2020 Pats: Cam Tests Positive

Kenny F'ing Powers

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,909
Why does the NFL have to be so fucking stupid?

Theres NOTHING stopping them from extending the season a handful of weeks. Theres no competition for eyeballs in March. Why not scatter a few weeks off throughout the season where teams can make up games if needed? I mean, that's a bare MINIMUM ask, and they just decided "fuck it. We change nothing."

This league is run by fucking imbeciles.
 
Mystic Merlin

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
49,500
Hartford, CT
Yeah, they basically turned one of the biggest games on the regular season slate into a farce due to their arbitrary protocols that privilege a perception of safe and orderly completion of any and all games on schedule over actually accomplishing that, and at the cost of better quality of play. It’s a joke the Pats are traveling like 10 hours prior to game time.

And I would and will say the same thing if the roles are reversed where a Pats opponent is traveling same day.
 
Reggie's Racquet

Reggie's Racquet

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2009
7,731
Florida/Montana
Mystic Merlin said:
Yeah, they basically turned one of the biggest games on the regular season slate into a farce due to their arbitrary protocols that privilege a perception of safe and orderly completion of any and all games on schedule over actually accomplishing that, and at the cost of better quality of play. It’s a joke the Pats are traveling like 10 hours prior to game time.

And I would and will say the same thing if the roles are reversed where a Pats opponent is traveling same day.
Click to expand...
Well... after yesterday's games at least we can count on the officiating to be competent!
 
Captaincoop

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,858
Santa Monica, CA
54thMA said:
Thanks for the link to that story, that's the first I have read of this.

Oh well.
Click to expand...
Why does that tweet rule out a false positive? The positive test came up on Friday, there was not going to be time to get him cleared by Monday whether it was a false positive or not, so obviously they would need to put him on the Covid list to get a replacement available for the game. Is there some other information missing?

edit: it goes without saying, but I have no idea if Cam has Covid, is symptomatic, etc. All I know is that he had a positive test result - so he is something like 95% likely to truly have it.
 
Last edited:
Captaincoop

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,858
Santa Monica, CA
Mystic Merlin said:
Yeah, they basically turned one of the biggest games on the regular season slate into a farce due to their arbitrary protocols that privilege a perception of safe and orderly completion of any and all games on schedule over actually accomplishing that, and at the cost of better quality of play. It’s a joke the Pats are traveling like 10 hours prior to game time.

And I would and will say the same thing if the roles are reversed where a Pats opponent is traveling same day.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree, but there are not many perfect options this year. Expecting total competitive fairness is, well, not fair. I'm just happy we're getting games to watch at all.
 
Mystic Merlin

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
49,500
Hartford, CT
My primary issue isn’t competitive fairness (which is never achieved to perfection anyways, and you live with that to an extent), it is with the safety risk and impact to quality of play. What is the logic, based on what we know about COVID, for not quarantining the players who were contact traced to Newton? Why do contact tracing at all if all that matters are a few rounds of tests over a few days that we know don’t reliably indicate whether someone has COVID? Hell, the league/teams don’t even customarily test players on game day!

The real reason for this is the NFL is willing to disregard the known guidance on best practices in order to avoid ANY logistical inconvenience. Look at Peter King’s mouthpiece column from this morning, its narrative is all about the parade of horribles the league and teams face if they have to extend the regular season and postseason; it outright assumes the NFL protocols are congruent with best practices for containing spread and that there isn’t a safety risk attendant with their approach. (Note: this is actually a generous assumption I am making, as it is possible King or others don’t care or don’t understand or just are willing to defer to the league because HEY WE HAVE FOOTBALL AND WHY QUIBBLE)

And obviously ALL of this presents safety risk, but that doesn’t make it acceptable or logical to trade logistical risk against against safety risk to any or an arbitrary magnitude. I think they’re engaging in the latter here.

Once one assumes - and the league mouthpieces like King have made this easy to confirm - that the NFL privileges completing the season within its scheduled bounds over safety considerations, all of their decisions make sense. Nobody is seeking or expecting a ‘perfect’ solution. But I don’t think the absence of a perfect solution nullifies a discussion about whether the balance the league seems to be trying to strike is the right balance or is being struck when the league makes decisions on how to respond to confirmed positives. I think they’re fucking up on this, and for the wrong reason.
 
E5 Yaz

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
95,103
Oregon
So ... would fake-coughing by the offensive lineman tonight to plant seeds of doubt in the KC rush cost us a second-round pick?
 
