King, who identifies himself as a writer-in-residence for The Fair Punishment Project and Young Turks commentor, tweeted: “The owner of the Eagles said he wouldn’t hire Colin because of his anthem protest, but hired a white player who called black people “n—–”
The white player referenced is Riley Cooper, who played three seasons for the Eagles after a video of him using the n-word at a Kenny Chesney concert surfaced in 2013.
King responded, pointing to a Philly.com column on Lurie’s quotes.
The piece, written by Marcus Hayes, is critical of Lurie for his undeniably unfavorable response to Kaepernick’s actions. It includes this paragraph:
That doesn’t mean the Eagles would never consider signing Kaepernick; it’s just that Kaepernick would have to persuade them that he has evolved since last season. That’s understandable … but this is where Lurie put his foot in his mouth.
It is not unreasonable to read this column between the lines and walk away with the conclusion Lurie is in no rush to bring Kaepernick in, barring some thorough, perhaps unnecessary vetting.
A more salient fact is that the Eagles are not in need of Kaepernick’s services anyway. With backups Nick Foles and Matt McGloin behind Carson Wentz, their quarterback situation is pretty well secure for the foreseeable future and not one of the situations where Kaepernick would provide a boost on the field.
The Kaepernick controversy engendered strong feelings on both sides of the aisle and it’s not surprising that someone like King, who has been a diligent crusader, would use this data point as an opportunity to further his arguments. It’s also not surprising that the franchise would balk at what they believe to be an unfair shot at their owner.
Considering that the Eagles have decided to let the quotes “speak for themselves,” further back-and-forth is unlikely.