JoshAllenHasBigHands

It was the NFLPA that refused the bubble idea, not Goodell.

Do you know the answer to the question? Do guys who opt out still get to have their contract pushed out if the season is cancelled?

Whhhhhhoooaaaaaa. That was a terrible idea. They are incentivizing guys opting out, especially if they try to read the tea leaves and conclude the season will be canceled. What if a guy opts out, but then the season is canceled. Does that result in his contract getting pushed. Or is his 2020 contract year cancelled as well?

"So those will push into 2021 and '22?" The cap hit rolls over into the following year?

Weird time we live in that to correct an untruth necessarily means I also support Trump. Truly sad stuff. Just so ya know: I HATE Trump. But I care about truth.

Yes. Actively misquoting him is done for no other reason than to stoke fear and make him look bad.

Well, my wife is in the Teacher’s Union, so it was at the top of my mind. Im saying your comment is stupid because you are advocating that misrepresenting people’s statements to stoke fear is good.

This is stupid

No body took it that way until a bunch of irresponsible journalists desperate to make Trump look bad took his quote out of context and tweeted it without context. It would have been a non-story but for the media’s response.

Yes. He is saying the accusation that he is not taking the virus response seriously is a "hoax." He is not saying the virus, itself, is a hoax. You know, for a guy that claims this isn't about "politics," you really haven't shut up about it.

Yup. Trump spoke in a secret code that only his supporters have access to. Pretty cool that you figured it out.

@HappyDays Biden called him xenophobic; Pelosi and De Blasio encouraged people, in light of the China travel ban, to disregard the virus and attend the Chinese New Year celebrations. Take a look at twitter generally, however, and people were quick to call him racist for the travel ban. This in conjunction with the obsession over whether he should call it the Chinese/Wuhan virus.

The real heroes.

Sort of a distinction without a difference. I appreciate that the original graph was much more comprehensive. I really wish a similar graph existed for this point in time. That said, the conclusion to be drawn is that States that mandate facemasks show a decrease in cases. The opposite happened in California. Its still a point that needs to be addressed.

I don't want to sound like I'm in the anti-facemask camp. I'm really not. But I think California sort of belies this point.

You think the States were ever going to listen to Trump? I mean, really? Trump banned travel from China, and the left accused him of being a racist. DeBlasio encouraged New Yorkers to go to the Chinese New Year festivities. Hypothetically, if, before the virus really took off, Trump, on the advice of medical experts, called for the nation to quarantine -- businesses to close, people to stay home, people to stop wearing protective gear -- do you really think the States would have listened?

You are dead right about the first piece. Republicans would have been absolutely terrible situation reversed. That said, Trump didn't call it a hoax. I feel like that has been fact-checked enough that people shouldn't still be making that claim.

This is such an obtuse response. Death rates matter, and you know it matters. We don't know what the hospitalization rate for children is from the flu; however, it follows that if the death rate is lower for COVID-19, so too is the hospitalization rate for COVID-19.

That's like 2000 players that have to go a year without a salary

JA will do the same after every sack.

Yes, but despite that, children die at a minimal rate due to COVID-19. This doesn't make the point you think it does.

It sucks. This whole thing sucks. To your point, you are right. That said, if you removed the number of adults above the age of 65 (retirement age), you aren't losing that many people (I don't use the term teachers, because I understand its more than just teachers). Same, more or less, for people with underlying conditions. You are right, but it doesn't really change the conclusion. But its important to have accurate information. Thanks.

That is true. And I dont mean for my comment to suggest that there are not risks associated with opening schools. Its just important that all the facts are right. The fact that children are not at risk for this disease is an important fact of which people need to be aware, but which they are not. To be frank, there will be risk up until the point we have a vaccine. Waiting that long is not a realistic option. It just isn't. I think we can all agree on that, right? Maybe I presume too much.

You revealed yourself as not being a serious person to respond to a while back. Hence the "wow."

Well, the science is pretty clear that COVID-19 isn't particularly dangerous for children. Fun fact: the CDC has only recorded 12 pediatric deaths due to COVID-19. For reference, the flu took 174 children this year, and the year before it took 400 children. We good now? Wow