What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Players opting out of the 2020 season - Deadline Aug 6...unless you've got a good reason to opt out later (1 Viewer)

nittanylion said:
I heard on the radio yesterday, I believe it was on the Sirius/XM Fantasy Channel, that information had leaked out that Major League Baseball had contacted it's TV partners and advised them to have alternate programming ready to implement in the MLB time slots as of this coming week.
Click to expand...
The NFL isn't going to make it unless they bubble. Capella has been saying this in the baseball thread and I think he's right. I've never thought there would be a football season, but MLB's unsuccessful non-bubble doesn't bode well for the NFL, while the hockey and soccer examples do. 

Are the logistics feasible? Probably not really, but you could reduce spread by doing it. 

 
Cjw_55106 said:
It’s possible that some have. There is technically no opt-out rule for coaches or other staff so we may not have heard about it yet. I think if it was a head coach, we definitely would’ve heard but maybe not other coaches? Just a thought. 
Click to expand...
Good point.  I do kind of think that we would have heard of it though just because, let's say, a DC opts out because his wife has high risk, I think the sports reporters would run the story just to get a reaction of impact across people's lives. 

 
Shutout said:
Good point.  I do kind of think that we would have heard of it though just because, let's say, a DC opts out because his wife has high risk, I think the sports reporters would run the story just to get a reaction of impact across people's lives. 
Click to expand...
We definitely would have heard that by now for two reasons, the first being that it's a significant role in the coaching staff and the second being exactly what you pointed out. 

 
Blackbear said:
Looks like NFL thinks players are taking advantage of the opt out and trying to move deadline up to counter losing more players...

https://larrybrownsports.com/football/nfl-teams-concerned-players-exploiting-opt-out/560362

I am surprised certain RB Dalvin Cook didn’t threaten with an opt out. You would think that the threat of an opt out would nudge a deal to get done. Same deal as Henry.
Click to expand...
They had me in the first half, as the meme says.  Lol. I almost believed the NFL was being taken advantage of.  But the reality is, while those reasons could certainly be factors, they are highly muddled by the situation in its entirety. The truth is, all these things are fluid to ALL parties involved and nobody truly knows how to play this for the long game. If a player is looking at future contracts or making a roster, they could easily say that they must act now (new contract) because of the highly unknown future salary caps, etc.  

So, what we are left with is you must take it at face value and it is poor taste to play "high-pressure used car salesman" and try to get a commitment on such an important issue. 

 
Trying to remain positive about some kind of season being played

but I just keep hearing Harrison Ford in the back of my head

"I have a very bad feeling about this."

 
Shutout said:
They had me in the first half, as the meme says.  Lol. I almost believed the NFL was being taken advantage of.  But the reality is, while those reasons could certainly be factors, they are highly muddled by the situation in its entirety. The truth is, all these things are fluid to ALL parties involved and nobody truly knows how to play this for the long game. If a player is looking at future contracts or making a roster, they could easily say that they must act now (new contract) because of the highly unknown future salary caps, etc.  

So, what we are left with is you must take it at face value and it is poor taste to play "high-pressure used car salesman" and try to get a commitment on such an important issue. 
Click to expand...
This is not high pressure. These players have known all of this for weeks. And their agents are the ones in the know and deflecting any pressures. And they have had ten days to make a decision. One extra day isn’t going to change that decision. I mean, are we supposed to believe these players only started thinking about the decision to play or not in the last ten days. And now they are caught off guard and in a high pressure situation. That is a joke. If you opted out it was because family health concerns or high risk scenarios for the individual. This was thought about well before hand.

Unless you mean Cook would be in poor taste to high pressure sell using an opt out as leverage. Well, I don’t mind it if he gets what he deserves. I think RBs haven’t been treated as fairly lately and I don’t mind it if he uses his only potential leverage to get that 13 million a year he wants instead of settling for the lower offer or playing for a couple million on his original deal. 

