Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Does player safety matter?


Recommended Posts

Is all the NFL doing in this season to try to make rich owners happy worth the risk of harm it does to the league in the long run?

We saw some leagues do it right, in my humble opinion, the NFL has done this all wrong. I can list them, but for the sake of keeping it simple, I wont.

Is the product worth the risk this year to the players safety? At the very least, the NFL lost any argument in the future on player safety. Not just player safety, the risk of regular hard working men and women within the facility. Coaches are getting really sick and these are older folks in some cases.

I could have done without football at the rate this is going. We are about to get a game without QBs and games have been moved, but player safety? This isnt a good NFL product, but rich owners need to get paid.

If we want to add the context to fantasy football, every league will have an asterisk by it as teams are gutted on a Saturday before the week. You wanna win a title that way? I dont, Ill take the cash, but cmon, its weak. This is unlike any season.  Im of the take, the league must suspend play, not just for the safety of players but for the very communities they play and practice in. Their non playing employees?

 

Edited by Razors Edge
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve said from the beginning that the NFL doesn’t really care about player safety, and frankly many of the players don’t really care about their own safety, so they were going to do whatever it took to get in as many games as possible. And that’s what’s happened. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The NFL, sadly, is not much different than the rest of the United States right now.

At least if people don't want the product the NFL putting out there, fans can always not buy their gear, turn off the TV, etc.

Edited by trader jake
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

Is all the NFL doing in this season to try to make rich owners happy worth the risk of harm it does to the league in the long run?

We saw some leagues do it right, in my humble opinion, the NFL has done this all wrong. I can list them, but for the sake of keeping it simple, I wont.

Is the product worth the risk this year to the players safety? At the very least, the NFL lost any argument in the future on player safety. Not just player safety, the risk of regular hard working men and women within the facility. Coaches are getting really sick and these are older folks in some cases.

I could have done without football at the rate this is going. We are about to get a game without QBs and games have been moved, but player safety? This isnt a good NFL product, but rich owners need to get paid.

If we want to add the context to fantasy football, every league will have an asterisk by it as teams are gutted on a Saturday before the week. You wanna win a title that way? I dont, Ill take the cash, but cmon, its weak. This is unlike any season.  Im of the take, the league must suspend play, not just for the safety of players but for the very communities they play and practice in. Their non playing employees?

 

Any employee is allowed to opt out this season if they dont feel safe.

Working in a grocery store for 10-15 an hour is probably much more dangerous with thousands of people coming and going every day.

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Pip's Invitation said:

I’ve said from the beginning that the NFL doesn’t really care about player safety, and frankly many of the players don’t really care about their own safety, so they were going to do whatever it took to get in as many games as possible. And that’s what’s happened. 

I think players care about their own safety, but many (most?) care more about making the money while they can. 

The NFL "cared" enough to finally do something about head injuries but only after it became blatantly obvious that they ignored the issue (or lied about it) for years.

The NFL, more so than other sports, is modern day Gladiators. Are you not entertained?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Da Guru said:

Any employee is allowed to opt out this season if they dont feel safe.

Working in a grocery store for 10-15 an hour is probably much more dangerous with thousands of people coming and going every day.

Yes, though I didnt know my opinions of the grocery store which should also be closed, really mattered here in discussing player safety.

But, funny you talk about stores being worse, yet when someone catches covid they close down and sterilize, at least where I live...not the NFL, they make the rest of your team play

Edited by Razors Edge
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FUBAR said:

I think players care about their own safety, but many (most?) care more about making the money while they can. 

The NFL "cared" enough to finally do something about head injuries but only after it became blatantly obvious that they ignored the issue (or lied about it) for years.

The NFL, more so than other sports, is modern day Gladiators. Are you not entertained?

Will let you know after I see a practice sqaud WR play QB against one of the best Ds in the NFL today.

