Elway did not include that he had offered Kaepernick a contract in advance of the '16 seasonGETTY IMAGES
Broncos GM & President of Football Operations John Elway’s comments on Colin Kaepernick "could affect" a ruling in the free agent QB's collusion case against the NFL, according to Ken Belson of the N.Y. TIMES. Elway on Thursday said, "Colin had his chance here. We offered him a contract. He didn’t take it. So, as I said in my deposition, I don’t know if I’ll be legally able to say this, but he’s had his chance to be here. He passed it." Belson notes Elway’s comments come as a league-appointed arbitrator "weighs a motion by the NFL to throw out the grievance brought by Kaepernick, who accused the NFL of shunning him because he protested during the national anthem, sparking protests across the league." The NFL asked arbitrator Stephen Burbank to "determine whether the evidence unearthed by Kaepernick’s lawyers was sufficient for the case to go forward." A ruling is "expected in the next couple of weeks" and the proceedings have been "shrouded in mystery." Now, Burbank may look "askance at Elway’s comments because the executive was prohibited from speaking publicly about them while the case is going on." More curiously, Elway did "not include that he had offered Kaepernick a contract in advance" of the '16 season. The timing is relevant because Kaepernick had "not yet begun protesting during the national anthem at that time." Kaepernick said no to Elway because in the potential trade he "would have had to take a pay cut to join the Broncos." Either way, Elway's comments gave a "rare glimpse into the thinking of at least one executive" who knows why his team has not signed Kaepernick (N.Y. TIMES, 8/17). SI.com's Michael McCann tweeted that Elway's comments "could advance Kaepernick's collusion grievance."
NOT HELPING NFL'S POSITION: PRO FOOTBALL TALK's Mike Florio wrote it is "unclear what the consequences could be" for Elway speaking publicly about the case. As a practical matter, Burbank could "take a dimmer view of the NFL’s current effort to knock out the Kaepernick case via the pending motion for summary judgment, and Burbank eventually could look more skeptically at the NFL’s overall defense if there’s a full-blown collusion hearing." Regardless, Elway’s remarks "will do nothing to make the NFL’s case stronger" (PROFOOTBALLTALK.com, 8/16). YAHOO SPORTS' Charles Robinson wrote Elway's comments were "stunning." Robinson: "Not only did it appear to be a breach of the confidentiality order in the Kaepernick collusion case against the NFL, there is a devil in the broad, illogical details." There "appears to be some significant intellectual dishonesty taking place." Why Elway has "opened this can of worms is anyone's guess." Robinson: "But he did." Unless Elway "decides to expound on it further," observers will be "left with a few facts to try and interpret why Elway took such an open swipe at Kaepernick" (SPORTS.YAHOO.com, 8/16).
HONEST BROKER? SB NATION's Adam Stites wrote under the header, "John Elway's Reason For Passing On Colin Kaepernick Is Disingenuous, At Best" (SBNATION.com, 8/16). In DC, Des Bieler notes the fact that Elway has been a major supporter of President Trump is "worth noting" (WASHINGTON POST, 8/17). In Denver, Mark Kiszla writes under the header, "Broncos' John Elway Believes In Giving Second Chances ... Unless Your Name Is Colin Kaepernick." If someone were to "take the politics out of the debate," it would become "more difficult to make a case any veteran free agent currently available, including Matt Moore, is a more accomplished" QB than Kaepernick (DENVER POST, 8/17).
