The Seahawks are trying to regain their focus this offseason and rebuild into another Super Bowl winner, which means they are right to avoid Colin Kaepernick if they feel he would be a distraction.

While we support NFL players who choose to use their platforms to make positive social statements and help their fellow citizens, teams have every right to do whatever they think is best in their pursuit of winning titles. Why? Because winning is the No. 1 priority. Good deeds and causes are nice, but not if they interfere with the entire purpose of the franchise’s existence.

Pete Carroll said Seattle’s activism last season became draining for the players, and he clearly wants to manage it better this year.

Depending on which reports you believe, the Seahawks either cast an ultimatum to Kaepernick, telling him they didn’t want him to protest the anthem, or they asked him to present his plan for social activism so they knew what to expect. The latter certainly seems more like the Seahawks, who have been very supportive of their players on social issues. But it doesn’t matter.

The Seahawks have the right to make that call — bleeding-heart critics be damned. And fans should be happy they are focused on competing for the Super Bowl again.

Seattle’s “reset” includes removing distractions. Why else do you think they were willing to let Michael Bennett and Richard Sherman go for nothing more than a little cap space and a draft pick? They wanted to get the team back in line with Carroll’s mantras. Earl Thomas might soon be leaving for those very reasons.

So, yeah, if the Hawks are dumping their best defenders because they didn’t “protect the team” (Carroll’s No. 1 rule) and they complained too much (No. 2 rule), of course Carroll and Schneider are not going to add a guy who might be more concerned with social activism than with football.