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Razors Edge said:

Yes, though I didnt know my opinions of the grocery store which should also be closed, really mattered here in discussing player safety.

But, funny you talk about stores being worse, yet when someone catches covid they close down and sterilize, at least where I live...not the NFL, they make the rest of your team play. 

No player has to play. They are playing for the $$$$$.    If I were in my 20s and getting games checks of 100-500K a week.  I would play and roll the dice.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Da Guru said:

No player has to play. They are playing for the $$$$$.    If I were in my 20s and getting games checks of 100-500K a week.  I would play and roll the dice.

I added to my post, but you must of hit respond before my edit.

But I dont get the justification to be forced to opt out of your job because rich owners need to make money in unsafe conditions.

Yay for unions, who also dont care about player safety clearly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It also depends upon which side of the issue one is on. And then once protocols are put into place one must follow.

The Great Reset or the Great Awakening. 

Edit: In the meantime sports is a big distraction for many and without it life changes. What is the truth here around all of this?

Edited by Team Smokin'
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Da Guru said:

No player has to play. They are playing for the $$$$$.    If I were in my 20s and getting games checks of 100-500K a week.  I would play and roll the dice.

 

10 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

I added to my post, but you must of hit respond before my edit.

But I dont get the justification to be forced to opt out of your job because rich owners need to make money in unsafe conditions.

Yay for unions, who also dont care about player safety clearly.

These are both great posts.  The problem therein is that the players with enormous contracts have job security, were they to opt out, but likely don’t want to opt out and miss out on making millions (or tens of) whereas bottom of the roster players without job security can’t afford to opt out, because a job may not await them when next season begins.  And also, even the lowest paid players are making quite a bit of coin relative to any other profession they might pursue.  
 

But it’s become pretty clear that the NFL realized early on after trying to screw around with rescheduling games, that the show must go on.  Team and player safety be damned. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Da Guru said:

No player has to play. They are playing for the $$$$$.    If I were in my 20s and getting games checks of 100-500K a week.  I would play and roll the dice.

This is why I don’t fault the NFL as much, because the players don’t worry about their safety as much either. The players could have opted out. Very few did that because the game check was more important to them. I bet if the NFL decided to cancel the rest of the season you would see players going nuts because they want to get paid. I doubt there would be any players speaking in favor of the league “looking out for them” in that way. 
 

You can’t fault a business for trying to stay open when the workers and the customers (us) all are pushing for them to stay open. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

These teams keep violating protocols. The same protocols they put in place to keep themselves safe. If their coaches, many of whom are in the higher risk category due to age and weight, can’t be bothered to wear masks and follow protocols, how can we expect a bunch of 20 something’s to stay on track. 
The human race is weird. The more people you get in a group the stupider they collectively become.

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

I added to my post, but you must of hit respond before my edit.

But I dont get the justification to be forced to opt out of your job because rich owners need to make money in unsafe conditions.

Yay for unions, who also dont care about player safety clearly.

I gues the final decision is up to the players and the players union to decide.

If the rich owners cancelled the whole season nobody would be getting a paycheck. The players who are there want a paycheck.

So I guess the question is why do fans care about player safety when the players themselves don`t?  Heck the defensive players do not even like the new rules on hitting let alone COVID.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Da Guru said:

I gues the final decision is up to the players and the players union to decide.

If the rich owners cancelled the whole season nobody would be getting a paycheck. The players who are there want a paycheck.

So I guess the question is why do fans care about player safety when the players themselves don`t?  Heck the defensive players do not even like the new rules on hitting let alone COVID.

I mean when your livelihood is attached to your insane income, I dont think many will think clearly especially in a short career window. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

I mean when your livelihood is attached to your insane income, I dont think many will think clearly especially in a short career window. 

I agree.  I would be doing the same thing.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Da Guru said:

I gues the final decision is up to the players and the players union to decide.

If the rich owners cancelled the whole season nobody would be getting a paycheck. The players who are there want a paycheck.

So I guess the question is why do fans care about player safety when the players themselves don`t?  Heck the defensive players do not even like the new rules on hitting let alone COVID.

You think fans are a monolith? How about players? You think the Tepper, Ross and Kahn are on a level playing field with Mara, Davis and Brown?

I know, nuance is a PITA, downright unAmerican. IME these issues are not simplistic.

Every player has a different perspective. Some guys are just trying to hang onto the Dream by their fingernails and know they’ll never see this kind of money again. Others are off their rookie contract and know they need to protect their most valuable asset. A handful of guys are thinking not only LT about their career but their quality of life beyond the game.

But in simplest, broadest terms, no I don’t think most owners care at all, not nearly as much as they care about wealth preservation. And looking at the 1,696 players under contract, I don’t think the vast majority give Covid or safety much thought - or they willfully choose to push those thoughts away bc family (& providing for them) is everything.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, skinsrule05 said:

This is why I don’t fault the NFL as much, because the players don’t worry about their safety as much either. The players could have opted out. Very few did that because the game check was more important to them. I bet if the NFL decided to cancel the rest of the season you would see players going nuts because they want to get paid. I doubt there would be any players speaking in favor of the league “looking out for them” in that way. 
 

You can’t fault a business for trying to stay open when the workers and the customers (us) all are pushing for them to stay open. 

Every business wants to stay open. Some have more power to do so than others. Few businesses yield the power of the NFL.

38 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

I mean when your livelihood is attached to your insane income, I dont think many will think clearly especially in a short career window. 

Yep. Plus, these players are young and in better shape than most people. While there are exceptions, this virus generally hits the old and physically weak hardest. Of course these guys feel they're unlikely to get really sick.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If it took until week 12 for this kind of post I would say the NFL has done well.  Way better so far than I thought it would go.

However at this rate it's going to be nothing but headaches for fantasy owners that for sure, and NFL games are going to be cancelled.  Maybe lots of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are not only playing to "keep rich owners happy."  The players want to play and get their money too.  As others have mentioned players could have opted out, but not many did.  They were given a choice and most chose to play.  There is a very small chance that COVID will have any serious impact on the players.

Out of all the guys that tested positive have any opted out?  Have any of their teammates opted out after a guy on their team tested positive?  I don't believe so.

Edited by ICON211
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pip's Invitation said:

I’ve said from the beginning that the NFL doesn’t really care about player safety, and frankly many of the players don’t really care about their own safety, so they were going to do whatever it took to get in as many games as possible. And that’s what’s happened. 

Seriously, the players could have easily practiced living in a bubble, even though they weren't forced to... and avoided these kinds of outbreaks. For that kind of money, you'd think they could go a couple of months without needing to do whatever they wanted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also add that cancelled seasons (regardless of cause) hurt pro sports long term. I don't have numbers but there are people who find something else to do/watch and never really come back. If you believe football only cares about money, it's both short and long term money on the line.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, BoerumHill said:

You think fans are a monolith? How about players? You think the Tepper, Ross and Kahn are on a level playing field with Mara, Davis and Brown?

I know, nuance is a PITA, downright unAmerican. IME these issues are not simplistic.

Every player has a different perspective. Some guys are just trying to hang onto the Dream by their fingernails and know they’ll never see this kind of money again. Others are off their rookie contract and know they need to protect their most valuable asset. A handful of guys are thinking not only LT about their career but their quality of life beyond the game.

But in simplest, broadest terms, no I don’t think most owners care at all, not nearly as much as they care about wealth preservation. And looking at the 1,696 players under contract, I don’t think the vast majority give Covid or safety much thought - or they willfully choose to push those thoughts away bc family (& providing for them) is everything.

I agree, if I were my 20s with a chance to attain wealth beyond what I would be capable of in a normal life I would do the same.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2020 at 7:36 AM, Razors Edge said:

Is all the NFL doing in this season to try to make rich owners happy worth the risk of harm it does to the league in the long run?

