As starting quarterbacks continue to drop like flies in the NFL, Colin Kaepernick remains a free agent. While some people may feel his continued unemployment is justified as a response for him starting a national anthem protest that has now grown to other teams (and even other sports), most people with even a small amount of football knowledge realize he would probably be a better choice than at least half a dozen stiffs pretending to be starting QBs in the league right now.

It’s been theorized by some that NFL owners are collectively blackballing Kaepernick out of a job, afraid of the backlash they might attract should they offer the former 49er pivot a job. Kaepernick obviously agrees with this line of thinking, because he has officially filed a union grievance via the NFLPA against the owners, alleging they are purposely colluding to keep him without a job.

This will obviously turn into a complicated legal matter, but here’s the short version: the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between the NFL players and the owners includes sections that prohibit the owners from colluding to keep a player out of the league. The counter argument is that teams are free to choose their own personnel, and may feel that Kaepernick’s skillset do not mesh with their desired offensive schemes.

It’s a muddled argument, but if Kaepernick is successful in his claim, it could have an even larger impact. The current CBA includes a clause that renders it entirely invalid if the owners are found to be colluding against even one player. The current CBA expires in 2020, but is Kaepernick gets his way, the current CBA could be thrown out the window. That means the entire NFL player base could refuse to play without a new (more lucrative) CBA, which would potentially force owners into concessions (and probably include a work stoppage of some length).