Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Hot Sauce Guy

Several Cowboys & Texans Test Positive for COVID19

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Per CDC through June 17 breakdown of deaths by age:

Under 1 .008%

1-5 .005%

5-14 .013%

25-34 .676%

35-44 1.72%

55-64 4.815%

65-74 20.76%

85 years and older 33.322%

And 42% of all deaths occurred in nursing homes.

 

 

So 1.72% is actually greater than 1% no? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DallasDMac said:

I'm sorry if you think pointing out incorrect anecdotal statements is "being a jerk", and I mean that in all seriousness. There are several states in dire straights right now, and testing is part of the issue in more than a handful of them. Obviously your area isn't being affected and so your viewpoint is tainted by that. I'm in a very bad area right now, and my viewpoint is tainted by that. But a blanket statement like "testing isn't an issue" is fundamentally wrong and I simply stated as much. My intent wasn't to turn it in to a pissing contest. As such, I'll drop it.

My area was the hardest hit state in the nation. And you're a jerk because you would rather be snarky and act like I was leaving out information instead of reading what was said - There was nothing incorrect about my statement. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

You are looking at the percentage of total deaths (that age group does make up 1%) not the rates of death per infections.

Because we don’t have enough testing to know with any degree of accuracy the rate of deaths per infection.  It’s in impossible data point to establish without that data.

there’s simply not enough testing to know this. 

I guess it’s like Trump said, the only reason we have so many infections is because we’re doing testing? :doh: 

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

So 1.72% is actually greater than 1% no? 

That's the percentage of deaths in that age group versus overall deaths. That doesn't speak to the likelihood of Tom Brady dying if he got Covid-19. That would come from the first chart (deaths per infection rate) which shows he'd have a .0092% of dying.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Because we don’t have enough testing to know with any degree of accuracy the rate of deaths per infection.  It’s in impossible data point to establish without that data.

there’s simply not enough testing to know this. 

I guess it’s like Trump said, the only reason we have so many infections is because we’re doing testing? :doh: 

So we should ignore CDC statistic and rely on hyperbole posted on a fantasy football message board?

I don't think you understand the data and are just interested in hearing yourself. If anything more testing would actually lower the death rates while increasing the number of cases. 

I'm done with this thread. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So specific to an earlier discussion, I just checked my league page. We collectively voted to:

1. Hold an online draft with Zoom for the social aspect

2. Collect only fees to cover the website/league renewal

3. if the season is cut short for any reason, there will be no additional fees collected & no payouts. 

Everyone favored this. A couple wanted “zoom-only” until I spelled out how crappy that would be for the person putting stickers on the board (me) and doing data entry for 300 picks (IDP) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol omg. Is this where the disconnect is coming from? HSG thinking percentage of deaths is mortality rate?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

So we should ignore CDC statistic and rely on hyperbole posted on a fantasy football message board?

I didn’t say that. i said there’s a chance. No one knows. No one. So using the NFL to experiment with a life & death scenario seems ethically questionable. 

4 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

I don't think you understand the data and are just interested in hearing yourself. If anything more testing would actually lower the death rates while increasing the number of cases.

I understand the data pretty well - I’m the only one who’s been posting links to it in here. You’re assuming that more testing would lower the rates. You don’t know that. For someone calling people “jerks” you may want to try being more polite to others. 

4 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

 

I'm done with this thread. 

We all say that at one time or another. I look forward to your future posts in here. ;) 

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

You need to look at updated charts. 

For 40-45 it’s just under 1%, e.g. the purple line on this chart. Saying it’s “not even close” is incorrect. Saying 1% represents the rate of the entire country is also incorrect according to the numbers tracked by age by the CDC. 

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm

important to keep in mind that “GIGO” still applies, so it doesn’t help accuracy of the data set that some (red) states are under-reporting COVID & instead reporting deaths by literal symptom causation & not associating it with COVID for re-opening purposes. So someone in their 30s having the type of abnormally large stroke normally associated with a geriatric and due to COVID may be reported in FL as only “stroke” hurts data integrity.

but for the sake of discussion that link shows you that just under 1000 deaths out of 125K were 40-45,  which is Tom Brady’s age group. 

not sure what that’s worth arguing about. It is what it is.

