ensure that is what would happen.  So it is without doubt a huge risk... if his talent was better it would go away.  Remove his name and insert Aaron Rogers with all else being equal I bet it is a different outcome.

[DougDew]

Just because 32 GMs know he has a longer wind up than Juan Marichal (google that for you youngsters) and think he sucks in general, not to mention he'll turn off off a big portion of the fan base, doesn't mean they colluded. 

 

It simply means they each have common sense.

[OLD FAN MAN]

On 10/16/2017 at 8:55 AM, crazycolt1 said:

Somehow I don't think Kaepernick thought his actions would have the personal repercussions it did.

With that said why would an owner want the negative attention (especially from the media) by signing a back up QB?

When he came into the league he was in a system that made him very successful. Once the defenses figured out how to defend him he wasn't good enough to excel in a different system and style of play.

i concur

[OLD FAN MAN]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Just because 32 GMs know he has a longer wind up than Juan Marichal (google that for you youngsters) and think he sucks in general, not to mention he'll turn off off a big portion of the fan base, doesn't mean they colluded. 

 

It simply means they each have common sense.

i agree

[IndyScribe]

Good for Kaep. Collusion is hard to prove, though, so it's likely he'll lose unless he has emails or solid proof. I hope he wins.

[IndyScribe]

On 10/17/2017 at 7:44 AM, Narcosys said:

Idk how he will justify it, he's been offered contracts from two different teams.

According to Kaep, no. Baltimore didn't sign him because of his GF's tweets, other teams won't sign him because of his protest.

[IndyScribe]

IMO, this is a win-win situation. If he loses, he at least forces the league and the owners to admit why they don't want to sign him. If he wins, he gets a roster spot(potentially) and can feel good at taking the NFL down.

[mikey287]

The loss is that the guy is allegedly for a cause (which he has stated he would trade in his beliefs for a job, so...ya know, he is easily bought and sold, which is a good trait to have in pro sports) and then creates a distraction with a spotlight only on him, he will get nothing out of it (I mean, does it take collusion to keep an expensive bad player with a ton of baggage out of the league? There are a ton of cheap bad players that will just sit there and not create distractions) and cheapen what would otherwise be a rather noble cause (see: Bennett, Michael). Throwing literal % at the wall is actually not a good thing in these instances, it detracts from the message. You want the opposite: single stream, single message and on point for the cause. You don't want to expose yourself to a lot of situations that can be used against you/your cause...this has a very high chance of being negative for whatever CK supports today...

[chad72]

11 hours ago, IndyScribe said:

IMO, this is a win-win situation. If he loses, he at least forces the league and the owners to admit why they don't want to sign him. If he wins, he gets a roster spot(potentially) and can feel good at taking the NFL down.

 

No, owners and coaches don't have to divulge why they made a roster decision, period. He is not going to force anyone to disclose anything. What is a judge going to do? He cannot force anyone to take a stand unless there is legitimate reason to, and Kaepernick is just grandstanding at this time. All Kaepernick will get is lawyer mumbo jumbo because even if a judge orders anything, being sympathetic to Kaep, everyone will invoke the Fifth Amendment.

 

Of course, this will all change if Kaep and his lawyers can show any emails or any concrete proof other than media speak from owners responding to any loaded questions regarding his antics. The person that got burnt by McDonald's hot coffee had more evidence than what Kaep has shown till this point for collusion, though both lawsuits are just as frivolous to me.

 

 

[mikey287]

He's got a celebrity lawyer now, not unlike Lionel Hutz...so this seems super seriously serious now...definitely not an empty, "ized PR move...

[Valpo2004]

18 hours ago, BR-549 said:

So you are saying that if someone such as the Colts signed him and he started winning games (like the ones we have recently lost) and he did as he said and stood up for the Anthem that people wouldn't soon forget all about it?  That is what I meant by sidestepping it.

 

Problem is, like I said earlier, he isn't good enough to ensure that is what would happen.  So it is without doubt a huge risk... if his talent was better it would go away.  Remove his name and insert Aaron Rogers with all else being equal I bet it is a different outcome.

