I find it interesting that he makes the point that the NCAA acted unilaterally without consulting its members. I have no idea if that’s a reasonable expectation or not in terms of NCAA typical process, I suspect it is completely unreasonable. But then in response to that, he takes his case to the Wall Street Journal…

“We vote for the lesser of two evils” is a tired but safe argument to make. It doesn’t engender positive, intelligent discourse, but it’s easy to garner support for.

I love it when people who glorify Tim Tebow for speaking about his beliefs, denigrate Kap for speaking about his.

Just a friendly reminder that John I. Jenkins helped sweep under the rug the fact that in 2010 Lizzy Seeberg committed suicide after her rape by Notre Dame football player/former Atlanta Falcon, Prince Shembo. When the case was brought to the police, members of the board or directors and athletic department put…

“But, but, superpredator!”

I disagree -- even in a vacuum, those two paragraphs don’t hold up. He says the NCAA’s role is to foster competition that “serves the well-being of student-athletes.” I think minimizing travel and rewards to states that actively withhold civil liberties from certain people (including, of course, some student-athletes)…

it’s important to also take into account the feelings of those who might be uncomfortable undressing in front of a member of the opposite biological sex.

Football throw boy isnt the preeminent political thinker of our time. Shocking.

He doesn’t need to pick a side, but Both Sides Are Equally Bad is the argument of somebody who hasn’t thought things through.

I disagree with Kaep. Trump has made no effort to show he’s less racist.