Lmao this would imply that the only infections are cases resulting in death. It would imply a 100% death rate for ages 1-100. It’s just not even close to how any of this works. You don’t understand the data my dude.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Cobbler1 said:

Lmao this would imply that the only infections are cases resulting in death. It would imply a 100% death rate for ages 1-100. It’s just not even close to how any of this works. You don’t understand the data my dude.

Yes, it’s early & I posted rate of death by age. 

my bad.

But I’m also not the one claiming COVID has a lower rate than the seasonal flu my dude. 
 

https://ourworldindata.org/mortality-risk-covid#case-fatality-rate-of-covid-19-compared-to-other-diseases

Edited by Hot Sauce Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Yes, it’s early & I posted rate of death by age. 

my bad.

But I’m also not the one claiming COVID has a lower rate than the seasonal flu my dude. 
 

https://ourworldindata.org/mortality-risk-covid#case-fatality-rate-of-covid-19-compared-to-other-diseases

Is anyone posting that the death rate is lower than the flu across all ages? It’s certainly isn’t me or Dr. O. Is that link of data from Feb/March supposed to have any value? You literally just said that we need more testing to produce more accurate data then you post a link that takes out 3-4 months worth of data and millions upon millions of tests? Gtfo with that.

 

Edit- it wasn’t early last night when you posted that Tom Brady has a 1% chance of dying from Covid. What data did you use to reach that conclusion?

Edited by Cobbler1
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Quote

 

Edit- it wasn’t early last night when you posted that Tom Brady has a 1% chance of dying from Covid. What data did you use to reach that conclusion?

I reserve the right to be dumb anytime of day. as an American citizen perhaps my duty.

As for the flu comparison, many have stated that the percentage is less than the flu.

Edited by Hot Sauce Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

I reserve the right to be dumb anytime of day. as an American citizen perhaps my duty.

As for the flu comparison, many have stated that the percentage is less than the flu.

You have the intelligence to wear a mask, that already puts you above a way too high % of American citizens. You may have misunderstood the mortality data at certain ages. Does this change your stance on how likely it is for a player to get severely ill from Covid?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

I reserve the right to be dumb anytime of day. as an American citizen perhaps my duty.

As for the flu comparison, many have stated that the percentage is less than the flu.

Take this kind of comment to the many other threads we have on this in our other forums. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

Take this kind of comment to the many other threads we have on this in our other forums. 

Just a little self deprecating humor. I thought I was adding levity, sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Cobbler1 said:

You have the intelligence to wear a mask, that already puts you above a way too high % of American citizens. You may have misunderstood the mortality data at certain ages. Does this change your stance on how likely it is for a player to get severely ill from Covid?

I’ve seen global charts that indicate 1% for the 4245 age range, and as high as 3% for the 50-year-old age range. I take those numbers to heart being 49, turning 50 in two months.

granted, I’m no Adonis. there is no doubt that I have a higher chance of dying from this NFL player, provided they don’t have underlying conditions.

I think “severely ill” is more likely than death. 

But for FF & estimations of whether there’ll be a season, the quarantines are the likely killer. 

logistically it presents a massive problem for continuity of the schedule. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

I’ve seen global charts that indicate 1% for the 4245 age range, and as high as 3% for the 50-year-old age range. I take those numbers to heart being 49, turning 50 in two months.

granted, I’m no Adonis. there is no doubt that I have a higher chance of dying from this NFL player, provided they don’t have underlying conditions.

I think “severely ill” is more likely than death. 

But for FF & estimations of whether there’ll be a season, the quarantines are the likely killer. 

logistically it presents a massive problem for continuity of the schedule. 

Can you share these charts and are they at all recent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dr. Octopus said:

My area was the hardest hit state in the nation. And you're a jerk because you would rather be snarky and act like I was leaving out information instead of reading what was said - There was nothing incorrect about my statement. 

 

Whatever. You totally left out a KEY element of what was posted to shape your narrative. But give yourself whatever free pass you want. I tried to drop it but you seem intent on being a #### so have at it. I'm not going to be goaded in to a time out so it's probably best for both of us if I simply ignore your posts from here on out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Cobbler1 said:

Can you share these charts and are they at all recent?

They were from over a month ago - I honestly don’t remember where they were from. I just know I remember those data points from a selfish standpoint, along with the 70-80 age group being around 8% since that’s where both my parents fell.

IIRC they had the 0-5 year old rates around 0% as well, which we now know to be slightly inaccurate.

i think your point highlights some of the difficulty in using data to make compelling points since it changes so often with more testing / understanding / evidence.

I don’t pretend to be an epidemiologist. i spent 20 years in project management - I’m usually better than I was above witn data points. But one constant is risk assessment. It’s a huge part of PM, along with contingency planning. So when I look at the risks the NFL has to their season from an infection / quarantine standpoint, I see a mess. That’s a professional opinion. It’s a mess. I’m not sure how it’ll be possible. But like many of you, I’ll draft a team & pray for the best. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

They were from over a month ago - I honestly don’t remember where they were from. I just know I remember those data points from a selfish standpoint, along with the 70-80 age group being around 8% since that’s where both my parents fell.

IIRC they had the 0-5 year old rates around 0% as well, which we now know to be slightly inaccurate.

i think your point highlights some of the difficulty in using data to make compelling points since it changes so often with more testing / understanding / evidence.

I don’t pretend to be an epidemiologist. i spent 20 years in project management - I’m usually better than I was above witn data points. But one constant is risk assessment. It’s a huge part of PM, along with contingency planning. So when I look at the risks the NFL has to their season from an infection / quarantine standpoint, I see a mess. That’s a professional opinion. It’s a mess. I’m not sure how it’ll be possible. But like many of you, I’ll draft a team & pray for the best. 

Well rest easier at night then because as a healthy almost 50 year old your odds of dying are much much lower than 3%. This should make you happy! The chart Dr O posted from the CDC showed .14% for 50-64 so as the lowest part of that age range you’d be significantly lower than that .14% to start. And I believe that’s just infections as the denominator in the calculation when really you’d be multiplying the denominator by 4-8 to account for cases that occurred but were never tested. And then you’d divide those even smaller odds by another number if you don’t have any underlying conditions. 
 

No question it’s a mess to run any business in these times, much less one with thousands of employees across the country very much in the public eye. I remain optimistic though.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Cobbler1 said:

Well rest easier at night then because as a healthy almost 50 year old your odds of dying are much much lower than 3%.

the next few months of potentially exponential growth should produce enough data to develop far better understanding than we have now. It’s difficult to know what to have faith in or not at this point, in the unique position the United States is in. 

I’ll likely only rest easier when there’s a vaccine.  Two 74 year old parents, both with preexisting conditions tends to make one a bit nervous. 

odds are a funny thing....I don’t know if you saw my thread a while back about a puppy I had last year.  She had a 1:10,000 chance of dying during spay surgery, as a healthy 6 mo old puppy.  But those odds sure seem a lot higher when you’re the 1. 

So back to the healthy 26 y/o NFL player. It is not impossible for one to catch COVID & die from it. Just unlikely.

So back to the subject of risk assessment & contingency planning - I don’t think anyone actually answered the question.

Do you think the NFL season would continue if a player died? 

What if it’s a coach or member of a coaching staff?

What about a stadium worker?

In the unlikely event that happens, does the season continue? Or is there a firestorm of public / political pressure for being irresponsible for playing in the 1st place?

same question applies to any of the major sports, so it may not even make it to the NFL if it happens with MLB or NBA. So follow-up Q:

if anyone in the NBA or MLB (players/coaching/staff/league officials) succumb to COVID, will there be an NFL season? Or would that stick a fork in all sports for the foreseeable future? 

i don’t see those as unreasonable questions to be asking in the context of this topic. 

 

Edited by Hot Sauce Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Per CDC through June 17 breakdown of deaths by age:

Under 1 .008%

1-5 .005%

5-14 .013%

25-34 .676%

35-44 1.72%

55-64 4.815%

75-84 26.640%

65-74 20.76%

85 years and older 33.322%

And 42% of all deaths occurred in nursing homes.

 

 

Wow. Much lower than I thought. Thanks for this. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Per CDC through June 17 breakdown of deaths by age:

Under 1 .008%

1-5 .005%

5-14 .013%

25-34 .676%

35-44 1.72%

55-64 4.815%

75-84 26.640%

65-74 20.76%

85 years and older 33.322%

And 42% of all deaths occurred in nursing homes.

 

 

45-54 is missing.

Edited by Vandelay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vandelay said:

45-54 is missing.

I edited it in.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a very thorough & well considered response. I agree with much of it. 

Quote

Most of the major sports secretly hopes someone else's league steps up first and takes the brunt of any lessons to be learned the hard way.

This is a good observation & I agree. I feel like the NFL is biding it’s time to see if:

1. A vaccine emerges in time

2. another league bites the bullet, either from a setback or hitting the limits of what is logistically feasible.

In that regard the NFL is in a more advantageous position due to the timing. they have the luxury of watching the other major sports try to start a season & either have success or possibly have stop it. 

I think you’re spot on that their best move would be to bag it & start planning for 2021,  but there’s likely just way too much money on the table for that. 

in my business i have various insurance policies. Some have to do with manufacturing, warehousing, trucking. There are several “act of god” exemptions that I had to address when this first hit. I now pay a little more to cover an event like “kitchen shuts down with $$$$$ worth of my product waiting to be cleared by the state in the whse” because the policies covered lightning & earthquake, but not plague. 

what a time to be alive.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Your decimal seems to be in the wrong place. I guess lumping in 20-39 ages helped lower it? 
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm

1000 out of 125k is just under 1% for 40-45.

 

This is actually mind blowing stuff.  So since ONE PERCENT OF THE COVID DEATHS are ages 40-45, he has translated that to a 1% mortality rate among all the people in that age group who get Covid????

1% of Covid deaths being aged 40-45 does not mean a 40-45 year old who gets covid has a 1% chance of dying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dr. Octopus said:

You are looking at the percentage of total deaths (that age group does make up 1%) not the rates of death per infections.

 

6 hours ago, Dr. Octopus said:

That's the percentage of deaths in that age group versus overall deaths. That doesn't speak to the likelihood of Tom Brady dying if he got Covid-19. That would come from the first chart (deaths per infection rate) which shows he'd have a .0092% of dying.

 

 

6 hours ago, Cobbler1 said:

Lol omg. Is this where the disconnect is coming from? HSG thinking percentage of deaths is mortality rate?

Sorry didn't see all these responses before posting mine.  It's wild to me how those numbers could be misrepresented like that.  Percentage of deaths is way way way different than percentage of cases.  And additional testing would ABSOLUTELY lower the numbers... it's not a simple safety net statement of "we don't know that".  Yes, more testing would show more cases, not negative cases... I would hope that most of the actual deaths are tracked and there aren't thousands of deceased people in their homes never to be found.  So if everyone in the USA was tested, these already very low mortality rates for people under 50 would be much much much lower.

I don't think anyone said this spreads less than the flu.  The symptoms are similar to the common flu though, no worse.  But this thing spreads way way easier so we must make sure we are protecting groups that actually have a chance to die from this.  Asking the question 'will the nfl season happen if a player dies" is a little pointless as it won't happen. 

I personally think the season should go on, with daily testing of players (funded by the NFL, not taking away from testing of the public), and some of the income the NFL is getting should go towards masks, testing of the public, etc. etc.  Would be great if having the NFL season could use their voice and money and actually help people with this horrible virus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, GordonGekko said:

 

No vaccine will be developed in time.
 

of course not. Standard turnaround is about 18 months, and possibly longer.

but I do believe that falls within the realm of what the NFL is considering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, GordonGekko said:

 

No vaccine will be developed in time. This approach defies everything established on how modern medicine works and has always worked. Even fast tracked and with a close to unlimited financial warchest and the entire world working on it with cooperation, it's not going to happen.

If a vaccine was developed, why would the NFL be a priority?

Teams and coaches got death threats for not drafting Michael Sam. Then again for cutting him if he was actually on their team. So what's going to happen if you prioritize vaccines for the NFL over other areas deemed more critical to the basic survival of the entire human race?  How well will players play with their wives and mothers begging them to leave?

NFL Security doesn't have the manpower, even combined with each team's internal security, to provide security for even one closed off isolation field/site, much less  the 3 to 4 needed to run a season. They'll have to hire "contractors", which is fine, the NFL already has some on retainer, many for international games.

Now you'll have players and their families, mostly black, under heavily armed guard (these guys aren't going to ex cops and ex federal law enforcement, you will have legitimate shooters with actual trigger time involved), with a good chance to be predominately white, in locked down location ( basically a prison) for the purposes of entertaining the masses? In a social/political climate as currently with black Americans deciding it will riot over which picture is on a box of rice?

For those who think an NFL season is going to happen, at what consequence?

It's hard to make money when you don't have means to handle the fallout of your players dying on you. It's hard to make money when your talent base will operate in will essentially become a forced labor camp. It's hard to make money when your liability risk EXPONENTIALLY outweighs what will amount to a fraction of your projected revenue otherwise.

There will be no NFL season this year.

Might be the oddest post I've read in awhile.

  • Like 2
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hate to :whitestar: this thread since I don’t know if I want to be dragged too far into this debate but...

 

lots of focus on the players, their age group and health. But isn’t it the staff, coaches, etc who are most at risk (most NFL coaches I can think of are +50 years old). Are they more replaceable? How many of them can test positive and sit out a few weeks and have their jobs absorbed by the remaining, healthy staff around them without adversely affecting the team? I’m more concerned about the bubble of staff (NFL , team, stadium, etc) around the players than the players themselves (who are in peak form). 

Edited by joey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Faust said:

Yeah, I’d mentioned this earlier. For symptomatic cases, people who recovered have reported shortness of breath months after recovery. That includes my friend from my FBB league. 38, runner & can’t walk up a flight of stairs without getting winded. Lungs are still recovering from even a mild-moderate case. Docs say they have no idea how long it’ll take or if he’ll be 100% again. 

to me this adds fuel to the “will players be willing to risk it if they have all the info” fire. Tough proposition to evaluate given the unknowns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, joey said:

Hate to :whitestar: this thread since I don’t know if I want to be dragged too far into this debate but...

 

lots of focus on the players, their age group and health. But isn’t it the staff, coaches, etc who are most at risk (most NFL coaches I can think of are +50 years old). Are they more replaceable? How many of them can test positive and sit out a few weeks and have their jobs absorbed by the remaining, healthy staff around them without adversely affecting the team? I’m more concerned about the bubble of staff (NFL , team, stadium, etc) around the players than the players themselves (who are in peak form). 

I don’t think anyone is going to drag you for this. It’s a reasonable position & points that many have made in here. Players, team personnel, coaching staffs. Add in stadium personnel - even without fans there’s security, police, EMTs, linemen, photogs & camera operators - it’s incredible how many people it takes to make the game we all love.

all those people could be a problem though, and the age range is likely something like 19-70..  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what scares me about the season.  It's not just the death(s) of a star player/coach...or any player/coach for that matter...but the consequences of what it can do to you without killing you.

What they don't tell you...

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Jedi Knight said:

This is what scares me about the season.  It's not just the death(s) of a star player/coach...or any player/coach for that matter...but the consequences of what it can do to you without killing you.

What they don't tell you...

I’d seen some of that before but reading through it completely - man, just a horror movie come to life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

the next few months of potentially exponential growth should produce enough data to develop far better understanding than we have now. It’s difficult to know what to have faith in or not at this point, in the unique position the United States is in. 

I’ll likely only rest easier when there’s a vaccine.  Two 74 year old parents, both with preexisting conditions tends to make one a bit nervous. 

odds are a funny thing....I don’t know if you saw my thread a while back about a puppy I had last year.  She had a 1:10,000 chance of dying during spay surgery, as a healthy 6 mo old puppy.  But those odds sure seem a lot higher when you’re the 1. 

So back to the healthy 26 y/o NFL player. It is not impossible for one to catch COVID & die from it. Just unlikely.

So back to the subject of risk assessment & contingency planning - I don’t think anyone actually answered the question.

Do you think the NFL season would continue if a player died? 

What if it’s a coach or member of a coaching staff?

What about a stadium worker?

In the unlikely event that happens, does the season continue? Or is there a firestorm of public / political pressure for being irresponsible for playing in the 1st place?

same question applies to any of the major sports, so it may not even make it to the NFL if it happens with MLB or NBA. So follow-up Q:

if anyone in the NBA or MLB (players/coaching/staff/league officials) succumb to COVID, will there be an NFL season? Or would that stick a fork in all sports for the foreseeable future? 

i don’t see those as unreasonable questions to be asking in the context of this topic. 

 

Sorry man, busy day just getting to this now. I have lots of thoughts but not the time right now to go into much detail.

 

Player death- likely shuts it down. I think the NFL could attempt to defend it as an extremely unlikely event that happened to happen even with the best care and testing so there’s an avenue to working around it.

Coach death- this would be a worse look to me especially if the coach is older/high risk. Now the NFL looks more culpable and it’s a more repeatable risk. I think this would shut it down and I think the NFL will put a ton of focus on making sure this doesn’t happen. Put the coaches in freaking enclosed golf carts. In masks and shields. You wanna come out and demonstrate something to a player? Not until both you and the player are masked up. And maybe we only allow that 2 practices a week. Maybe the sideline is only for masked coaches, players have to go directly to the bench without getting close to the coaches. They can be approached only once they’ve had a mask on. Maybe we approach in the golf cart here too. Or at least a shield in addition to the mask.

 

Stadium worker- probably would take a couple incidences to shut it down. I’m sure they’ll be masked at all times and will distance from each other and the players. There won’t be fans so won’t be nearly as many stadium workers. Ideally we’d furlough (paid!) the older ones but age discrimination laws may not allow that. 
 

I don’t think another sport suffering a death will shut it down. The rest will say they’re different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, joey said:

lots of focus on the players, their age group and health.

That's because this thread is meant to discuss the players that were diagnosed with Covid and the effect on them. 
 

1 hour ago, joey said:

 But isn’t it the staff, coaches, etc who are most at risk (most NFL coaches I can think of are +50 years old)

Still very very unlikely for any coach or staff to get severely ill.  Especially with daily tests and top medical attention.  Only 20% of Covid deaths are under 65.  And of those, 75-99% of all of those deaths had serious preexisting conditions.  I'm assuming if there's a staff member, coach, security guard, or janitor that's elderly and has a serious health condition, he'll probably not work this season.  All others have an extremely small chance of serious illness from this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Cobbler1 said:

Player death- likely shuts it down. I think the NFL could attempt to defend it as an extremely unlikely event that happened to happen even with the best care and testing so there’s an avenue to working around it.

Coach death- this would be a worse look to me especially if the coach is older/high risk. Now the NFL looks more culpable and it’s a more repeatable risk. I think this would shut it down and I think the NFL will put a ton of focus on making sure this doesn’t happen. Put the coaches in freaking enclosed golf carts. In masks and shields. You wanna come out and demonstrate something to a player? Not until both you and the player are masked up. And maybe we only allow that 2 practices a week. Maybe the sideline is only for masked coaches, players have to go directly to the bench without getting close to the coaches. They can be approached only once they’ve had a mask on. Maybe we approach in the golf cart here too. Or at least a shield in addition to the mask.

Stadium worker- probably would take a couple incidences to shut it down. I’m sure they’ll be masked at all times and will distance from each other and the players. There won’t be fans so won’t be nearly as many stadium workers. Ideally we’d furlough (paid!) the older ones but age discrimination laws may not allow that.

All good points here.  People are acting like all these old staff members with health issues are going to be running around in contact with people though.  The NFL has made some dumb moves over the years, but I don't think they're going to take any chances they don't have to.  If Sam the 80 year old janitor with an immune-deficiency wants to come back to work, I'm quite confident the NFL or the team will find a way to pay him to be on leave and not come to work.  If any assistant coaches are highly susceptible and elderly, I'm sure the league finds a way to isolate them in the stadium on game days. 

For every post in here of a concern a fan has about someone in the NFL becoming extremely ill/dying, I'm sure the league and owners who have billions on the line, will also be thinking about them and doing what it takes.  I hope so, anyways.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Deamon said:

That's because this thread is meant to discuss the players that were diagnosed with Covid and the effect on them. 
 

Still very very unlikely for any coach or staff to get severely ill.  Especially with daily tests and top medical attention.  Only 20% of Covid deaths are under 65.  And of those, 75-99% of all of those deaths had serious preexisting conditions.  I'm assuming if there's a staff member, coach, security guard, or janitor that's elderly and has a serious health condition, he'll probably not work this season.  All others have an extremely small chance of serious illness from this.

See. There you go, dragging me into the mud when there was no reason to.

first of all, who are YOU to put such strict guard rails on this thread? Especially when the OP said that we should keep this to football. Not football PLAYERS. Football. Last I checked, coaches and staff are part of football. 
 

second of all,,

...out. 

Edited by joey
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, joey said:

See. There you go, dragging me in. 

first of all, who are YOU to put such strict guard rails on this thread? Especially when the OP said that we should keep this to football. Not football PLAYERS. Football. Last I checked, coaches and staff are part of football. 
 

second of all,,

...out. 

I'm not.  You mentioned how there was so much talk on players.  So I told you it's because the thread is about the players. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Deamon said:

I'm not.  You mentioned how there was so much talk on players.  So I told you it's because the thread is about the players. 

Wow. You’re a real pleasure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, joey said:

Wow. You’re a real pleasure. 

Thanks, you too.  But try to keep this on football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So here’s one positive: it seems like we’re getting closer to really figuring out what causes transmission. 

Translating the recommendations here with football, I don’t think it’s going out on a limb to suggest there won’t be fans in attendance.

as for distancing, it’s also hard to imagine a locker room or huddle or tackle with distancing.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-exactly-do-you-catch-covid-19-there-is-a-growing-consensus-11592317650?mod=wsjtwittertest19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

So here’s one positive: it seems like we’re getting closer to really figuring out what causes transmission. 

The article is all good information. The items covered in the WSJ article were all pretty much firmed up by early April, when the CDC's guidance started downplaying fomites and more pointedly recommend source-control face coverings.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

So here’s one positive: it seems like we’re getting closer to really figuring out what causes transmission. 

Translating the recommendations here with football, I don’t think it’s going out on a limb to suggest there won’t be fans in attendance.

as for distancing, it’s also hard to imagine a locker room or huddle or tackle with distancing.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-exactly-do-you-catch-covid-19-there-is-a-growing-consensus-11592317650?mod=wsjtwittertest19

They could have fans as long as they don't scream or yell. They can just politely clap. 

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mongidig said:

They could have fans as long as they don't scream or yell. They can just politely clap. 

:lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Doug B said:

The article is all good information. The items covered in the WSJ article were all pretty much firmed up by early April, when the CDC's guidance started downplaying fomites and more pointedly recommend source-control face coverings.

That part is old news but for quite a while equal weight was given to dermal contact transmission.

From this update it sounds like the chances of getting it from a surface are very low.

also fleeting casual contact isn’t a high risk, which is good news for front line workers dealing with the public. interact with 30-50 people every sat/sun, (outdoors) so that puts me a little more at ease knowing it’s low risk provided we’re all wearing masks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Mongidig said:

They could have fans as long as they don't scream or yell. They can just politely clap. 

:lol:  Cowboys fans only know how to communicate by screaming or yelling so this  obviously wouldn't work for them.

I think I remember reading on one of the threads on this site that they were going to use fake crowd noise and images of fans during broadcasts.  It will be business as usual for the crappy teams that already have to resort to playing fake crowd noise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, yoman said:

:lol:  Cowboys fans only know how to communicate by screaming or yelling so this  obviously wouldn't work for them.

I think I remember reading on one of the threads on this site that they were going to use fake crowd noise and images of fans during broadcasts.  It will be business as usual for the crappy teams that already have to resort to playing fake crowd noise.

C'mon, Garrett was the king of the polite clap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like I am getting too involved in strategy for fantasy football this year, going to feel more disappointed if the season is cancelled or shortened due to Covid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.