 
Can't keep track if these were already posted . . .

Broncos T Ja'Wuan James and Panthers LB Christian Miller have opted out of the 2020 season.

 
Blackbear said:
This is not high pressure. These players have known all of this for weeks. And their agents are the ones in the know and deflecting any pressures. And they have had ten days to make a decision. One extra day isn’t going to change that decision. I mean, are we supposed to believe these players only started thinking about the decision to play or not in the last ten days. And now they are caught off guard and in a high pressure situation. That is a joke. If you opted out it was because family health concerns or high risk scenarios for the individual. This was thought about well before hand.

Unless you mean Cook would be in poor taste to high pressure sell using an opt out as leverage. Well, I don’t mind it if he gets what he deserves. I think RBs haven’t been treated as fairly lately and I don’t mind it if he uses his only potential leverage to get that 13 million a year he wants instead of settling for the lower offer or playing for a couple million on his original deal. 
Click to expand...
Put the bunny back in the box, my dude. 

My thought is (that I think needs to be considered) is that this is something the WORLD has never seen before. New information is coming out every single day that is helping people be informed.  There is SO much that we don't know about this still, especially long-term impacts. Much of the info coming out is in conflict with info that came out a few days ago. 

There is NO way any of us can look at another person and say with certainty that "you have all the info you need to make an informed decision". The only way you can gain knowledge in a situation like this is more information, which takes more time. 

It is unfortunate and recognized that the NFL has a legitimate need to make a decision by a certain date but the reality IS

The NFL wants to make money and CANNOT guarantee the safety of the players and workers involved, so they are leaving a VERY important decision and one that could have significant impact, up to the players (which is fine...NFL players routinely do this. they weigh the risks of making "x" amount of good money in return to known risks of playing in the NFL).  But there's the rub.  KNOWN.  A guy can say "I know the risks of concussions and broken body parts in return to this $5 million you offer. I accept".  But they can't say they know the implications here. They, like us, are discovering more each day.  

Players should have as much time as they feel comfortable with to make what could literally be a life and death decision so maybe its just possible that if those two things can't meet somewhere where BOTH sides feel like they are both informed and have BOTH carried an equal amount of risk in the decision, then maybe the obvious answer is "then we don't need to be playing".  Because the reality is that humans can die as a result of this decision if it's not carried out correctly. That's the risk the players and coaches are taking...for themselves and their families and the communities these games are to be played in. The risk the NFL carries is whether they make bank or mad bank this year.

I really don't want to come down on a "side" of this because I understand the dilemma of economy vs. unemployment in this situation and I DO NOT understand the impact of the COVID19 virus, short or long-term.  But I do find it at least generally hypocritical that the NFL floods PR with player safety, yet wants to know yesterday and wants to make sure there's no take backs on what potentially is literally life and death to others (not them) for the sake of making money.  It is very much like that Pixar cartoon where the prince says "I understand this decision may result in some of YOU dying...but that's a risk I am willing to take". 

 
Shutout said:
Put the bunny back in the box, my dude. 

My thought is (that I think needs to be considered) is that this is something the WORLD has never seen before. New information is coming out every single day that is helping people be informed.  There is SO much that we don't know about this still, especially long-term impacts. Much of the info coming out is in conflict with info that came out a few days ago. 

There is NO way any of us can look at another person and say with certainty that "you have all the info you need to make an informed decision". The only way you can gain knowledge in a situation like this is more information, which takes more time. 

It is unfortunate and recognized that the NFL has a legitimate need to make a decision by a certain date but the reality IS

The NFL wants to make money and CANNOT guarantee the safety of the players and workers involved, so they are leaving a VERY important decision and one that could have significant impact, up to the players (which is fine...NFL players routinely do this. they weigh the risks of making "x" amount of good money in return to known risks of playing in the NFL).  But there's the rub.  KNOWN.  A guy can say "I know the risks of concussions and broken body parts in return to this $5 million you offer. I accept".  But they can't say they know the implications here. They, like us, are discovering more each day.  

