The Catch-22 Kaepernick Conundrum

Nancy Armour asked all of the right questions in her September 17 USA Today column regarding the "actively, actively interested" but unsigned Colin Kaepernick. Given the early-season ravaging of the quarterback position, why has no NFL team rushed to sign Kaepernick?

Considering the rash of contender-toppling injuries, even if a particular owner had a distaste for assigning Kaepernick a roster spot, that owner would be insane to not sign the man immediately and use him as trade bait. Allow me to repeat that. If an owner is so committed to white nationalism that it precludes his team from actually playing Kaepernick, why not be the first to sign him and then leverage the signing into a deal that benefits your team? The fact that no team has done this underlines, strongly, that there has been some kind of NFL-wide conspiracy to keep Kaepernick off all rosters.

None of the Kaepernick saga makes any sense, and it never will. Carolina could use him, as could the Jets, the Steelers, Miami, Tennessee, Minnesota, Washington, the Colts, and maybe Tampa Bay. Kaepernick could start for a third of the teams, and he'd be a superb backup for mobile young guns in Philadelphia, Kansas City, San Francisco, Buffalo, Dallas, and Houston.

Instead, he's working out at home. Why is that? Are NFL owners all idiots? For the sake of brevity, let's skip that question and cut to the proverbial chase.

The owners are trapped in a classic catch-22 of their own making. If a team signs Kaepernick, and the man succeeds, the fact that he's succeeded will demonstrate unequivocally to the American public that the owners illegally blackballed Kaepernick from the league for multiple seasons. They deprived him of prime athletic years at peak ability. Conversely, if they do not sign him, and they plug in various and sundry journeymen quarterbacks, they also demonstrate to the American public that the owners illegally blackballed Kaepernick. But at least they aren't paying him.

The only way that the owners look as if they haven't illegally blackballed him is if some team signs him and Kaepernick fails miserably. But here's the catch-22 inside the catch-22:  the fact that nobody has signed Kaepernick and given him an opportunity to fail is because most owners are convinced that he won't fail. It's as simple as that.

Lurking in the back of the NFL owners' minds is another troubling thought. The possibility exists that signing Kaepernick could motivate some of that team's players to go above and beyond to help Kaepernick succeed. That team might perceive themselves as playing for more than paychecks.

The NFL owners' Mr. Magoo business optics just amaze me. Kaepernick sits at home. Ray Lewis is a commentator. How does that work? I keep expecting Lewis to show up on one of the new NFL/Tide detergent commercials wearing his infamous white suit. Peyton Manning could call him to the podium to have Ray explain how he got all of the stains out.

The entire situation is ridiculous. The owners know Kaepernick could start for a third of the teams. It's particularly absurd that the championship caliber team that would probably benefit most from having Kaepernick as a backup is the Dallas Cowboys, deep in the heart of "we don't kneel" Texas.

Personally, I don't understand why any African-American should stand for The Star Spangled Banner. I'm not sure how many owners are familiar with the third stanza, but it's a doozy. I happen to know all of the stanzas because my grade school music teacher used 1920's songbooks. We sang all of the verses.

"No refuge could save the hireling or slave
From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave."

Remind me, the next time the Star Spangled Banner plays, I really need to kneel.



Bob Dietz -- September 19, 2019