We saw some leagues do it right, in my humble opinion, the NFL has done this all wrong. I can list them, but for the sake of keeping it simple, I wont.

Is the product worth the risk this year to the players safety? At the very least, the NFL lost any argument in the future on player safety. Not just player safety, the risk of regular hard working men and women within the facility. Coaches are getting really sick and these are older folks in some cases.

I could have done without football at the rate this is going. We are about to get a game without QBs and games have been moved, but player safety? This isnt a good NFL product, but rich owners need to get paid.

If we want to add the context to fantasy football, every league will have an asterisk by it as teams are gutted on a Saturday before the week. You wanna win a title that way? I dont, Ill take the cash, but cmon, its weak. This is unlike any season.  Im of the take, the league must suspend play, not just for the safety of players but for the very communities they play and practice in. Their non playing employees?

 

What is entirely unsafe here? Despite all the positive tests (including numerous false positives), there has been 1 hospitalization and almost none of the positives have shown symptoms. You can say there is a vague threat of something bad happening but these men are in prime athletic condition and are working to make money that they won't be able to at a later point in their lives. Even the coaches who are older and not as in shape have decided to continue working at their job understanding the potential risks. The owners may be greedy but players forgoing a year of top quality pay for something they have a 99.9% chance (in their age and health bracket) of not only surviving but not even showing symptoms of is going to be worth it in their eyes every time. The window is too short for the player to give up that opportunity. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, ghostguy123 said:

If it took until week 12 for this kind of post I would say the NFL has done well.  Way better so far than I thought it would go.

However at this rate it's going to be nothing but headaches for fantasy owners that for sure, and NFL games are going to be cancelled.  Maybe lots of them.

I think the Denver game yesterday shows that there will be no cancellations unless the team has no players to play.

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

Denver could have avoided that.

I'm not saying they were wrong to play as is. Just evidence that the NFL will play on regardless. They might give concessions for more popular players/teams (ravens, pats) but the games will be played if there are players to play them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2020 at 7:36 AM, Razors Edge said:

Is all the NFL doing in this season to try to make rich owners happy worth the risk of harm it does to the league in the long run?

We saw some leagues do it right, in my humble opinion, the NFL has done this all wrong. I can list them, but for the sake of keeping it simple, I wont.

Is the product worth the risk this year to the players safety? At the very least, the NFL lost any argument in the future on player safety. Not just player safety, the risk of regular hard working men and women within the facility. Coaches are getting really sick and these are older folks in some cases.

I could have done without football at the rate this is going. We are about to get a game without QBs and games have been moved, but player safety? This isnt a good NFL product, but rich owners need to get paid.

If we want to add the context to fantasy football, every league will have an asterisk by it as teams are gutted on a Saturday before the week. You wanna win a title that way? I dont, Ill take the cash, but cmon, its weak. This is unlike any season.  Im of the take, the league must suspend play, not just for the safety of players but for the very communities they play and practice in. Their non playing employees?

 

Another problem with this post is that the players are making the same money while the owners are making less.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Insein said:

What is entirely unsafe here? Despite all the positive tests (including numerous false positives), there has been 1 hospitalization and almost none of the positives have shown symptoms. You can say there is a vague threat of something bad happening but these men are in prime athletic condition and are working to make money that they won't be able to at a later point in their lives. Even the coaches who are older and not as in shape have decided to continue working at their job understanding the potential risks. The owners may be greedy but players forgoing a year of top quality pay for something they have a 99.9% chance (in their age and health bracket) of not only surviving but not even showing symptoms of is going to be worth it in their eyes every time. The window is too short for the player to give up that opportunity. 

Can you say for certain Lamar Jackson or Driskell hasnt passed it on to someone who is now hospitalized? 

But safe to say we are still in the denying the virus is a bad thing phase after 9 months.  A post just asked whats unsafe about a virus, I cant wrap my head around that.

Did you  just ask whats unsafe about what scientists and doctors call a pandemic? Right on.

Whats unsafe about not wearing a seatbelt, right? 

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

Can you say for certain Lamar Jackson or Driskell hasnt passed it on to someone who is now hospitalized? 

But safe to say we are still in the denying the virus is a bad thing phase after 9 months.  A post just asked whats unsafe about a virus, I cant wrap my head around that.

Did you  just ask whats unsafe about what scientists and doctors call a pandemic? Right on.

Whats unsafe about not wearing a seatbelt, right? 

You're going to take this thread to the political forum with this line of questioning where there is a massive thread already on the topic. 

The likely hood that they passed on the virus to someone who was then hospitalized is the same or less than the rest of us. 95-99% unlikely. It's going to happen but it doesn't happen nearly as much as is being presented compared to the size of the population.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Insein said:

I'm not saying they were wrong to play as is. Just evidence that the NFL will play on regardless. They might give concessions for more popular players/teams (ravens, pats) but the games will be played if there are players to play them. 

I don't think that is evident at all.  The testing and contact tracing apparently indicated that it was contained to the players that were held out.  This was not the case with BAL and, if the game was played on Thursday, the players who have since tested positive would have been allowed to play and endanger players from PIT.  Not saying that the NFL is playing this straight, I am quite certain the aren't, but the BAL/PIT delay isn't necessarily the evidence people are purporting it to be.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Navin Johnson said:

I don't think that is evident at all.  The testing and contact tracing apparently indicated that it was contained to the players that were held out.  This was not the case with BAL and, if the game was played on Thursday, the players who have since tested positive would have been allowed to play and endanger players from PIT.  Not saying that the NFL is playing this straight, I am quite certain the aren't, but the BAL/PIT delay isn't necessarily the evidence people are purporting it to be.

Guess we'll find out Tuesday. 

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

You're going to take this thread to the political forum with this line of questioning where there is a massive thread already on the topic. 

The likely hood that they passed on the virus to someone who was then hospitalized is the same or less than the rest of us. 95-99% unlikely. It's going to happen but it doesn't happen nearly as much as is being presented compared to the size of the population.

To be honest, this now appears to be a rhetorical question and a litmus test as evidence already shows from court filings that the NFL doesnt care and acting as they do shows more of an agenda. 

Player safety includes this virus clearly and quite frankly and sadly, player safety has now been political unfortunately as player safety is determined by the politics of their region like Florida having fans and now SF 49ers in California not being able to play in their own city.

So yes, player safety is political, it seems and this is not just about the virus but about everything it entails, like how players now have a shorter IR because it almost seems the NFL understands that this game has gotten more extreme regardless of rules to police it. Also, I can argue having stadiums with artificial turf is a sign of lack of player safety.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2020 at 7:14 AM, Team Smokin' said:

It also depends upon which side of the issue one is on. And then once protocols are put into place one must follow.

The Great Reset or the Great Awakening. 

This. Where you align is key to how you'll answer this question. Some view the 'rona as a terrible catastrophe that requires constant vigilance... others see it as one of the biggest scams ever perpetrated on the world. Your opinion of it will color your answer. Regardless, this is drifting towards politics and maybe should be moved to a different forum. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tom Hagen said:

They had to opt out by August 6, it's no longer an option.

Didnt know this, it makes it even worse that these players are now forced to play to make money.

 

5 minutes ago, Navin Johnson said:

I don't think that is evident at all.  The testing and contact tracing apparently indicated that it was contained to the players that were held out.  This was not the case with BAL and, if the game was played on Thursday, the players who have since tested positive would have been allowed to play and endanger players from PIT.  Not saying that the NFL is playing this straight, I am quite certain the aren't, but the BAL/PIT delay isn't necessarily the evidence people are purporting it to be.

