Aaron Rodgers Says Kaepernick Not on a Roster Due to Protests, Not His Play

Able Papa

In an interview with ESPN The Magazine, Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers gave his opinion about why former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick, doesn’t have a job. According to Rodgers, Kaepernick’s unemployment has nothing to do with his ability to play football.

“I think he should be on a roster right now,” Rodgers told ESPN The Magazine. “I think because of his protests, he’s not.”

Rodgers went on to say he understands why some have decided to protest the anthem, though he has decided not to.

“I’m gonna stand because that’s the way I feel about the flag — but I’m also 100 percent supportive of my teammates or any fellow players who are choosing not to,” Rodgers told ESPN The Magazine. “They have a battle for racial equality. That’s what they’re trying to get a conversation started around. . . . I don’t understand what it’s like to be in that situation. What it is to be pulled over, or profiled, or any number of issues that have happened, that Colin was referencing — or any of my teammates have talked to me about. . . . But I know it’s a real thing my black teammates have to deal with.”

Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk, whose steadfast determination to not grasp the simple truth of why Kaepernick remains unemployed can at this point only be described as willful ignorance, thinks that Rodgers’ comments represent some kind of Rosetta Stone moment. A moment which proves Kaepernick’s football skill, while solidifying the case of the pro-Kaepernick camp, and triggering the angst of the “anti-Kaepernick” crowd.

Florio writes:

The anti-Kaepernick crowd surely will find a way to discredit or discount Rodgers’ opinion, the same way that the anti-Kaepernick crowd finds a way to twist and reject any other facts or opinion that support the notion that Kaepernick should be employed.  The process began as a clumsy effort to make it all about football, and it has evolved into a clumsy effort to suggest that Kaepernick’s activities constitute the kind of baggage/distraction that can’t overcome his skills. It will culminate in a clumsy effort to claim “next man up” if/when starting quarterbacks get injured and teams insist on going with substandard understudies who consistently prove the adage that bad quarterbacks are hard to find.

Before deconstructing Florio, it’s important to backtrack for a moment and look at what Rodgers actually said. Rodgers told ESPN, “I think he should be on a roster right now…”

That’s the NFL equivalent of saying a guy is merely good enough to have a job. Nowhere in there did Rodgers say that Kaepernick was God’s gift to football. It’s also important to note that, as the tip of the anti-Kaepernick spear, Rodgers’ argument is the same argument we’ve made here at Breitbart. Kaepernick is good enough to be on an NFL roster, he’s just not good enough to distract, from the all the distractions he brings with him.

So, far from discrediting Rodgers, the Green Bay quarterback only buttresses half of the anti-Kaepernick argument. He just left off the other half of the argument, that part which LeSean McCoy correctly stated last week: “I just think as a player, there’s certain players that can be on a team with big distractions, and other players, they’re not good enough … that it’s worth it. I think his situation is, not good enough to have on a team with all the attention that comes along with it. I’m sure if a guy like [Tom] Brady or a guy like — whoever is your favorite player, Odell Beckham or a guy like that — you’ll deal with that attention and play him. With certain guys, it’s not worth it.”

Nor is arguing that someone has to justify their baggage, a “clumsy argument.” That’s an argument that every business manager in every walk of life has to have. That’s the same question the Steelers and the Eagles answered in the affirmative, when they decided to take chances on Ben Roethlisberger and Michael Vick, respectively. Each of those players had serious encounters with the law and controversy away from football. Had Ben Roethlisberger only achieved mediocrity and never won anything of importance, the Steelers likely would have cut ties with him after the severe accusations and public backlash he received. Had Vick been, just a guy, instead of a three-time Pro Bowler worthy of a $100 million contract prior to his arrest, the Eagles wouldn’t have bothered.

Yet, those teams decided to gamble on those players. Why? Because the potential rewards of dealing with them, outweighed the potential risks of not dealing with them. Unlike the situation with Kaepernick, who has never thrown for 4,000 yards, and has seen his numbers remain stagnant, or decline over the past three years.

Is that hard to understand, Florio?


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.