Sure. And when people acted like his baggage was irrelevant and he was put of the league because he's washed up and sucks, they deserved to be corrected
Supposing a team wants to take the steps to redesign its offense for the backup QB. Some probably would too. Most wouldn't. Then the some have to decide if he is that much better a backup and if the potential distractions / drops in profit would be worth it. CK dug his own hole, dude. And the sad part is he just kept digging instead of allowing sh** to blow over. He's a victim of his own pride.
You called out the owner for not accepting a prospective player's abuse. That's just utterly stupid on its face. I guess you just stand united with your fellow SJWs at the end of the day no matter how stupid it makes you look.
The Colts had Scott in Tolzien start but were perfectly happy starting the running brisset one week later.
The Raiders signed EJ Manuel as their backup
The Texans went from Savage to Watson.
This argument sounds great but fails in practice
abuse
And again, CK did nothing. You can't help but lie about that.
At any given time, you can find a handful of failure starting QBs. That's the nature of the beast. Pointing to one of them as a reason for CK getting screwed does not pass the muster. CK in his own right was a failure, which is why he was benched, dude. Ask yourself if you'd want to roll with a diva backup QB.
CK is culpable for his gf talking about a prospective employer. You're pretending he did nothing wrong as a means to pretend you're not the real snowflake here. PATHETIC.
And again, CK did nothing. You can't help but lie about that.
You're taking this waaaaaaay too seriously, snowflake.
You think they saw the tweets and thought they were innocuous and that CK had nothing to do with it? That would be supremely stupid; almost as supremely stupid as CK's sending out the tweet.
You're taking this waaaaaaay too seriously, snowflake.
I think they saw the tweets and lost their like sensitive snowflakes do.
They let the world know that this woman got to them by posting two pictures together and letting them connect the dots.
CK is culpable, bro. Only SJWs like you would make excuses for that level of bad behavior.
bad behavior in this case being nothing, snowflake.
So, you're saying that Colin Kaepernick is a victim?
I'm saying he's been declared guilty by association. If you think that's fair, OK. He's certainly prone to overreactions from snowflakes.
So, Colin Kaepernick bares no responsibility for whatever his girlfriend says about prospective employers?
Age 25 and ninety percent career completion percentage. But you're not alone in your disgraceful dismissal. One snowflake media reporter called it "yet another mediocre quarterback signed instead of Colin Kaepernick."
If you believe he is guilty by association.
So, Colin Kaepernick bares no responsibility for whatever his girlfriend says about prospective employers?
Guilty by association implies happenstance. I think there is no happenstance to his talking about (prospective) employers.
Great. Prove it.
I don't have to prove it. Nor does the owner. Colin Kaepernick is the only one to blame for not meeting reasonable expectations. Only SJWs argue against these time-tested standards.
So all you have is guilt by association.
Snowflake.
No guilt by association as established. CK is responsible for the notorious statements of his girlfriend with regards to prospective employment. If he cannot keep her in check, he should find a new girlfriend. BTW, she has issued no apology either. Nor has CK disavowed the tweet.So all you have is guilt by association.
Snowflake.
Guilt by association. Nothing else.
Snowflake.
Why didn't CK take the corrective steps following the tweet if he's an innocent?
It's someone else's tweet. Who gives a besides snowflakes?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote