Starting to think there is no way they play football in 2020

[ColoradoBills]

3 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Patience and strict compliance with the social distancing mandate.

 

That's what I'm doing and hoping most of our citizens are doing the same.

It's a small price to pay to protect the elderly and health care workers IMO.

Every American generation has challenges they must endure.

[SectionC3]

7 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:

 

that ONE GUY is an infectious disease expert at John Hopkins.  He's not just some random guy.  He also talks about the harm from cancelling voluntary surgery procedures unless absolutely necessary.  

 

really, it is totally fair to say that all experts do not agree with a total lock-down.  There is an expert, saying that a total lock-down is likely to cause more harm than good.  And what is a "total lock-down" anyway.  

 

Nice try, but you’re forgetting what you said and taking my response completely out of context. 

 

You said, and I quote,  “infectious disease experts do NOT AGREE with a total lockdown.”

 

I responded by noting, among other things, that the article you cited referred to a cost-benefit analysis discussed by a single expert.  In view of the narrow scope of that article, I specifically said that, “it’s not fair to say that experts do NOT AGREEwith a total lockdown based on that article.”  

 

Now, you’ve modified your position and said that “it is totally fair to say that all experts do not agree with a total lockdown.”  That point accounts for the fact that you have referenced only a single expert in support of the “no-lockdown” point, but ignores the prospect that the expert at issue simply wonders at what point the cost of an extended lockdown would outweigh the benefit of that tack.  

 

With that, I’m done arguing on the Internet for the day.  And, frankly, I responded to the aforementioned nonsense only because we’re in the midst of a national crisis in which the stupidity and selfishness of others may affect the “group” (e.g., our community as a whole).  Generally I have a libertarian view about such things.  Want to smoke cigarettes?  Go for it.  You’ll probably help keep Social Security alive for my generation.  Want to drink yourself stupid on Friday nights?  Have at it, as long as you don’t drive or assault anyone.  But this is different.  And we have to be smart about things and work together to maintain the institutions that we love (and so that we have the ability to argue about such institutions when all of this hopefully passes).  

[Capco]

1 minute ago, ColoradoBills said:

Every American generation has challenges they must endure.

 

"There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen."  

 

―Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

[DrDawkinstein]

6 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:

 

the idea of a Wuhan lock-down v. do-nothing is a false dichotomy.  The middle ground, which is what most states do with their "shelter in place", etc. orders is done to prevent a lock-down, while keeping small businesses running to the extent practicable (take out, delivery, etc.).  

 

 

 

This is obviously the most ideal approach. But what do you do when millions of Americans choose to ignore that order because "freedom & liberty" and keep going out anyways? Especially with the mixed messaging we are getting from leaders.

 

I dont think any of us want a Wuhan style lockdown. But if people dont start taking personal responsibility, theyre gonna have a bad time.

[Chandler#81]

Warning Alert!

 

We do have rules & policies regarding posting of political views. You are not adhering.

This gets shut down on the next political post. Mod inboxes are blowing up!

 

Thank you.

 

C#81

[HappyDays]

2 hours ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

No, but the effects of the "cure" are going to be worse than the disease. But, carry on shamer.

 

 

Millions of people getting sick enough to require intensive care and possibly die will have a much larger negative economic effect than imposed quarantine for a couple months. The stock market will rebound if we are able to stop the spread of the virus.

[DrDawkinstein]

1 minute ago, HappyDays said:

 

Millions of people getting sick enough to require intensive care and possibly die will have a much larger negative economic effect than imposed quarantine for a couple months. The stock market will rebound if we are able to stop the spread of the virus.

 

Great point and one that some folks are missing.

 

Small businesses may take a hit, same may even close. But it wont be as bad as the hit they take if their employees and patrons are DEAD.

[SectionC3]

3 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Millions of people getting sick enough to require intensive care and possibly die will have a much larger negative economic effect than imposed quarantine for a couple months. The stock market will rebound if we are able to stop the spread of the virus.

 

 

Bill Ackerman and the money people agree with this.  Completely.  Entirely.  Because it’s right, from both a human and an economic perspective.  And if we want to worry about whether Stefon Diggs fits well at the “X” receiver come July (instead of stressing about where I’m going to find a gallon of 1% milk for my kids), it’s time to take it seriously.  Now I’m done.  Whether you agree or disagree with what I’ve said here, I hope that you all are safe and that you and your loved ones are healthy.  We’re all in this together. 