This game should be cancelled, not because of players missing, but its a darn certainty some are infected and not showing it but will pass it on, cuz you know...pandemic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Tom Hagen said:

They had to opt out by August 6, it's no longer an option.

For the most part yes:

There are two ways an NFL player can opt out of the 2020 season after Thursday's 4 p.m. ET deadline, according to NFL Network's Tom Pelissero. 

A new diagnosis reveals that the player has a high-risk condition 

A player's family member dies, is hospitalized or is otherwise moved to a medical facility because of a COVID-19 or related condition. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tom Hagen said:

They had to opt out by August 6, it's no longer an option.

They still can opt out under these conditions.

"However, players can still opt-out in two ways:

New diagnosis of a high-risk condition

Player’s family member dies, is hospitalized or otherwise moves to a medical facility because of COVID-19 or related condition"

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ICON211 said:

For the most part yes:

There are two ways an NFL player can opt out of the 2020 season after Thursday's 4 p.m. ET deadline, according to NFL Network's Tom Pelissero. 

A new diagnosis reveals that the player has a high-risk condition 

A player's family member dies, is hospitalized or is otherwise moved to a medical facility because of a COVID-19 or related condition. 

 

Just now, Insein said:

They still can opt out under these conditions.

"However, players can still opt-out in two ways:

New diagnosis of a high-risk condition

Player’s family member dies, is hospitalized or otherwise moves to a medical facility because of COVID-19 or related condition"

I did not know that. Thank you both.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

To be honest, this now appears to be a rhetorical question and a litmus test as evidence already shows from court filings that the NFL doesnt care and acting as they do shows more of an agenda. 

Player safety includes this virus clearly and quite frankly and sadly, player safety has now been political unfortunately as player safety is determined by the politics of their region like Florida having fans and now SF 49ers in California not being able to play in their own city.

So yes, player safety is political, it seems and this is not just about the virus but about everything it entails, like how players now have a shorter IR because it almost seems the NFL understands that this game has gotten more extreme regardless of rules to police it. Also, I can argue having stadiums with artificial turf is a sign of lack of player safety.

I mean if you want to go that route, I would say in general Owners care about player safety as much as it affects their bottom line. They want better equipment and better stadiums etc to protect their investment. They have no personal attachment to the player itself and if they should have a career ending injury, they are upset for the player but ultimately mad that they lost an asset to sell tickets. 

Owners never truly cared in any sport. We didn't need the virus to confirm that.

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

I mean if you want to go that route, I would say in general Owners care about player safety as much as it affects their bottom line. They want better equipment and better stadiums etc to protect their investment. They have no personal attachment to the player itself and if they should have a career ending injury, they are upset for the player but ultimately mad that they lost an asset to sell tickets. 

Owners never truly cared in any sport. We didn't need the virus to confirm that.

I understand and this is true for the overwhelming majority, but it appears the virus just exposed it more. This lack of attachment also makes it seem to me that some people are siding with players more in contracts than the teams, but I could be wrong in my take there.

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

This game should be cancelled, not because of players missing, but its a darn certainty some are infected and not showing it but will pass it on, cuz you know...pandemic.

If they can identify the players who are possibly carrying and not showing symptoms thru diligent contact tracing and hold them out along with the ones that tested positive then they should play regardless of the product that they are forced to put on the field but I think they won't be able to contain this by KO Tuesday.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That any of the issues raised here are new to you is a sign of one who has not thought critically about things like the league acting in the best interest of "player safety" beforehand. Your indignation, though, bespeaks something different. It sounds like you held a belief before and now want to take a victory lap with new evidence.

If so, you should have stated it more generally, been more informed about COVID, and just generally taken a different argument tactic than you took. But you also probably knew how welcome that all would be.

eta* Yeah, I see you laughing. You're the troll the troll wanted, and you damn well know it.

Edited by rockaction
  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
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.

×
×
  • Create New...