Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) Tweeted:
Patriots-Chiefs will kick off at 7:05 ET with full telecast on Monday night on CBS; Falcons-Packers kicks off at 8:50 et, per source. https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1312768788954259459?s=20
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 (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Joe Bryant
- Start date
Patriots-Chiefs will kick off at 7:05 ET with full telecast on Monday night on CBS; Falcons-Packers kicks off at 8:50 et, per source. https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1312768788954259459?s=20
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Doug B
Footballguy
Atlanta's DB didn't spread COVID to any other players that we know of. There is that apparent precedent of one guy on a team getting it and not starting an outbreak. Nevertheless, strictly you are correct.
Counterpoint: If Newton tested positive Friday, that means he was likely exposed sometime over the previous weekend, maybe as early as Thursday 9/24 and maybe as late as Tuesday 9/29 (going by mean incubation period of 3-8 days). It would seem somewhat more likely than not, then, that some of Newton's teammates would have been exposed through him early- to mid-last-week during practices. It also seems somewhat more likely than not that a teammate, then, would've tested positive Saturday through probable exposure to Newton.
So, the apparent (?) fact that the rest of the Patriots' players so far have tested negative could be meaningfully positive. Not time to spike the football, and not time to do away with a Sunday just-to-be-safe test ... but positive enough to feel OK about proceeding with a game Monday night.
ericttspikes
Footballguy
I'm keeping Goff in over Mahomes but putting Kelce in over Eifert. II'm willing to risk the Kelce upside over Eifert but would rather take the Goff points today.
I know you guys don't care, but fyi, I went with what seemed to be majority opinion here to allow backup lists. Couldn't wait for consensus in my league as no one was saying anything either way. A few were for it, and a few would be indifferent and many just didn't respond. I don't make rule changes lightly but you guys have shown me the way. Really appreciate the discussion here to help me make an educated decision.
Last edited by a moderator:
Man In The Box
Footballguy
Question for those who are changing their rules and allowing owners to use subs for Pats/Chiefs. What is your plan if say on a Sunday afternoon, after the late games kickoff, someone from the late game or Monday night game comes up positive and one of those games gets postponed. Are owners with players in those games screwed if they don’t have a replacement that hasn’t played yet?
Doug B
Footballguy
My money leagues** went radio silence yesterday. I emailed the commissioner within an hour of the Newton positive-test news and tried to get a discussion started -- no response. There are a few guys who I know would dig in their heels, though.
** two 12-team live-draft leagues -- one redraft, one keep-6 -- with the same commissioner and eight owners in common.
Phantom Knight
Footballguy
Perhaps, this has been brought up in thread. If so, forgive me for not having time to read all 14 pages right now before posting.
I know lots of leagues have measures in place for postponed or canceled games. But what if only last-minute notice is given? Imagine if the Saints-Lions positive had proven true. And the unexpected notice was only hours before kickoff. And it was a Monday night game (meaning all/most alternates had already played). Hopefully it doesn't happen, but it is certainly within the realm of possibility.
Without something in place to indicate HOW one would get substitutes into lineups from players who had already played, a league would probably have to consider scrapping that week here. And that could get hard to manage if your platform (MFL,CBSSPorts, ESPN, Yahoo, fleaflicker, etc) does not have something in place to allow us to annul certain weeks. Imagine having to track all won-loss records, total points scored, etc. for the rest of the season and then manually calculate playoff seedings. As a commissioner, I say, shoot me now!
What I will be implementing for this (unlikely) circumstance is to name a 3rd party ranking list. Then using the rankings from that site, I would substitute in the highest ranked (pre-kickoff) player that could fill the spot in question. If the flex spot could be involved, I would rearrange players positions in the lineup if that would allow a higher seeded play to take the spot of the cv'ed player.
I know lots of leagues have measures in place for postponed or canceled games. But what if only last-minute notice is given? Imagine if the Saints-Lions positive had proven true. And the unexpected notice was only hours before kickoff. And it was a Monday night game (meaning all/most alternates had already played). Hopefully it doesn't happen, but it is certainly within the realm of possibility.
Without something in place to indicate HOW one would get substitutes into lineups from players who had already played, a league would probably have to consider scrapping that week here. And that could get hard to manage if your platform (MFL,CBSSPorts, ESPN, Yahoo, fleaflicker, etc) does not have something in place to allow us to annul certain weeks. Imagine having to track all won-loss records, total points scored, etc. for the rest of the season and then manually calculate playoff seedings. As a commissioner, I say, shoot me now!
