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.

NFL and Covid Issues - Initially Asked in Shark Pool To Keep it 100% NFL (4 Viewers)

NFL is going to have to cancel a week and get this under control. 
Aside from Tennessee -- which is a self-created dumpster fire caused by a bunch of players and coaches who should be lining up for suspensions -- all of the league's covid cases are random players here and there, which all of us should have expected.  No need to overreact at this point.

 
Turning into a nightmare. Eventually they're going to have to shut this thing down for a bit IMO

So glad decided to sit out the fantasy football season. What a disaster.

 
So every time there’s an individual case we just cancel games. Just shut down the league already. It’s become a crap fest any way.

 
No need to overreact at this point.
I concur and I understand the present fear of what could lie ahead but what are the alternatives? 

I guess some folks want to shut it down but it doesn't seem like the NFL is all that interested. 

We knew this was going to be a difficult or unique year however you look at it. 

 
So every time there’s an individual case we just cancel games. Just shut down the league already. It’s become a crap fest any way.
I'm a little curious, looking back, why the Atlanta DB testing positive two weeks ago didn't elicit the same response? Seemed like the working assumption at the time was to isolate/quarantine the positive player while the rest of the team carried on with practice and next-game preparation. Can we surmise that teams will not longer be responding that way to single cases?

 
I'm a little curious, looking back, why the Atlanta DB testing positive two weeks ago didn't elicit the same response? Seemed like the working assumption at the time was to isolate/quarantine the positive player while the rest of the team carried on with practice and next-game preparation. Can we surmise that teams will not longer be responding that way to single cases?
Exactly, that's what we were led to believe up front. Now they seem to have changed their response.

 
I'm a little curious, looking back, why the Atlanta DB testing positive two weeks ago didn't elicit the same response? Seemed like the working assumption at the time was to isolate/quarantine the positive player while the rest of the team carried on with practice and next-game preparation. Can we surmise that teams will not longer be responding that way to single cases?
It has been done that way. The only outlier being Tennesse where it's out of control.

 
Exactly, that's what we were led to believe up front. Now they seem to have changed their response.
Have they? The Titans are the only one that have had more than a single positive in a day. Chiefs and Pats have each had two but they were spread out from each other (the tests anyway). I think the only thing that has really changed is the public's perception of this all, particularly in FF circles.

 
No, it wasn't.
Really? I don't seem to recall accumulating any fantasy points for Titans or Steelers players in week 4.

You can play the semantics game saying it was postponed instead of cancelled. But it's still the same point, and now we're getting to the point there aren't easy fixes in rescheduling. 

 
Aside from Tennessee -- which is a self-created dumpster fire caused by a bunch of players and coaches who should be lining up for suspensions -- all of the league's covid cases are random players here and there, which all of us should have expected.  No need to overreact at this point.
Agreed. When they get a positive, suspending operations for a day to see if anyone else comes back positive the next day seems wise. If they don’t, then resume normal activities. The more difficult situation would be if a team suddenly comes up with multiple positives on Saturday or Sunday morning after not having any previously. That hasn’t happened yet and would be the most chaotic situation (other than ignoring protocols and continuing to spread the infection throughout half the organization over multiple weeks).

 
Really? I don't seem to recall accumulating any fantasy points for Titans or Steelers players in week 4.

You can play the semantics game saying it was postponed instead of cancelled. But it's still the same point, and now we're getting to the point there aren't easy fixes in rescheduling. 
It's not semantics. There's a HUGE difference between something being cancelled and something being postponed. 

 
I'm a little curious, looking back, why the Atlanta DB testing positive two weeks ago didn't elicit the same response? Seemed like the working assumption at the time was to isolate/quarantine the positive player while the rest of the team carried on with practice and next-game preparation. Can we surmise that teams will not longer be responding that way to single cases?
It has been done that way. The only outlier being Tennesse where it's out of control.
I'll have to go back and look at some late-September news pieces about the Falcons ... but I don't even think they quit having practices or anything after the DB tested positive. Going from memory, though ... have to go look. Maybe he tested late in the week (say, Saturday) and practices/installations were done for the week.

@AAABatteries , you're our only hope (for Falcons info).

 
I'll have to go back and look at some late-September news pieces about the Falcons ... but I don't even think they quit having practices or anything after the DB tested positive. Going from memory, though ... have to go look. Maybe he tested late in the week (say, Saturday) and practices/installations were done for the week.

@AAABatteries , you're our only hope (for Falcons info).
It was a Friday. There's no practices on Saturday.

 
It has been done that way. The only outlier being Tennesse where it's out of control.
Also -- when Cam Newton tested positive, the Patriots facility closed immediately. There was no Saturday walkthrough or anything leading up to the Chiefs game. That's a different response to a single player testing positive than what happened with Atlanta the previous week. Granted ... I understand that the league is learning as they go and situations are in flux. Week 3 anti-COVID strategies won't necessarily inform the Weeks 5 and 6 strategies.

 
Really? I don't seem to recall accumulating any fantasy points for Titans or Steelers players in week 4.

You can play the semantics game saying it was postponed instead of cancelled. But it's still the same point, and now we're getting to the point there aren't easy fixes in rescheduling. 
Yes really. Did you take zeroes in those spots or did you sub someone? The game was postponed and the week was converted to a bye. I agree it is largely the same point, but it is an important distinction. Teams can have a freebie one-off like that and redscheduling can accomodate both for the NFL and for FF. But if this weeks Titans game gets cancelled *or* postponed, then we are looking at a 2nd bye for Titans players for FF purposes. Which is a major domino and the beginning of competitive disadvantages for FF. 

 
It's not semantics. There's a HUGE difference between something being cancelled and something being postponed. 
Until another Titan player pops a positive test tomorrow, and the league retroactively imposes forfeitures for their games with Pittsburgh and Buffalo. It's still on the table as far as I know.

 
Until another Titan player pops a positive test tomorrow, and the league retroactively imposes forfeitures for their games with Pittsburgh and Buffalo. It's still on the table as far as I know.
Yes - one more time and then I give up, the Titans have been the outlier so far due to their own failures to contain the virus. So far no games have been cancelled or even moved (other than by a day or two) where any outbreak was contained. 

Do you want me to say the league will be in trouble if multiple teams have multiple outbreaks, because yes that would be a problem?

 
This might differ team to team, but I thought teams typically did a Saturday morning walkthrough before traveling for a Sunday road game.
Yes, that is true. If that was cancelled who would notice though?
I was just making the point that (a) Newton's positive test immediately stopped all Patriots team activities while (b) A.J. Terrell's positive test did not (apparently) stop all Falcons team activities and certainly did not (apparently) threaten the cancellation of the Bears @ Falcons game on September 27th. Maybe the fact that the Falcons didn't have to travel played a role in how the team responded to Terrell's positive test.

Admittedly ... I don't know for sure whether or not the Falcons cancelled any team activities on Saturday 9/26 after Terrell's positive test. But I do know the Falcons hosted the Bears the next day, so the Falcons did not go through two consecutive days without positive tests, as seems to the be the rule of thumb now.
 

EDIT: This article (from Sat 9/26) seems to answer a lot of my questions about the Falcon's response going into the Week 3 Bears game:

Atlanta Falcons cornerback A.J. Terrell has tested positive for COVID-19 and is being placed on the reserve/COVID list, the team announced Saturday.

Terrell, a rookie first-round draft pick by the Falcons, is the first player to be placed on the COVID-19 virus since the beginning of the 2020 season. Players can be placed on the list if they test positive for COVID-19 or if they've been exposed to someone who tested positive.

NFL Network's Tom Pelissero reports that Terrell's positive test came back overnight and as a result he was not at the Falcons' Saturday walk-through. Terrell has been declared out for Sunday's home game against the Chicago Bears. Cornerbacks Delrick Abrams and Tyler Hall were elevated from the practice squad to the 53-man roster in a corresponding move.

According to Pelissero, no other team members tested positive from the overnight tests and all other individuals were tested again this morning. Results from Saturday morning's tests will be available on Sunday morning.

Contract tracing will be used to determine who came in contact with Terrell in recent days, as all NFL players and Tier 1/2 individuals wear tracking devices all day in the facility. If no one was within six feet of Terrell for 15-plus straight minutes, tests negative or shows no symptoms, then that player's game day status will not be compromised.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'll have to go back and look at some late-September news pieces about the Falcons ... but I don't even think they quit having practices or anything after the DB tested positive. Going from memory, though ... have to go look. Maybe he tested late in the week (say, Saturday) and practices/installations were done for the week.

@AAABatteries , you're our only hope (for Falcons info).
When it comes to the Falcons there is no hope....only pain and suffering.

Honestly, I haven't follow this story at all so sorry but I cannot provide any insight.

 
I'll bet this protocol has now been abandoned after the Titans kerfluffle:

Contract tracing will be used to determine who came in contact with Terrell in recent days, as all NFL players and Tier 1/2 individuals wear tracking devices all day in the facility. If no one was within six feet of Terrell for 15-plus straight minutes, tests negative or shows no symptoms, then that player's game day status will not be compromised.

 
Yes - one more time and then I give up, the Titans have been the outlier so far due to their own failures to contain the virus. So far no games have been cancelled or even moved (other than by a day or two) where any outbreak was contained. 

Do you want me to say the league will be in trouble if multiple teams have multiple outbreaks, because yes that would be a problem?
No, I don't mean to get in a peeing match with you. I have no issue with you. I'm just p'd off it's coming to this point. I think the NFL has mishandled the whole situation from day one. Started with no preseason. Set players up to get hurt right from the start. Look at all the hamstring issues this year. Then not seeming to have clear procedure how to handle Covid. They led us to believe putting players on the Covid list was the full solution. Then it morphed to what it is now. The right thing to do after the first major outbreak was to pause the season a couple weeks to get it under control, and of course, they wouldn't do that. 

 
I see people talking about pausing the season to get it under control.  What exactly would be accomplished by pausing the season?
One, get the current cases under control so teams don't face a competitive disadvantage. It's like they're saying it's someone's fault for getting sick and they need to be punished. Example Cam maybe getting it because he went to see his kid in Atlanta on an off day, and the Pats losing their starting QB for a big game (and believe me I'm no Pats apologist). Likewise, expecting the Titans to go into a game without any practice for 2 weeks (whether it was their faults or not for getting sick not wearing a mask or whatever).

Two, the NFL to streamline their reaction to outbreaks. Again, poor planning involved by not creating more scheduling flexibility if needed, and they had to know it probably would be.

The NBA halted their season after the first incidence. They got things under control and were able to finish their season. Granted not under the most ideal setup, but they got it done at least.

 
I see people talking about pausing the season to get it under control.  What exactly would be accomplished by pausing the season?
I think the idea is to kind of "reset" the season -- use the pause to contact-trace, isolate positives and exposed persons, and then let cases peter out to zero. Then restart with better protocols.

Can cases get down to zero again? And can better protocols even be developed? And if so, will those protocols succeed? Those are all exercises left for the reader.

 
Life's not fair.

Some teams have to travel across the country for road games while others can drive there in a couple hours on a bus.  Some teams get to play the Broncos with their 3rd string QB and some teams have to play them with their starter.  Last year some teams had to face Patrick Mahomes and some teams got to play against Matt Moore.  Some teams can get into the playoffs at 8-8 and others have to be 11-5.  Some teams get 4 games against NFC East opponents and others have to play 4 games against the NFC West.

It's just circumstance, and it's always been a huge part of the game, for reasons far more trivial than people's health and the ability of the season to continue on.
Of course but giving a playoff team a win in game they do not play is absurd.  Just go with winning percentage if you can't make up the game.

 
One, get the current cases under control so teams don't face a competitive disadvantage. It's like they're saying it's someone's fault for getting sick and they need to be punished. Example Cam maybe getting it because he went to see his kid in Atlanta on an off day, and the Pats losing their starting QB for a big game (and believe me I'm no Pats apologist).
Bruce Smith missed a playoff game in 1996 because he had influenza.  Should the NFL have rescheduled that game?  If not, how is the Cam Newton situation any different?

 
Bruce Smith missed a playoff game in 1996 because he had influenza.  Should the NFL have rescheduled that game?  If not, how is the Cam Newton situation any different?
I knew this was coming LOL. So you're saying Covid is the same as the flu? Not my intention to open that debate, but you see where this could go.

 
I think the idea is to kind of "reset" the season -- use the pause to contact-trace, isolate positives and exposed persons, and then let cases peter out to zero. Then restart with better protocols.

Can cases get down to zero again? And can better protocols even be developed? And if so, will those protocols succeed? Those are all exercises left for the reader.
Yeah, I guess to me those questions are completely unknowable, making the shutdown somewhat pointless.

I agree that they should be furiously working on solutions, but I'm not sure that a shutdown would affect those that much.

