I'm guessing he thinks you should have some respect for the brand since without the brand you don't have the platform. Without the platform, you don't have the opportunity. So do what you feel you need to, but in a way that doesn't disrespect what put you in a position to do it in the first place.
I guess so, but isn't the platform just "sport", and the message something really big and social?
Like, I would get all the fuss if Kaepernick's actions totally ruined football, and kids could no longer make a career out of football, but employers take heat for things not directly related to their business all the time and they are required to maneuver through them.
Like, I'm a lawyer, but when a trial judge says something I vehemently oppose, I take it on appeal. Then if I lose the appeal, I am totally free to criticize the judiciary in the NYT or on Fox (depending on which way I lean on an issue, haha). Now, you could say that I am damaging the "brand" of the justice system (criticizing judges and all), but isn't that what makes the society we live in good? No?
I hate to spill yet more ink on the Kaepernick thing, and apologies to all those who are sick of debating the myriad overlapping issues, but it's interesting to me.