 

I think we're saying the same thing here.  His talent isn't worth the problems he would cause by being signed.

 

But I totally reject the idea that if he never started the protest at all that he isn't in the NFL.  I would say he would be starting somewhere as a "journeyman" QB.  And he would likely bounce around the league that way for a while had he never protested.  

[Valpo2004]

12 hours ago, IndyScribe said:

IMO, this is a win-win situation. If he loses, he at least forces the league and the owners to admit why they don't want to sign him. If he wins, he gets a roster spot(potentially) and can feel good at taking the NFL down.

 

No I doubt he's going to get anything out of it.  It's desperation.

 

Ultimately he's going to have to prove that 2 or more teams discussed an agreement to not sign him before anyone is going to go make those teams answer for anything.  

 

I really strongly doubt that 2 or more teams got together to do that.  

 

Ultimately each of the 32 teams individually decided that the potential fan reaction was not worth what Kap could provide them in terms of talent.  

 

There just isn't positives for the teams to collude on this.  There is no motive for the teams to do so, nothing to be gained but everything to be lost.  

 

Think about it, you are a team owner or GM.  You know you arn't gonna be signing Kap.  What's the point in talking with other teams about it?  I mean do you hate him so much that you are gonna risk EVERYTHING in an attempt to try and make sure another team doesn't sign him?  Even then it's not like you can make another team do what you say.  

 

I mean if he has the evidence I would love to see it.  But right now I just don't buy it.  There just isn't any point or value in teams talking with one another about not signing him.  

[Valpo2004]

23 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

IMO QB Rating and completion % are the 2 most overrated things to judge a QB on. I go by TD's/Yards/and clutch play in the 4th Qtr and Andrew is Very Good when it comes to those things.

 

I think the biggest thing is TD/INT ratio (and/or TD % and Int %) and yards per attempt.  

 

Passer rating takes all those things into account but it scores completion percentage too highly because it scores the actual percentage itself AND the yards per attempt (which takes into account completion percentage because you gain no yards on an incomplete pass.)   I think I read somewhere that a player going 40/40 for 100 yards scores the same passer rating as a player going 20/40 for 300 yards.  

 

But the yards per attempt for the 100 yards is only 2.5 but the yards per attempt for the 300 yards is 7.5.  

 

I avoid the "clutch play in the 4th quarter" because it's too subjective.  If you build up a 21 point lead going into the 4th you don't have to be clutch.  On the other hand a lot of QB's get huge increases in stats in the 4th quarter because opposing teams start going into a prevent defense. 

 

That's not to say that a certain clutch play ability doesn't exist, but it's subjective and you can only see it by watching the player and watching that player in multiple games.  

[mikey287]

Well...that wouldn't fall under "clutch" then...

 

People need to consider statistics in the context of the system/tactics that are employed. 

 

If game nuance isn't for you (royal you), I kind of like red zone passing metrics. It's in a small window, so accuracy and timing is on high. And it should be best on best in that area of the field, so you aren't playing against muppets usually...

 

From 2015 thru 2017 (min. 75 attempts) here are the players in red zone passing sorted by passer rating...(not perfect: McCown, Hoyer looking good is wrong, Wilson and Carr looking bad is wrong...but no statistic is perfect, just a potential foundation)

 

Player	Cmp	Att	Cmp%	Yds	TD	Int	Sk	Yds	Y/A	1D	Rate
											▼
Marcus Mariota	69	117	59	556	35	0	2	-14	4.8	53	110.6
Andrew Luck	69	105	65.7	429	31	1	7	-42	4.1	42	109.5
Drew Brees	148	219	67.6	903	57	5	14	-82	4.1	86	105.7
Tom Brady	120	187	64.2	843	56	4	8	-40	4.5	74	105
Matthew Stafford	122	196	62.2	810	51	3	9	-52	4.1	78	104.4
Josh McCown	44	79	55.7	261	16	0	6	-31	3.3	24	101.8
Brian Hoyer	55	107	51.4	389	23	0	5	-31	3.6	36	99.6
Dak Prescott	46	79	58.2	376	24	2	8	-43	4.8	35	99.5
Aaron Rodgers	141	240	58.8	862	64	4	11	-88	3.6	91	98.6
Tyrod Taylor	62	108	57.4	429	24	2	9	-47	4	36	98.3
Sam Bradford	85	138	61.6	570	28	4	9	-80	4.1	42	98.1
Matt Ryan	122	195	62.6	795	43	6	11	-52	4.1	76	98
Cam Newton	80	153	52.3	656	42	2	9	-81	4.3	64	97.7
Ben Roethlisberger	83	155	53.5	555	36	2	5	-35	3.6	53	95.8
Carson Wentz	61	117	52.1	396	22	1	3	-13	3.4	34	95.7
Kirk Cousins	103	191	53.9	691	41	3	4	-22	3.6	62	95.1
Blake Bortles	104	188	55.3	723	52	4	7	-57	3.8	67	94.9
Ryan Tannehill	67	121	55.4	485	26	3	7	-54	4	35	94.2
Trevor Siemian	53	96	55.2	327	17	2	13	-91	3.4	27	93.2
Philip Rivers	109	208	52.4	847	53	5	7	-38	4.1	79	92.3
Jameis Winston	78	167	46.7	660	41	2	10	-83	4	56	92.1
Alex Smith	90	162	55.6	544	33	4	5	-10	3.4	49	91.7
Carson Palmer	104	202	51.5	801	51	5	12	-74	4	69	90.8
Eli Manning	102	176	58	732	44	7	12	-72	4.2	60	90.7
Joe Flacco	88	157	56.1	586	27	5	9	-156	3.7	41	90.7
Brock Osweiler	52	103	50.5	368	18	2	5	-40	3.6	29	90.5
Andy Dalton	82	152	53.9	631	37	5	9	-53	4.2	46	90.2
Russell Wilson	78	163	47.9	650	38	4	11	-88	4	58	87.9
Derek Carr	80	164	48.8	586	40	4	4	-20	3.6	56	87
Jay Cutler	52	104	50	362	19	3	7	-24	3.5	29	85.8
Ryan Fitzpatrick	77	152	50.7	561	36	7	2	-4	3.7	49	80.1

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

I think the biggest thing is TD/INT ratio (and/or TD % and Int %) and yards per attempt.  

 

Passer rating takes all those things into account but it scores completion percentage too highly because it scores the actual percentage itself AND the yards per attempt (which takes into account completion percentage because you gain no yards on an incomplete pass.)   I think I read somewhere that a player going 40/40 for 100 yards scores the same passer rating as a player going 20/40 for 300 yards.  

 

But the yards per attempt for the 100 yards is only 2.5 but the yards per attempt for the 300 yards is 7.5.  

 

I avoid the "clutch play in the 4th quarter" because it's too subjective.  If you build up a 21 point lead going into the 4th you don't have to be clutch.  On the other hand a lot of QB's get huge increases in stats in the 4th quarter because opposing teams start going into a prevent defense. 

 

That's not to say that a certain clutch play ability doesn't exist, but it's subjective and you can only see it by watching the player and watching that player in multiple games.  

Yeah Clutch is an intangible which isn't measured statistically but it's always nice knowing having a QB that come from behind late in games. Andrew has done it a bunch, so did Peyton.

[HOFClipboardHolder]

He should be filing a lawsuit against his girlfriend. He was almost a Raven, until she opened her mouth and the racism belched out.

[Narcosys]

On 19/10/2017 at 4:12 AM, IndyScribe said:

IMO, this is a win-win situation. If he loses, he at least forces the league and the owners to admit why they don't want to sign him. If he wins, he gets a roster spot(potentially) and can feel good at taking the NFL down.

I wouldn't want to hire a pr liability either. They cab say that all day and get away with it. Its within their right. He isn't entitled to anything. 

 

Plus, he was invited to talks about the movement he started and  DIDN'T SHOW!!

 

So much for him really caring and proving this is a stunt on his part.