What I will be implementing for this (unlikely) circumstance is to name a 3rd party ranking list. Then using the rankings from that site, I would substitute in the highest ranked (pre-kickoff) player that could fill the spot in question. If the flex spot could be involved, I would rearrange players positions in the lineup if that would allow a higher seeded play to take the spot of the cv'ed player.
Doug B
Footballguy
I'm starting to heavily question the sanctity of the "starting lineup decision" given the specific circumstances of the 2020 season. Without complete and timely information, the whole exercise of setting a starting lineup gets all skill-and-knowledge elements completely removed. There's lots of luck in fantasy football ... but it's not supposed to be 100% luck. A FFB manager knowing the game and accurately evaluating players is still supposed to make the difference in a fantasy team's fortunes.
Probably the ideal and fairest-to-all solution is to just score by best-ball going forward, even if the software or league set-up doesn't really support it without heavy commissioner intervention.
My 2 cents. Provisional only works if decided before games are played. You cannot select a player after knowing their score. That just wouldn't be fair as its revisionist. You just have to deal with getting screwed if games get cancelled. That's the only way imo.
Doug B
Footballguy
That's just best-ball under another name. It's fair if everyone is on board and everyone gets to benefit.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
I can't speak for every hosting site, but lots of them allow commissioners to manually make whatever changes are needed and having the game re-scored. Even without the direct ability to make those changes, many sites will allow commissioners to requests those changes to be made through a trouble ticket through the hosting site.
I think we were talking about a scenario where you have to decide if its best ball after scores are known. So people deciding to best ball would decide based on whether or not they would win the game if you switched rules.
Phantom Knight
Footballguy
A bye week is not necessarily a wash. If an owner selected his team to cover his bye weeks. And now the bye weeks change leaving him exposed (especially if he is further hit by other game's being moved to a different week as has happened this week), that is not a wash.
I agree that we cannot have knee jerk reactions with rules. It is unfortunate (as often happens in our little game of ff). But there comes a point where it cannot be remedied and simply must be accepted. But "wash" is not the term I would use.
Phantom Knight
Footballguy
I understand the reasoning, although I don't agree with it. It is not hard to envision one or more teams having their season ruined for something that could have been remedied. But, certainly there is no perfect solution and every year there is usually some degree of blind luck involved in who wins and who doesn't.So our league decided against the designate a backup. We're going with play at your own risk.
Phantom Knight
Footballguy
I got tired. Real. Tired. Of owners that do not care enough to place their votes in a league poll. I find it unfair that a commish/league should be handcuffed by owners who care less than others. So I now take a point of view and place my polls noting that any uncast votes will be counted as a "Yes". If you disagree, great! Cast your vote. If you don't disagree or don't care one way or the other or disagree but not enough to click a button... your vote will be counted in favor of the pending vote.
rick6668
Footballguy
If you are going to allow provisional players, you need to allow them for EVERY game.
I can see it happening now, team with Mahomes and Hill get to select provisionals, opponent with Matt Ryan and Julio. Monday Morning, Matt Ryan tests positive, Falcons/GB game postponed as a BYE, That guy will be stuck with 2 zeros.
You allow provisionals, you better allow it for every player for every game. Only way to do that is to list you QB1, QB2, RB1, RB2, RB3, RB4, RB5, WR1,WR2 etc.
Then players move up in the ranking only if their game is not played.
It's already unfair for for teams who had players play on Thursday. One guy has Watkins and Hill, M Thomas injured, Slayton and Jeudy. He cannot set provisionals for both Watkins and Hill. All lists should have to be submitted before the weeks games start.
At this point I say do nothing and let the cards fall where they may.
I can see it happening now, team with Mahomes and Hill get to select provisionals, opponent with Matt Ryan and Julio. Monday Morning, Matt Ryan tests positive, Falcons/GB game postponed as a BYE, That guy will be stuck with 2 zeros.
You allow provisionals, you better allow it for every player for every game. Only way to do that is to list you QB1, QB2, RB1, RB2, RB3, RB4, RB5, WR1,WR2 etc.
Then players move up in the ranking only if their game is not played.
It's already unfair for for teams who had players play on Thursday. One guy has Watkins and Hill, M Thomas injured, Slayton and Jeudy. He cannot set provisionals for both Watkins and Hill. All lists should have to be submitted before the weeks games start.
At this point I say do nothing and let the cards fall where they may.
Last edited by a moderator:
Man In The Box
Footballguy
Correct. If you’re going to try to be fair this week you need to plan ahead and be fair every week.
