NFLPA President unhappy NFL doesn't have daily testing

[ndirish1978]

https://nflpa.com/posts/daily-covid-testing-is-the-key-to-a-full-nfl-season

 

Here you go. This thread will inevitably get shut down, but this letter from JC Tretter echoes concerns raised about the lack of daily testing this year. I think it is noteworthy.

Edited September 7, 2021 by ndirish1978

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

INdeed 🤔 

 

 

[Malazan]

I don't understand why the NFL itself would be against it. He probably needs to speak to the people he represents. 

Edited September 7, 2021 by jeremy2020

[RussellDopeland]

5 minutes ago, jeremy2020 said:

I somehow doubt the NFL itself is against it. He probably needs to speak to the people he represents. 

[MJS]

7 minutes ago, jeremy2020 said:

I don't understand why the NFL itself would be against it. He probably needs to speak to the people he represents. 

I think they want incentives for getting vaccinated. They might feel like players are no longer incented to get vaccinated if they have to get tested every day, and also may be fearing the backlash of players who got vaccinated because of the reduced protocols involved.

 

But I think they should be doing whatever necessary to ensure the least disruption from COVID, and to me that means daily testing for everyone.

[Matt_In_NH]

Its Covid, the rules can change at any time....if its not the right thing, change it.  I tend to agree, test everyone everyday and minimize the risk to taking a team down.

[Malazan]

8 minutes ago, MJS said:

I think they want incentives for getting vaccinated. They might feel like players are no longer incented to get vaccinated if they have to get tested every day, and also may be fearing the backlash of players who got vaccinated because of the reduced protocols involved.

 

But I think they should be doing whatever necessary to ensure the least disruption from COVID, and to me that means daily testing for everyone.

 

I think everyone should be tested daily especially if the NFLPA is coming to them now asking for it. They should jump on it. I suspect that is more of JC Tretter knowing that the players won't go for it, but sees a PR opportunity as well as a chance to play hero to the unvaxxed which some who have spoken publicy have said the vaxxed should be tested daily as well. 

 

It also backs up that the NFL has no reason to not test players daily. If they did it an incentive, it means they were trying to give the players something the players wanted. 

 

I personally expect a prominent vaxxed player to get it and a few weeks in and miss a prime time game or two then it will be daily testing. 

Edited September 7, 2021 by jeremy2020

[Doc Brown]

7 minutes ago, MJS said:

I think they want incentives for getting vaccinated. They might feel like players are no longer incented to get vaccinated if they have to get tested every day, and also may be fearing the backlash of players who got vaccinated because of the reduced protocols involved.

 

But I think they should be doing whatever necessary to ensure the least disruption from COVID, and to me that means daily testing for everyone.

That's what happens when you try to force players to try to get vaccinated without actually requiring it.  A better approach since we knew at the time we weren't out of the woods with this thing yet would've been to keep all policies in from last year and allow players to opt out again.  Then once multiple vaccines were FDA approved make it mandatory for the 2022 season if need be.

[RiotAct]

oh, dearie me.

[Mango]

7 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

That's what happens when you try to force players to try to get vaccinated without actually requiring it.  A better approach since we knew at the time we weren't out of the woods with this thing yet would've been to keep all policies in from last year and allow players to opt out again.  Then once multiple vaccines were FDA approved make it mandatory for the 2022 season if need be.

First, let me say I agree with you. I also think it would have been smart for the league to put language around mandates and FDA approval so that they could address this in season if need be. 
 

I think the problem with this from a league standpoint is having an available vaccine and an opt out may end up having way more opt outs. Just from a Bills perspective we could have lost Beasley, Milano, Davis, and Poyer (based on Rachel Bush). The league does not want to risk that kind of star power as well as product on the field. 

[Rochesterfan]

22 minutes ago, jeremy2020 said:

I don't understand why the NFL itself would be against it. He probably needs to speak to the people he represents. 

 

The NFL is against it because the cost.  They are alone absorbing the cost and last year the daily testing cost them close to 100 million dollars.

 

By setting it 2 weeks originally for vaxxed players/staff (let’s say 80% of players and all staff) during the season that equates to over 37,500 less tests performed every 2 weeks - at $125 a test - over 4.5 million in savings every 2 weeks or about 43 million in savings for the season.

 

At 1 time a week testing you cut that saving in half down to about 20 million in savings.

 

Daily testing goes back to the owners paying an additional 100+ million out of their profits.  
 

Plus I think the idea was to have incentives to get vaccinated, but the money is the driver.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

15 minutes ago, jeremy2020 said:

I don't understand why the NFL itself would be against it. He probably needs to speak to the people he represents. 