Players should have as much time as they feel comfortable with to make what could literally be a life and death decision so maybe its just possible that if those two things can't meet somewhere where BOTH sides feel like they are both informed and have BOTH carried an equal amount of risk in the decision, then maybe the obvious answer is "then we don't need to be playing".  Because the reality is that humans can die as a result of this decision if it's not carried out correctly. That's the risk the players and coaches are taking...for themselves and their families and the communities these games are to be played in. The risk the NFL carries is whether they make bank or mad bank this year.

I really don't want to come down on a "side" of this because I understand the dilemma of economy vs. unemployment in this situation and I DO NOT understand the impact of the COVID19 virus, short or long-term.  But I do find it at least generally hypocritical that the NFL floods PR with player safety, yet wants to know yesterday and wants to make sure there's no take backs on what potentially is literally life and death to others (not them) for the sake of making money.  It is very much like that Pixar cartoon where the prince says "I understand this decision may result in some of YOU dying...but that's a risk I am willing to take". 
Click to expand...
They can have more time. It is just if they choose to not play after the deadline they can push contracts to next year and use an advance on their pay next year. They can just wait until after deadline and say never mind I don’t want to play. And they won’t get paid. They are then at the mercy of their contract like any normal year.

I just think it is ridiculous for players or others forming an opinion to act like no thought was put into it until last ten days. Ridiculous.

And if it is a nail biter then maybe you need to sit out a season and err on the side of caution.

Every player that will play this year has thought it out and said I am likely to get it and I accept the risk because it is worth it. 

Hopefully smart one decide, if I test positive I don’t live at home for thirty days. They have a contingency plan where they live either in hotel, a short term rental, etc...

I think these guys aren’t babies and know the risks. This pressuring by nfl is crap. If you feel pressured now then you really should sit out. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blackbear said:
Looks like NFL thinks players are taking advantage of the opt out and trying to move deadline up to counter losing more players...

https://larrybrownsports.com/football/nfl-teams-concerned-players-exploiting-opt-out/560362

I am surprised certain RB Dalvin Cook didn’t threaten with an opt out. You would think that the threat of an opt out would nudge a deal to get done. Same deal as Henry.
Click to expand...
Not really. He’d get paid $150k this season and have his contract tolled until next season where he’d be a year older. It would be a hollow threat.

 
Dr. Octopus said:
Not really. He’d get paid $150k this season and have his contract tolled until next season where he’d be a year older. It would be a hollow threat.
Click to expand...
Not if Minny GM thinks he doesn’t want Cook to sit out a season... when he can no longer have leverage in fines for not reporting.

also, right back at ya 😋

 
Dr. Octopus said:
So he’s gains leverage by threatening to make an idiotic financial decision?
Click to expand...
No, if his agent says he might hold out due to COVID opt out it isn’t a hollow threat. His story actually is reasonable. He says hey I want the “reasonable” deal Henry got otherwise I opt out this year since if I play and get COVID I could suffer long term compromising my future earning potential. Minnesota could easily say, ok sounds good. Both sides happy. His agent should be doing this behind the scene. In his case, it actually does make sense to negotiate in this manner if you are his agent. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blackbear said:
No, if his agent says he might hold out due to COVID opt out it isn’t a hollow threat. His story actually is reasonable. He says hey I want the “reasonable” deal Henry got otherwise I opt out this year since if I play and get COVID I could suffer long term compromising my future earning potential. Minnesota could easily say, ok sounds good. Both sides happy. His agent should be doing this behind the scene. In his case, it actually does make sense to negotiate in this manner if you are his agent. 
Click to expand...
He’s way better off playing out his contract - especially since it could a short season and go into free agency next offseason.

He’d make nothing this season and would be in the exact same position next offseason yet a year older.