Phantom Knight
Footballguy
That concern is the whole point of stating beforehand what would be done - without owners having the benefit of having seen how their player did before making a substitution.
Let's say:
- We are using FBG pre-game rankings.
- You have on your bench Anthony Miller and Justin Jefferson.
- Pre-game, FBG ranks Jefferson higher of the two.
- A game gets cancelled at the last minute and several owners had no opportunity to make a substitution.
- Both Miller and Jefferson have already played. Miller outscored the higher ranked Jefferson, let's say by a lot - perhaps 15 points.
- Because Jefferson was ranked higher pre-game, Jefferson would get substituted into the owner's lineup and the owner has no say in the matter at that point.
Phantom Knight
Footballguy
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Can we all take a moment to appreciate that we get to witness the greatness that is Brian Hoyer, while listening to announcers lament on the downfall of the legend that never was, Jarett Stidham?
Dwayne Hoover
Footballguy
I agree with you and this is the problem when you start making tweeks. You can never cover for every situation and while you think you are doing the right thing, you may tweek to help one set of GMs and then others can't be helped. Better to stay out of overmanaging these situations.
This is why I was afraid of doing this. We are going to have to overmanage this season. Really it looks like it should have been best ball from the start. But if leagues wanted best ball they would have been best ball.
What is fair this week is probably unfair next week. Oh well.
What is fair this week is probably unfair next week. Oh well.
incogneato
Footballguy
Same here. Commish who is in firesale mode and doesn't care about wins/losses just shot it all downSo our league decided against the designate a backup. We're going with play at your own risk.
Sam Quentin
Footballguy
Seems fair to allow provisional players for every player, every game.
This would be a great idea even in non-COVID seasons.
FUBAR
Footballguy
That would be tough.
Yeah, my options were Mahomes and Haskins. I'll risk the zero
Navin Johnson
Footballguy
Man In The Box
Footballguy
Nope, sorry. Changing rules on the fly is asking for unnecessary headaches. Been doing this for a long time and learned the hard way.
Sure it's possible, even likely- the Titans have a week to sign subs and/or get PS guys ready or whatever they have to do.
Since there were so many reported cardiac issues, the NFLPA and NFL agreed to a return protocol for moderate to significant cases that will keep them out at least a week to be monitored. "HIPAA won't allow" the Titans to tell us if someone is in the hospital or under more care than something casual (how to word?) but every player that is, they won't play in the Bills game.
We had the Titans go from asymptomatic to symptomatic and that's worse, obviously, but any progression after does not have to be reported and players privacy comes in. We might need to send well wishes or prayers or whatever and we wouldn't know.
if the case is minor, it's as you'd expect.
If it is moderate to severe, then they'll return at least a week later as they're monitored for cardiac issues. I saw brain or nervous system issues this morning but no one confirming. Basically, since the season started later than others, they got to see after effects of severe cases so they added a return protocol to test for that stuff
A guy on Dallas ESPN pointed out (and I think this is a great point) the schedule really is the limiting factor here.
If we conceded not everyone will ever be happy and do what's best for players health (and schedule changes) it becomes a whole lot easier.
Suppose the Titans and Pats were out this week. The Steelers could have simply played KC with the Titans playing the Pats later.
Everything here would certainly be a slippery slope- but that means that team has a harder schedule and that team an easier one and (no disrespect to Carlton as I love his SOS stuff) are we really sure the SOS is even across all 32 teams? This seems like a small concession to make in a pandemic. Remember almost half the teams make the playoffs now so even with changes it still should be realistic who makes it.
Someone suggested seeding if 4 or more teams positive, I like that. Someone suggested similar records play to have a better/realistic draft order. Not sure I get it, but fine.
The draw here was also that if you're covid free, you might get an extra week or two off before the playoffs.
I wouldn't doubt there are a handful of people here that would be more than capable of making a modified schedule. I really like this concept; although the NFL has not at all said anything about doing this and straying from the schedule
If we conceded not everyone will ever be happy and do what's best for players health (and schedule changes) it becomes a whole lot easier.
Suppose the Titans and Pats were out this week. The Steelers could have simply played KC with the Titans playing the Pats later.
Everything here would certainly be a slippery slope- but that means that team has a harder schedule and that team an easier one and (no disrespect to Carlton as I love his SOS stuff) are we really sure the SOS is even across all 32 teams? This seems like a small concession to make in a pandemic. Remember almost half the teams make the playoffs now so even with changes it still should be realistic who makes it.
Someone suggested seeding if 4 or more teams positive, I like that. Someone suggested similar records play to have a better/realistic draft order. Not sure I get it, but fine.