Edited March 24, 2020 by SectionC3

[Dopey]

I think the season will start in October and end in Jan.

17 weeks would be the end of Jan. No games in London or Mexico.

No media week between the end of the playoffs and the Super Bowl.

[RyanC883]

20 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

Nice try, but you’re forgetting what you said and taking my response completely out of context. 

 

You said, and I quote,  “infectious disease experts do NOT AGREE with a total lockdown.”

 

I responded by noting, among other things, that the article you cited referred to a cost-benefit analysis discussed by a single expert.  In view of the narrow scope of that article, I specifically said that, “it’s not fair to say that experts do NOT AGREE with a total lockdown based on that article.”  

 

Now, you’ve modified your position and said that “it is totally fair to say that all experts do not agree with a total lockdown.”  That point accounts for the fact that you have referenced only a single expert in support of the “no-lockdown” point, but ignores the prospect that the expert at issue simply wonders at what point the cost of an extended lockdown would outweigh the benefit of that tack.  

 

With that, I’m done arguing on the Internet for the day.  And, frankly, I responded to the aforementioned nonsense only because we’re in the midst of a national crisis in which the stupidity and selfishness of others may affect the “group” (e.g., our community as a whole).  Generally I have a libertarian view about such things.  Want to smoke cigarettes?  Go for it.  You’ll probably help keep Social Security alive for my generation.  Want to drink yourself stupid on Friday nights?  Have at it, as long as you don’t drive or assault anyone.  But this is different.  And we have to be smart about things and work together to maintain the institutions that we love (and so that we have the ability to argue about such institutions when all of this hopefully passes).  

 

my response was totally in-line, and I have not modified my position.  Indeed, you continue to argue against the incontrovertible fact that I've presented, which has been consistent, that being, experts do not agree that a total lock-down is advisable.    The fact that you continue to argue with this is proof that I've been consistent.  

 

You stated that "it's not fair to say experts do not agree with a lock-down."  It is.  This guy does not agree with a lock-down, at least not the type you are apparently proposing based on your earlier post that seemingly advocates for a Wuhan style lock-down.  You  advocated a Chinese communist Wuhan lock-down, which no expert that I have read is advocating for.  Even Fauci has not advocated for that.  

 

In terms of you responding to "the aforementioned nonsense," I'm sorry that a contrary view to yours (that being the Wuhan model is a bad idea) is automatically deemed nonsense.  You clearly are an expert, despite citing zero authorities in support of your position.  

 

I do agree that we need to be smart about things, but simply shutting things down China-style will not work, it will cost people their jobs, and indeed literally kill people.  Yes, stay inside and away from others, but a whole scale lock-down is overboard, and likely counterproductive.    

Edited March 24, 2020 by RyanC883

[BobChalmers]

3 hours ago, uticaclub said:

If this doesn’t end next week, football is going to be the least of anyones concern

 

It's not ending next week.

 

Think more in terms of 6-8 weeks.

 

NOT months though - NFL season will be fine.

[nucci]

1 minute ago, BobChalmers said:

 

It's not ending next week.

 

Think more in terms of 6-8 weeks.

 

NOT months though - NFL season will be fine.

well,  8 weeks is 2 months.....jk

[RyanC883]

12 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

This is obviously the most ideal approach. But what do you do when millions of Americans choose to ignore that order because "freedom & liberty" and keep going out anyways? Especially with the mixed messaging we are getting from leaders.

 

I dont think any of us want a Wuhan style lockdown. But if people dont start taking personal responsibility, theyre gonna have a bad time.

 

I totally agree with your overall post, esp. personal responsibility,  but I don't believe that millions of Americans are ignoring that order to only go out for food, exercise, and essential items.   IF they were, restaurants would still have dine-in.  This isn't happening--at least not that I'm aware of.  Schools and other venues would be opening, not happening.  Sure, some people may be ignoring certain things, but it's generally not happening at a large scale level.  

 

 

 

 

 

15 minutes ago, Chandler#81 said:

Warning Alert!

 

We do have rules & policies regarding posting of political views. You are not adhering.