Threatening to Opt out due to a Pandemic when your ultimate threat, sitting out,  would hurt you financially doesn’t seem like much of a threat. I hope he gets his money one way or another but reporting makes sense.
 

 
Dr. Octopus said:
He’s way better off playing out his contract - especially since it could a short season and go into free agency next offseason.

He’d make nothing this season and would be in the exact same position next offseason yet a year older.

Threatening to Opt out due to a Pandemic when your ultimate threat, sitting out,  would hurt you financially doesn’t seem like much of a threat. I hope he gets his money one way or another but reporting makes sense.
 
Click to expand...
Since I know you will know info on this, compare what Leveon Bell did in holding out and not playing and then coming to the Jets a year older and seemingly paid.  Would Cook be hurt all that much if he took that Bell route?  

 
Shutout said:
Since I know you will know info on this, compare what Leveon Bell did in holding out and not playing and then coming to the Jets a year older and seemingly paid.  Would Cook be hurt all that much if he took that Bell route?  
Click to expand...
Bell made a huge financial blunder. He gave up $15MM on the franchise tag the year he sat out and ended up making about the same he would have made in the last offer Pitt made to him. The way the contract with the Jets was structured the team could get out of it after this year.

ETA: The huge difference however is Bell never signed the Franchise Tag so he was a free agent the following season. If Cook sat out his contract would toll and he’d be in the same position next year, last year of his contract. He wouldn’t be a free agent next year. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Octopus said:
Bell made a huge financial blunder. He gave up $15MM on the franchise tag the year he sat out and ended up making about the same he would have made in the last offer Pitt made to him. The way the contract with the Jets was structured the team could get out of it after this year.

ETA: The huge difference however is Bell never signed the Franchise Tag so he was a free agent the following season. If Cook sat out his contract would toll and he’d be in the same position next year, last year of his contract. He wouldn’t be a free agent next year. 
Click to expand...
Thanks for that info.  

So, to me, and I have no bias or dog in the right, it seems to me that cook could get guaranteed money in his pocket now and have some leverage if he threatens IF the Vikings think this is their year, their best shot, etc.  And maybe Cook being motivated enough to take it this far right now helps him get money now and get a contract now before things get really messy for a few years (if the NFL has to have a reckoning related to salary caps, etc...will money be son strapped the next few years that a contract doable now simply can't be done next year due to cap limitations?).

However, if he sits it is a RB a year older (although, less wear and tear might be a counter argument) and a tolled contract with no freedom, which can't be argued...that's concrete barring some  restive argument that somebody comes up with like Teddy Bridgewater a few years ago.

I guess I could listen to either side and get on board but, to me, the biggest factor that cannot be overlooked is the tolled contract.  I think he's better off to play and get the credit and then he is closer to a new contract or tagged money.

Does anyone know if the season lasts, say 3 weeks, do all the player contracts advance or is there some number where the players get tolled anyway?  If the 2nd is the case then maybe players are playing a game where they think "we ain't gonna make it a month anyway so why not try to bluff them or sit out an stake some bucks?  

 
Sooner than I expected - ESPN's Adam Schefter reports the official deadline for players to opt out of the NFL season is Thursday at 4 p.m. EST.

Not to say someone couldn't just do what that baseball player did and just quit during the season and say he is opting out I guess.

 
Dez said:
Sooner than I expected - ESPN's Adam Schefter reports the official deadline for players to opt out of the NFL season is Thursday at 4 p.m. EST.

Not to say someone couldn't just do what that baseball player did and just quit during the season and say he is opting out I guess.
Click to expand...
Obviously guys could, they could any year. But they won't get that stipend if they do and probably face team fines and pay back money.

 
Twenty-Four Eighty-Four said:
Obviously guys could, they could any year. But they won't get that stipend if they do and probably face team fines and pay back money.
Click to expand...
The stipend is a loan against next year unless they have a high risk medical condition themselves. For example, Cannon I think gets 350 k without having to pay back since he was a leukemia survivor. 
 

So you could play and then say screw it, then it falls back on your contract how much you don’t make or have to pay back if you got a bonus, etc...

 
Shutout said:
Does anyone know if the season lasts, say 3 weeks, do all the player contracts advance or is there some number where the players get tolled anyway?  If the 2nd is the case then maybe players are playing a game where they think "we ain't gonna make it a month anyway so why not try to bluff them or sit out an stake some bucks?  
Click to expand...
I *think* if a player reports and one game is played, that constitutes an accrued season.  I don't believe a certain number of games have to be played to count as a year toward free agency.  I imagine contracts would be considered in the same vein.

ETA: According to the CBA, six games count as an accrued season.  However, I think if the NFL elects to cancel the season before six games are played it would count as an accrued season for anyone who didn't opt out without being classified as high-risk.  I'm trying to find proof of the canceled season policy.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I just wanted to add the new CBA signed in march changed hold out scenarios a lot. If a player shows up and competes in camp. Then plays one game and sits he is not entitled to an accrued season. He would have to prove to an independent arbitrator he had justified reason to not perform for a material amount of time. https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29553309/expect-nfl-training-camp-holdouts-2020-why-to-do-coronavirus
 

That is why I am saying, the only leverage(not much maybe depending on Minnys GM point of view) Cook has is if he has his agent mention he is willing to opt out in the name of protecting his long term earning power by avoiding the risk of getting COVID-19. It might not be much, but it could be just enough to nudge the GM into offering the “reasonable” contract he wants. Which was rumored to be 13 million for four years. Seems like a reasonable deal can be accomplished where the only stickling points are guaranteed money’s. Maybe Cook has less guaranteed money and some game time related incentives given his injury risk. 
 

BTW, the article above says in the event of a hold out Cook becomes a RFA. Which means his agent can negotiate contracts with other teams. Though built into those contracts would be the forfeit of a second round pick. So it may limit his contract number. Minnesota could then take the second or match the offer. More than likely before it got to that point Minnesota could franchise him and make him play for estimated 9 million for one year. I think the most they could franchise him is two years. So let’s say they both get nasty and Cook opts out, plays under franchise two years, then leaves and gets his 13 million per year for four years. Or he gets his 13 million per year for four years now. The savings Minnesota can save 8 million over two years and then replace Cook. Or they can spend the extra 8 million and lock Cook down for four years. Cook is a difficult replacement in that talent that he has is not available for competing teams each year guaranteed.

But I think if you are worried about the extra couple million needed per year to lock down Cook for four years you aren’t confident in your abilities to recoup that in other ways. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blackbear said:
BTW, the article above says in the event of a hold out Cook becomes a RFA. Which means his agent can negotiate contracts with other teams.
Click to expand...
How can this possibly be true when he still has one year left on his contract? If he sits out in 2020 his contract tolls to 2021 and he still has that year left.

 
Dr. Octopus said:
How can this possibly be true when he still has one year left on his contract? If he sits out in 2020 his contract tolls to 2021 and he still has that year left.
Click to expand...
In the article they were talking holdout... which is different than a covid opt out.

 
Dr. Octopus said:
Yeah I’m not even sure that’s accurate but I’m sure he knows better than me.
Click to expand...
So my point of posting that article was to illustrate he has little leverage from a GM perspective if holding out.
 

However from a GM perspective the opt out sucks because he would get no real penalty except for losing out on the 1.3 million he is set to make. which is peanuts compared to what he will ultimately make. But Minny would not have their all star elite back this season. So you look at what the possibilities are and it is squabbling over a couple million per season. So a GM would be a buffoon not to take an opt out threat seriously and get a deal done before the opt out deadline. It would show you are playing hardball over a couple million per year with a guy that the coach described as being the captain of the team. So my point in all of this is to illustrate a covid opt out could and should be used as a bargaining chip to get this deal done if it is only about a couple million a season from a guy that is elite and the center of your offense and captain of your team. 