The draw here was also that if you're covid free, you might get an extra week or two off before the playoffs.
I wouldn't doubt there are a handful of people here that would be more than capable of making a modified schedule. I really like this concept; although the NFL has not at all said anything about doing this and straying from the schedule
A link is always preferable. Especially on something important like a covid report.
If that's a problem for you, deal with it.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Not sure what the plan is at this point. Earlier in the day, places referenced that the teams would be tested tonight. But Schaffer tweeted that if there are no issues with the tests tomorrow then the game will be played as rescheduled. I am not sure what that means. Did they test guys again already today? Are they not testing guys again today? Are they doing the more accurate test that takes much longer tonight and a quick test in the morning? No one has come out and said what they are doing.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
No more news before kickoff of these 8pm games? Damn. Torn but I think I’m gonna risk it and bench Mullen and Ward for my Mahomes and Tyreek. #### it!
Doug B
Footballguy
No news since, either. I assume the Patriots players, coaches, and staff went through another round of testing yesterday? Perhaps we’ll hear results this morning?
Doug B
Footballguy
Indeed.
If I've read all the news correctly since Saturday morning ... all players on both teams (minus Newton and the Chiefs' scout QB) have tested negative both on Saturday and on Sunday.
themeistersinger
Footballguy
Steve Tasker
Footballguy
Thought I saw on Twitter earlier that the Patriots were checking into their hotel prior to going to the stadium for the game?
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
So here’s the thing....let’s say, hypothetically, the game tonight between KC & NEP is played.
And a few days later, let’s say Thursday, 8 NEP players test positive & 7 KC players test positive.
This game seems really, really risky to me. The NFL is taking a massive gamble that these player’s early negative tests are meaningful. And they might be - I’m not saying it isn’t possible for this to go off without a hitch.
But if it doesn’t and two teams have a major outbreak as a result...oof. I can’t imagine the repercussions. It could get ugly in a hurry.
And a few days later, let’s say Thursday, 8 NEP players test positive & 7 KC players test positive.
This game seems really, really risky to me. The NFL is taking a massive gamble that these player’s early negative tests are meaningful. And they might be - I’m not saying it isn’t possible for this to go off without a hitch.
But if it doesn’t and two teams have a major outbreak as a result...oof. I can’t imagine the repercussions. It could get ugly in a hurry.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
There is probably less cause for concern because Cam is said to be asymptomatic. The Titans had guys that had active symptoms, which according to some medical folks make them more likely to spread things to others.
As far as exposure to Cam, the logic seemingly is the rest of the team would have been exposed to him on Thursday, so this would be viewed as Day 4 since they were exposed. The league seems to think that someone would have shown symptoms by now if there was going to be an outbreak. I have been posting all week that the league has been rolling the dice prematurely on when they determine teams can proceed all systems go (which really doesn't fit the CDC guidelines). Hopefully they are right this time around (but to be safe they probably should have waited longer to give the go ahead).
Doug B
Footballguy
No idea of the Patriots plans, or how flexible they've been in the past. I know that after the Saints Week 2 MNF game at Las Vegas, Sean Payton made an impromptu call right after the game to NOT have the team fly back to New Orleans that night as originally scheduled. Instead, the team stayed in their hotel through Tuesday afternoon, and Payton scheduled a film session at the hotel during the day.
Doug B
Footballguy
Probably earlier than that, right? The Patriots held practice on Wednesday, I'd have thought. And does Belichick use Tuesday as a completely "off" day, or do players still come into the facility for film, medical treatment, one-on-one work, etc.?
Anarchy99
Footballguy
I don't really know what they usually do either, but I do know that they planned on flying the team in two jets . . . their own team owned jets . . . which they can't do for some red tape reason. So half the team is flying out of Boston and half the team is flying out of Providence on different planes. They are splitting the team and flights into two groups: personnel that were in close contact with Cam and those that were not.
I think part of the reason they would likely want to fly home is they haven't really practiced much with Hoyer, haven't been able to practice at all with him once Cam was ruled out, and it's unlikely Newton will be available to play against the Broncos next week. So they probably want to get as much going as soon as possible once they get back.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
I am sure they were exposed to Cam all week, but I thought the rule of thumb was someone was contagious the day before they tested positive. So if Cam tested positive on Friday, they could use Thursday as the day they were exposed. I really don't know the official NFL policy on that, but that's what I had heard for people in general.
Doug B
Footballguy
I haven't found good sites that tease apart "before testing positive" and "before experiencing symptoms". Nevertheless, I'll offer this:
Further reading making a similar point.