 
Ministry of Pain said:
Middle of Summer in Florida and Texas was no picnic, I didn't know we had this virus pegged to certain seasons of the year as being better or worse... 

That response is a bit sarcastic but I would beg folks not to inject personal opinions into this CV-19 thread, there's an entire thread with more open lanes over in the Free For All. 

I understand where you are coming from, and I know you're not trying to get under anyone's skin but everyone has a differing opinion or belief, much of it comes down to personal comfortability, some folks want to wear a mask by themselves in a outside park with no one around them, I find that to be a little over the top but right now we are not really allowed to question folks for taking precautions, not allowed to question local government closing the beaches, etc...so let's try and stick to Xs and Os please. 

Thanks and Cheers!
Ministry of Pain said:
I would beg folks not to inject personal opinions into this CV-19 thread
Guess what you just did, three times in one response?

 
Yeah, I guess to me those questions are completely unknowable, making the shutdown somewhat pointless.

I agree that they should be furiously working on solutions, but I'm not sure that a shutdown would affect those that much.
The argument would be it mostly worked for the NBA and NHL. Not so much with baseball. Also can be said it's comparing apples to oranges though. 

 
Can cases get down to zero again? And can better protocols even be developed? And if so, will those protocols succeed? Those are all exercises left for the reader.
Yeah, I guess to me those questions are completely unknowable, making the shutdown somewhat pointless.

I agree that they should be furiously working on solutions, but I'm not sure that a shutdown would affect those that much.
In theory, getting cases back to zero is very much possible -- it's just that the means to do so may be unpalatable to the players (hard isolation -- no families, no outings, no exposure to non-team personnel).

 
The argument would be it mostly worked for the NBA and NHL. Not so much with baseball. Also can be said it's comparing apples to oranges though. 
yeah, nba and nhl are very different because they were further along in the season, so in some ways there were fewer variables to worry about.  also, it's much easier to stop and start and condense games in those sports, especially when in a bubble, since there are so many more games (i.e. each one isn't as important) and they don't need the same type of recovery and planning for every single game.

I guess if the NFL thought that it would be viable to set up 4-6 bubbles or something, then maybe it would be worth shutting down.  Other than that, I'm not sure what great solutions they will come up.

 
In theory, getting cases back to zero is very much possible -- it's just that the means to do so may be unpalatable to the players (hard isolation -- no families, no outings, no exposure to non-team personnel).
yeah, i'm sure that they technically can, but it seems impossible in a realistic way, unless they are really going to go to a bubble.  if they are actually considering that, then i agree it is worth thinking about.

 
You can't be an asymptomatic carrier of the flu.
I don't mean to get us offtrack, but this isn't correct.
"One in three influenza-infected individuals is asymptomatic.4 Mathematic models of influenza transmission and control have included presymptomatic and asymptomatic individuals.2,4–7 The proportion of transmission by asymptomatic individuals, defined as Theta (Τ) in transmission models, is assumed to be one-third to one-half that of influenza-infected symptomatic individuals"  (Source: NIH)

 
In theory, getting cases back to zero is very much possible -- it's just that the means to do so may be unpalatable to the players (hard isolation -- no families, no outings, no exposure to non-team personnel).
True, but if the alternative ends up being less game checks and cancelled games, and less chance to maximize your earnings in a sport where your earning potential is capped by time, would they agree to it. Not sure, it does infringe on personal freedoms, but we're all going through that now, and they get paid a lot more than most of us do.

 
I don't mean to get us offtrack, but this isn't correct.
"One in three influenza-infected individuals is asymptomatic.4 Mathematic models of influenza transmission and control have included presymptomatic and asymptomatic individuals.2,4–7 The proportion of transmission by asymptomatic individuals, defined as Theta (Τ) in transmission models, is assumed to be one-third to one-half that of influenza-infected symptomatic individuals"  (Source: NIH)
You can infect someone if you are asymptomatic at the time with the flu but it is much less likely than if you have C19.

This is different than being an asymptomatic carrier. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If the Bills and Titans fo get to play Tuesday, can/does the NFL move Packers and Bucs to Thursday?  Fox still gets the marquis gale, can put it in prime time...they can keep Bills and Chiefs on Fox for Sunday afternoon.

Packers coming off of a bye and Bucs off of a Thursday game already so no “short” weeks for either team.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top