 
Blackbear said:
So my point of posting that article was to illustrate he has little leverage from a GM perspective if holding out.
 

However from a GM perspective the opt out sucks because he would get no real penalty except for losing out on the 1.3 million he is set to make. which is peanuts compared to what he will ultimately make. But Minny would not have their all star elite back this season. So you look at what the possibilities are and it is squabbling over a couple million per season. So a GM would be a buffoon not to take an opt out threat seriously and get a deal done before the opt out deadline. It would show you are playing hardball over a couple million per year with a guy that the coach described as being the captain of the team. So my point in all of this is to illustrate a covid opt out could and should be used as a bargaining chip to get this deal done if it is only about a couple million a season from a guy that is elite and the center of your offense and captain of your team. 
Click to expand...
The penalty would be that unless Cook gets grouped in the high risk pool, if he opts out, he would not get any closer to becoming a free agent. IMO, he would be much better suited to play this year on the chance the league doesn't come close to playing a full season. So his body would take less wear and tear, he would still gain an accrued season, and he would be in much better physical shape down the road (if that saved him say 200 carries in a shortened season).

If he does go the voluntary COVID opt out route, he would be exactly where he is now . . . a year from now, so a year older and still no closer to getting the big contract that you think he will be able to get. Mind you, the salary cap is going to come down $23 million next year (and may decrease again the following year). The point being, teams may not be quite so eager to hand out big RB contracts over the next couple of years, especially with a guy with some durability concerns. IMO, there will be a new contract landscape next year compared to what we are used to.

 
The NFL and the NFL Players Association have agreed that players will have the ability to opt out of the 2020 season through Thursday, August 6, at 4:00 p.m. ET. After that, players may opt out under only limited circumstances.

According to the document outlining the final opt-out procedures, a copy of which PFT has obtained, a player may opt out after August 6 if he he receives a new diagnosis that he suffers from one of the “Higher Risk” factors. If that occurs, the player will have one week after receiving the new diagnosis to opt out.

Also, if a player has a family member die or become hospitalized due to COVID-19 after August 6, the player will be eligible at that point to opt out.

Beyond those two categories, players can’t opt out after August 6. Technically, they can still retire and un-retire; however, some players may have to refund teams for unearned signing bonus payments.

Ideally, players would have two more limited windows to decide whether to opt out: (1) after padded practices begin; and (2) after games begin. That’s when all players will have a chance to see whether they feel safe and comfortable playing 11-on-11 football in a pandemic, and that’s why they all should get extra opportunities to tap out.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/08/04/nfl-allows-for-changed-circumstances-opt-outs-after-thursday/

 
Seems to be a lot of players being put on the covid list that don't actually have covid with Stafford and Minshew saying they didn't have it (or their teams saying they didn't have it).

With teams not being able to say if they have tested positive or not when put on the list will make it difficult for us to know when/if we need to pick players up say they throw your player on the covid IR on a Tuesday did they test positive and will be out for the week or will they be like Minshew and be back in 2 days because they really didn't test positive it was something else.

 
Titans_fan said:
Shutout said:
Does anyone know if the season lasts, say 3 weeks, do all the player contracts advance or is there some number where the players get tolled anyway?  If the 2nd is the case then maybe players are playing a game where they think "we ain't gonna make it a month anyway so why not try to bluff them or sit out an stake some bucks?  
Click to expand...
I *think* if a player reports and one game is played, that constitutes an accrued season.  I don't believe a certain number of games have to be played to count as a year toward free agency.  I imagine contracts would be considered in the same vein.

ETA: According to the CBA, six games count as an accrued season.  However, I think if the NFL elects to cancel the season before six games are played it would count as an accrued season for anyone who didn't opt out without being classified as high-risk.  I'm trying to find proof of the canceled season policy.
Click to expand...
These are different things.  Contracts advance regardless of qualifying for an accrued season.  For example when Josh Gordon was suspended that one time* he came back for the last 6 games but got suspended by the team for the final game.  His contract advanced and he became a Free Agent the next season but because he didn't get the accrued season he remained an RFA.