This gets shut down on the next political post. Mod inboxes are blowing up!

 

Thank you.

 

C#81

 

thanks.  how do we report political posts?  I only responded because they continued to be appearing unabated.  Then, of course, I got a warning.  

[DrDawkinstein]

Just now, RyanC883 said:

 

I totally agree with your overall post, esp. personal responsibility,  but I don't believe that millions of Americans are ignoring that order to only go out for food, exercise, and essential items.   IF they were, restaurants would still have dine-in.  This isn't happening--at least not that I'm aware of.  Schools and other venues would be opening, not happening.  Sure, some people may be ignoring certain things, but it's generally not happening at a large scale level.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Good. But that is mostly because those business have been ordered to close. Not because folks took the personal responsibility. I think we both know that if those places were open, people would be out.

 

I'm not arguing against you, just more discussing human nature, and moreso... Americans.

3 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:

 

thanks.  how do we report political posts?  I only responded because they continued to be appearing unabated.  Then, of course, I got a warning.  

 

There's a link in the upper-right of every post that says "Report Post"

[Oregonbillsfan]

 

This is something to worry in private about, not something to post.  The situation with covid19 is depressing already.  Are you a Pat's fan trying to harsh our buzz??

[jrober38]

37 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:

 

this isn't "one guy."  This is a noted infectious disease expert at Hopkins.  Besides, where are the people who are arguing for a Wuhan-type response of total lockdown?  The goal is to avoid that by what most people are doing now, avoid nonessential socializing, etc.  

 

the idea of a Wuhan lock-down v. do-nothing is a false dichotomy.  The middle ground, which is what most states do with their "shelter in place", etc. orders is done to prevent a lock-down, while keeping small businesses running to the extent practicable (take out, delivery, etc.).  

 

 

 

The middle ground is the worst option. 

 

If a business loses all revenue for 1 month with an enormous government bailout, vs seeing a 30% drop over 6 months, what's the better option?

[Gordio]

26 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Great point and one that some folks are missing.

 

Small businesses may take a hit, same may even close. But it wont be as bad as the hit they take if their employees and patrons are DEAD.

 

Meanwhile 31 million Americans have caught the flu this year & 30K people have died from it.  My one friend has been a Pharmacist for 20 years.  He has told this is a strong flu strain & it is downright criminal how the media has portrayed this.  He also says once the tests results come in, he expects the death rate % to be similar of the flu or even less.  Just one guys opinion, but I think when people look at this they need to keep these numbers in mind.

 

 

[Coach Tuesday]

26 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:

 

Indeed, you continue to argue against the incontrovertible fact that I've presented, which has been consistent, that being, experts do not agree that a total lock-down is advisable.    

 

And again, I'm not arguing politics, I'm pointing out that the article you linked to for this point does not support it.  It quotes ONE expert who is NOT an economist and who does NOT say that a total lockdown is not advisable, just that you need to balance competing interests and be careful.

Edited March 24, 2020 by Coach Tuesday

[Hapless Bills Fan]

4 hours ago, DFT said:

I’m pretty hopeful, but that’s probably just the “optimism amidst downtime”, talking.  The good thing is that even though things are pretty much at a standstill, the NFL is still working through their options and are making really strong decisions.  With the exception of Sean P and his affinity for ordering cheesesteaks during quarantine.  

 

But seriously, for as much grief as Goodell gets (and some deservedly), he’s a “war-time” commissioner who’s motivated by money and profitability.  If there’s a way to make the year happen in a worst-case scenario, my money’s on him getting it done.   

 

Wat?

[Hardhatharry]

4 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said:

Until there is a full stay-at-home lockdown they won't "flatten the curve." Meanwhile spring break is in full swing in South Florida.

No spring break got killed over the weekend with the closing of beaches finally.

4 minutes ago, Gordio said:

 

Meanwhile 31 million Americans have caught the flu this year & 30K people have died from it.  My one friend has been a Pharmacist for 20 years.  He has told this is a strong flu strain & it is downright criminal how the media has portrayed this.  He also says once the tests results come in, he expects the death rate % to be similar of the flu or even less.  Just one guys opinion, but I think when people look at this they need to keep these numbers in mind.

 

 

Your pharmacist friend don't know what he is talking about and probably needs to stop spreading false information.