 

It's a good question. 

 

Here is an article on the NFL's protocols for reference

https://www.nfl.com/news/nfl-nflpa-agree-to-covid-19-protocols-for-regular-season

 

As an educated thought, I would guess

1) The NFL likely has a transmission model for intra-facility spread where, given the most recent data including from pre-season, they believe weekly testing will suffice to prevent intra-facility spread.

 

All players are required to fill out a daily health check and to report symptoms immediately and be tested

It's whether asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic infections of vaccinated players who are not known close contacts pose a transmission risk, that is the question. (Vaccinated close contacts are now required to test daily)

 

2) It's easier to step up testing as needed than to step down - once you have a program that works, the pressure is typically "on" not to back away from it. 

 

3) Additional testing is not "burden free" - in addition to logistical issues, all tests carry a burden of false positives and negatives

 

I think it's possible that the vaccinated staff and players would yell "bait and switch!" if they in fact got jabbed to avoid daily testing, but if the NFLPA is doing its job, the players, at least, are supposedly on-board.  So "incentives for vaccination" should not be a motivation to not test.

 

From the article linked above.  Changes I see as significant highlighted:

Quote

One unchanged rule is the high-risk close contact protocol. Fully vaccinated individuals will not be designated as high-risk close contacts, but can be held to daily testing for five days. Therefore, only unvaccinated players are at risk of missing games without a positive test.

Among other notable changes:

Effective immediately, fully vaccinated club medical staff, strength and conditioning coaches and equipment staff are required to wear masks when providing treatment, fitting equipment or otherwise directly dealing with players inside the club facility (excluding outdoors).

Players who are not fully vaccinated will not be required to wear masks at outdoor practices or walkthroughs, but face coverings are still mandatory indoors and in weight rooms.

Updates for traveling include a maximum of 75 non-player staff members in a traveling party, no public transportation, no private transportation for unvaccinated players and staff, and all members of the traveling party, whether fully vaccinated or not, must wear masks.

 

 

 

[Malazan]

5 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

The NFL is against it because the cost.  They are alone absorbing the cost and last year the daily testing cost them close to 100 million dollars.

 

By setting it 2 weeks originally for vaxxed players/staff (let’s say 80% of players and all staff) during the season that equates to over 37,500 less tests performed every 2 weeks - at $125 a test - over 4.5 million in savings every 2 weeks or about 43 million in savings for the season.

 

At 1 time a week testing you cut that saving in half down to about 20 million in savings.

 

Daily testing goes back to the owners paying an additional 100+ million out of their profits.  
 

Plus I think the idea was to have incentives to get vaccinated, but the money is the driver.

 

The potential cost of missing players and a damaged season would dwarf that. I can't imagine that 43 million is an amount they'd balk at to reduce the risk. 

 

The 'benefit' for vaccinated players seems more likely to me, but that isn't something the NFL wants.. that's something they've giving up because the players want it. 

 

2 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

I think it's possible that the vaccinated staff and players would yell "bait and switch!" if they in fact got jabbed to avoid daily testing, but if the NFLPA is doing its job, the players, at least, are supposedly on-board.  So "incentives for vaccination" should not be a motivation to not test.

 

That's why I tend to see this a PR move from Tretter. I don't think he has the players on board with it. 

Edited September 7, 2021 by jeremy2020

[Hapless Bills Fan]

4 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

The NFL is against it because the cost.  They are alone absorbing the cost and last year the daily testing cost them close to 100 million dollars.

 

By setting it 2 weeks originally for vaxxed players/staff (let’s say 80% of players and all staff) during the season that equates to over 37,500 less tests performed every 2 weeks - at $125 a test - over 4.5 million in savings every 2 weeks or about 43 million in savings for the season.

 

At 1 time a week testing you cut that saving in half down to about 20 million in savings.

 

Daily testing goes back to the owners paying an additional 100+ million out of their profits.  
 

Plus I think the idea was to have incentives to get vaccinated, but the money is the driver.

 

These are good points - "follow the Money" - and I think that only counts the actual testing costs, not the costs of courier services to deliver the samples.

 

Except - I can't find the regular season protocols yet but here are the preseason protocols

https://static.www.nfl.com/image/upload/v1627485241/league/z62pmhkip5is8ohxmqza.pdf

There are two interesting points with regard to testing cost:

1) One is agreement to transition to saliva-based testing as soon as it meets sensitivity and selectivity standards.  If it's the Salivadirect test used by the NBA, it is said to be less expensive (p 60)

2) The other is use of the so called "MESA test" or Mesa Accula Rapid PCR Test,  which is actually called out as acceptable daily screening test for unvaccinated players and weekly screening for vaccinated players and personnel.  This probably has higher reagent cost, but may be cheaper overall due to lower personnel and transportation costs. (I'm personally surprised it meets the sensitivity standards).   It would also likely not have the throughput to support daily testing for all

 

Perhaps you know how these factors enter into the costing equation?