Really interesting concept on if they give out accrued seasons if only 3 games played.  It's no fault of the player, and he was available for 100% of the games, so why should he get punished?  On the other hand, if there was no "season" and no "champion" and most important if the owners didn't get a year of indentured servitude of all those guys on rookie deals and the resulting profit boost, why would they give that up the following season?

 
Per rotoworld

The NFL will offer narrow exceptions for players to opt out of the 2020 season after Thursday's opt out deadline.   A player will be able to opt out if he is diagnosed with a high-risk condition or if a member of his family is hospitalized with conditions related to COVID-19 or dies from the virus. Morbid stuff. Meanwhile, the rushed deadline for players to opt out is Thursday at 4 p.m. ET. 

 
Dez said:
Seems to be a lot of players being put on the covid list that don't actually have covid with Stafford and Minshew saying they didn't have it (or their teams saying they didn't have it).

With teams not being able to say if they have tested positive or not when put on the list will make it difficult for us to know when/if we need to pick players up say they throw your player on the covid IR on a Tuesday did they test positive and will be out for the week or will they be like Minshew and be back in 2 days because they really didn't test positive it was something else.
Click to expand...
Your league likely has Covid spots.  If they go on it, put them on the Covid IR spot and pick someone else up.  If it's like Minshew and he's back 2 days later, it's an easy fix to call them back up.  Shouldn't be an issue.

 
Dez said:
Seems to be a lot of players being put on the covid list that don't actually have covid with Stafford and Minshew saying they didn't have it (or their teams saying they didn't have it).

With teams not being able to say if they have tested positive or not when put on the list will make it difficult for us to know when/if we need to pick players up say they throw your player on the covid IR on a Tuesday did they test positive and will be out for the week or will they be like Minshew and be back in 2 days because they really didn't test positive it was something else.
Click to expand...
Won't teams still be also using the standard status designations for the upcoming game--questionable, doubtful, out--and won't that be an indication of where the players stands?

 
Dez said:
Seems to be a lot of players being put on the covid list that don't actually have covid with Stafford and Minshew saying they didn't have it (or their teams saying they didn't have it).

With teams not being able to say if they have tested positive or not when put on the list will make it difficult for us to know when/if we need to pick players up say they throw your player on the covid IR on a Tuesday did they test positive and will be out for the week or will they be like Minshew and be back in 2 days because they really didn't test positive it was something else.
Click to expand...
I am guessing the league will be pretty liberal in what teams do. All teams have to do is say someone may have been exposed to someone and that player could get on the list. We won’t know the full story unless the player wants to chime in. Teams this year will be allowed to shuffle game day actives / inactives / on or off the COVID list up to 90 minutes before game time. It’s going to be tough to keep track of everyone for fantasy purposes, especially for guys laying in late games or night games. Having a replacement fill in ready to go minutes before game time will be pretty important. 

 
Dez said:
Seems to be a lot of players being put on the covid list that don't actually have covid with Stafford and Minshew saying they didn't have it (or their teams saying they didn't have it).
Click to expand...
Stafford tested positive, but turned out to be a false positive. Same thing just happened with two Phillies last week. Which seems odd since, in the broader world, we've heard of false negatives being a thing, but not positives. Wonder if there is some issue with how the leagues are testing

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Andy Dufresne
2015 Shark Pool mock draft - The SECOND one
20 21 22
Replies
1K
Views
23K
BoltBacker
B
Bracie Smathers
Halfway point of season, time for 1st look at 2014 NFL draft
2 3 4
Replies
183
Views
6K
JaxBill
JaxBill
Bracie Smathers
SI redrafts the 2012 picks
Replies
39
Views
4K
Drop
Drop

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top