New NFL-NFLPA Covid protocols

[YoloinOhio]

 

[CorkScrewHill]

15 hours ago, YoloinOhio said:

 

This seems like a good way of handling things .. last year those that feared the virus could choose to sit out. This year those that fear the vaccine and don’t want to adhere to the policies .. can sit out without being cut etc. and hope that by next year they feel better about the vaccine or the virus risk is so reduced nobody cares to keep the policies in place.

 

 

Edited June 24, 2021 by CorkScrewHill

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, YoloinOhio said:

 

 

From the link, some differences:

Quote

Players deemed "higher risk" for COVID are again entitled to a $350,000 stipend but voluntary opt-outs will not be compensated

 

They are also apparently handling roster bonuses differently:

 

 

I'm not going to repost them here, but some of the responses to this Twitter are pretty funny

[Hapless Bills Fan]

 

[YoloinOhio]

 

[machine gun kelly]

Thanks for keeping us in the loop.  I hope the NFL and PA continue with these protections as it was a miracle we made it through the season last year.

[YoloinOhio]

 

[Heitz]

Wasn't quite sure where to drop this, but wow.

 

Mods if this is too close to the line, feel free to delete, but it's certainly relevant to the season...

 

 

 

 

[VaMilBill]

I agree with the idea, but I hate that they are really targeting unvaccinated players. It’s funny what Beane said earlier in the off-season about potentially cutting an unvaccinated player and the nfl yells at him. However, the NFL has taken a very passive aggressive stance against unvaccinated players to the point that jobs will be cost purely on the fact that a player is vaccinated or not. 
 

I think the better way here would be if a team had a COVID outbreak, regardless or vaccination status, the team would be liable to forfeiture and financial penalty. 

[YoloinOhio]

Egads what a mess 

[Rc2catch]

I get the forfeit idea after some of the messes last year, what I can’t get is players losing game checks for the forfeit. That’s incredibly dirty for the team not at fault to lose their pay when they did things the right way. I seen up top about possible financial losses having to be covered by an offending team but that didn’t say game checks for players, sounded to me like it’s worded more for the owners to recoup the ticket sales loss 

[Lionel Hutz]

26 minutes ago, VaMilBill said:

I agree with the idea, but I hate that they are really targeting unvaccinated players. It’s funny what Beane said earlier in the off-season about potentially cutting an unvaccinated player and the nfl yells at him. However, the NFL has taken a very passive aggressive stance against unvaccinated players to the point that jobs will be cost purely on the fact that a player is vaccinated or not. 
 

I think the better way here would be if a team had a COVID outbreak, regardless or vaccination status, the team would be liable to forfeiture and financial penalty. 

If players/teams take steps to decrease the spread of the virus (i.e. get everyone vaccinated) why should they be punished for an outbreak? 
 

You have to incentivize players to get vaccinated if you want decrease the risk of an outbreak. This is not complicated. 

[ndirish1978]

I feel like this has been poorly thought out by the NFL. You would think this is meant to forcefully "encourage" players to be vaccinated, but it's entirely possible that a team could have an outbreak amongst vaccinated players. I admit ignorance on the nuances of all the league's protocols, but from what I've read vaccinated players may leave the hotel when traveling to interact with vaccinated family members. Given that vaccination does not preclude infection, these guidelines seem to be contrary to the goal of minimizing chances of an outbreak. The guidelines, if followed by the players to the letter, actually increase the likelihood that a vaccinated player might be the cause of an outbreak by interacting with others outside of team facilities. I don't understand why they don't just make everyone stay in the hotel, it seems like the carrot/stick approach employed by the league is at odds with itself. 

 

Edited July 22, 2021 by ndirish1978

[patzen]

I'm not sure why Pelissero is making it seem like a big deal when literally no games got cancelled last year and cases were much higher than they are now. The odds of games getting cancelled are very low tbh.

[Simon]

Just a reminder to please keep this thread on topic and limited to commentary about NFL Covid protocols

[T&C]

What about players not getting vaxxed for religious reasons? I'd like to hear how the NFL will address that.

[ColoradoBills]

This quote from the article pretty much says it all.

 

t’s always been that simple. Today’s memo simply raises the stakes.

Beasley may bristle at this, but the simple reality is that vaccinated players will be tested once every 14 days. They’re more likely to be available because they won’t be tested for two weeks after their most recent test. Thus, they can’t suddenly be unavailable.

Non-vaccinated players assume a daily risk of being immediately unavailable. because they’ll be tested every day.

Beasley has yet to tweet in response to today’s memo. However, it’s becoming harder and harder for anyone to argue that vaccination status doesn’t directly impact a team’s competitive interests. After today’s memo, it’s impossible to make the argument.

After today’s memo, every unvaccinated player who isn’t a franchise quarterback or otherwise untouchable due to skill or cap reasons is at risk of being cut.

[Malazan]

1 hour ago, VaMilBill said:

I agree with the idea, but I hate that they are really targeting unvaccinated players. It’s funny what Beane said earlier in the off-season about potentially cutting an unvaccinated player and the nfl yells at him. However, the NFL has taken a very passive aggressive stance against unvaccinated players to the point that jobs will be cost purely on the fact that a player is vaccinated or not. 
 

I think the better way here would be if a team had a COVID outbreak, regardless or vaccination status, the team would be liable to forfeiture and financial penalty. 

 

Well, they yelled at him BECAUSE they knew they were going to have to go in this direction and what he said was true. 

[Doc Brown]

5 minutes ago, T&C said:

What about players not getting vaxxed for religious reasons? I'd like to hear how the NFL will address that.

They're technically not mandating it and the players had the option to opt after the revised protocols were issued for this season.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

43 minutes ago, ndirish1978 said:

I feel like this has been poorly thought out by the NFL. You would think this is meant to forcefully "encourage" players to be vaccinated, but it's entirely possible that a team could have an outbreak amongst vaccinated players. I admit ignorance on the nuances of all the league's protocols, but from what I've read vaccinated players may leave the hotel when traveling to interact with vaccinated family members. Given that vaccination does not preclude infection, these guidelines seem to be contrary to the goal of minimizing chances of an outbreak. The guidelines, if followed by the players to the letter, actually increase the likelihood that a vaccinated player might be the cause of an outbreak by interacting with others outside of team facilities. I don't understand why they don't just make everyone stay in the hotel, it seems like the carrot/stick approach employed by the league is at odds with itself. 

 

 

I think this is one of two valid points made by a Player who Shall Not be Named (admixed with a bunch of silliness and contradictory points, but valid is valid)

 

The NFL's protocols are appropriate for the Covid situation as it was last Fall and the initial data on vaccination, where data said a vaccinated person was ~12x less likely to get any form of the disease and even less likely to spread it.  That was Then, This is Delta.  The NFL really needs to get its medical experts into a room and have them look at the best available data current situation and modify their approach accordingly.

 

At this point, the whole thing seems like Sabre rattling to me. 

Weren't they saying a few weeks ago that games would not be re-scheduled at all?