 

And last....the cost to the NFL of additional daily testing of vaccinated players and staff could easily be countered by a pooled testing strategy, an approach that has been thoroughly vetted (see what I did there?) for application in low positivity situations by a large surveillance testing program nearby.  (Follow the cows.)

 

 

 

[wjag]

It probably has to do with the price.  I've done some checking because I have wondered what the 'free covid tests' were really costing the goverment.  I found one study that shows the largest percentage in their study (30%) ranged in the $100-$149 category.  So lets assume between players, coaches and staff, an NFL team needs to test 100 personnel (which I think is probably close, but low-ish).

 

$149 per test * 100 people  = $14,900 per day

$14,900 * 7 days = $104,300 per week

$104,900 * 18 weeks = $1,877,400 per regular season

$1,877,400 * 32 teams = $60,076,800 per regular season league wide

 

And I'm sure these costs don't scratch the surface of everything else that goes into testing, same day results, supplies, handling, reporting, doctors, etc...

 

 

Edited September 7, 2021 by wjag

[Hapless Bills Fan]

20 minutes ago, wjag said:

It probably has to do with the price.  I've done some checking because I have wondered what the 'free covid tests' were really costing the goverment.  I found one study that shows the largest percentage in their study (30%) ranged in the $100-$149 category.  So lets assume between players, coaches and staff, an NFL team needs to test 100 personnel (which I think is probably close, but low-ish).

 

$149 per test * 100 people  = $14,900 per day

$14,900 * 7 days = $104,300 per week

$104,900 * 18 weeks = $1,877,400 per regular season

$1,877,400 * 32 teams = $60,076,800 per regular season league wide

 

And I'm sure these costs don't scratch the surface of everything else that goes into testing, same day results, supplies, handling, reporting, doctors, etc...

 

 

 

IIRC, Rochesterfan who posted above actually has connections to Bioreliance and likely has accurate gouge on the testing cost, so plug his $ into your per-test cost.  Also see my caveats about cost impact of the MESA POC test and possible transition to saliva testing.

 

I'm pretty sure daily testing for all would cover more than 100 people.

It's 72 players counting practice squad and players on IR who may rehab here.

It's 91 people counting coaches and S&C

 

Add in Trainers, Medical Staff, Equipment, Performance Science, Player Engagement, FO people on the pro-player side, Food service, maintenance, security...could easily be 150-200 people who need to be tested every day.

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

35 minutes ago, jeremy2020 said:

That's why I tend to see this a PR move from Tretter. I don't think he has the players on board with it. 

 

That's possible.  Per Pelissaro, post cuts to the 53 man roster:

 

So JC Tretter may be speaking for the interests of ~160 players divided among 32 teams, vs the interests of about 2,150 players on 53-man rosters, PS, and IR

 

[Stanley Lombardi]

The sky is falling!

[Saxum]

1 hour ago, jeremy2020 said:

I personally expect a prominent vaxxed player to get it and a few weeks in and miss a prime time game or two then it will be daily testing. 

 

I hope it is Tom Br*dy because we know rules are changed when he is involved (i.e. Tuck Rule).

[Saxum]

45 minutes ago, wjag said:

It probably has to do with the price.  I've done some checking because I have wondered what the 'free covid tests' were really costing the goverment.  I found one study that shows the largest percentage in their study (30%) ranged in the $100-$149 category.  So lets assume between players, coaches and staff, an NFL team needs to test 100 personnel (which I think is probably close, but low-ish).

 

$149 per test * 100 people  = $14,900 per day

$14,900 * 7 days = $104,300 per week

$104,900 * 18 weeks = $1,877,400 per regular season

$1,877,400 * 32 teams = $60,076,800 per regular season league wide

 

And I'm sure these costs don't scratch the surface of everything else that goes into testing, same day results, supplies, handling, reporting, doctors, etc...

 

 

 

 

If the NFLPA is a NFL partner they should be sharing the cost but they won't because they aren't.

26 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

So JC Tretter may be speaking for the interests of ~160 players divided among 32 teams, vs the interests of about 2,150 players on 53-man rosters, PS, and IR

 

 

Not unusual for NFLPA who spend money and negotiating power to resist penalties on players who use illegal drugs when most (other than MJ according to unreliable sources) don't take them.