Lose Remerswaal

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2002
55,072
Dicker and Dicker of Beverly Hills
Kenny F'ing Powers said:
Why does the NFL have to be so fucking stupid?

Theres NOTHING stopping them from extending the season a handful of weeks. Theres no competition for eyeballs in March. Why not scatter a few weeks off throughout the season where teams can make up games if needed? I mean, that's a bare MINIMUM ask, and they just decided "fuck it. We change nothing."

This league is run by fucking imbeciles.
Click to expand...
Other than the Supersized Big Dance, but I agree with you.
 
Oppo

Oppo

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2009
1,576
Re: complaining about NFL policy
Am I missing a CDC update?
Isolation can end for people that are asymptomatic 10 days after a positive test.
*Isolation can end earlier if you get 2 negative tests at least 24 hours apart*
NFL policy is asymptomatic, 5 days since positive test, and 2 negative pcr tests separated by 24 hours, cleared to return
 
Captaincoop

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,858
Santa Monica, CA
Mystic Merlin said:
My primary issue isn’t competitive fairness (which is never achieved to perfection anyways, and you live with that to an extent), it is with the safety risk and impact to quality of play. What is the logic, based on what we know about COVID, for not quarantining the players who were contact traced to Newton? Why do contact tracing at all if all that matters are a few rounds of tests over a few days that we know don’t reliably indicate whether someone has COVID? Hell, the league/teams don’t even customarily test players on game day!

The real reason for this is the NFL is willing to disregard the known guidance on best practices in order to avoid ANY logistical inconvenience. Look at Peter King’s mouthpiece column from this morning, its narrative is all about the parade of horribles the league and teams face if they have to extend the regular season and postseason; it outright assumes the NFL protocols are congruent with best practices for containing spread and that there isn’t a safety risk attendant with their approach. (Note: this is actually a generous assumption I am making, as it is possible King or others don’t care or don’t understand or just are willing to defer to the league because HEY WE HAVE FOOTBALL AND WHY QUIBBLE)

And obviously ALL of this presents safety risk, but that doesn’t make it acceptable or logical to trade logistical risk against against safety risk to any or an arbitrary magnitude. I think they’re engaging in the latter here.

Once one assumes - and the league mouthpieces like King have made this easy to confirm - that the NFL privileges completing the season within its scheduled bounds over safety considerations, all of their decisions make sense. Nobody is seeking or expecting a ‘perfect’ solution. But I don’t think the absence of a perfect solution nullifies a discussion about whether the balance the league seems to be trying to strike is the right balance or is being struck when the league makes decisions on how to respond to confirmed positives. I think they’re fucking up on this, and for the wrong reason.
Click to expand...
I haven't followed the Pats situation that closely, but I know the NFL has implemented technology that gives it much more detailed and reliable contract tracing data than we would have for any normal patient. That could explain some of the decision-making this week (and also the differences between the decisions in the Titans case and here).

I mean, also the NFL could just be dumb. But there's another plausible possibility here, at least based on the limited stuff I've read.
 
RedOctober3829

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
56,654
deep inside Guido territory
Captaincoop said:
I haven't followed the Pats situation that closely, but I know the NFL has implemented technology that gives it much more detailed and reliable contract tracing data than we would have for any normal patient. That could explain some of the decision-making this week (and also the differences between the decisions in the Titans case and here).

I mean, also the NFL could just be dumb. But there's another plausible possibility here, at least based on the limited stuff I've read.
Click to expand...
Each player wears a bracelet that tracks their movements within the facility and on the field so they know who is in close contact.
 
BigJimEd

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,608
Captaincoop said:
I haven't followed the Pats situation that closely, but I know the NFL has implemented technology that gives it much more detailed and reliable contract tracing data than we would have for any normal patient. That could explain some of the decision-making this week (and also the differences between the decisions in the Titans case and here).

I mean, also the NFL could just be dumb. But there's another plausible possibility here, at least based on the limited stuff I've read.
Click to expand...
I think the bigger question is more why aren't those close contacts in quarantine. A negative test a day or two after exposure doesn't mean much.
 
Ed Hillel

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
48,534
Here
You don’t say. Someone else testing positive four days after patient zero? What a surprise!

NFL is stupid, no way they should have played yesterday and no fucking way should Cam be allowed to show up later this week.
 
johnmd20

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
63,590
New York City
Ed Hillel said:
You don’t say. Someone else testing positive four days after patient zero? What a surprise!

NFL is stupid, no way they should have played yesterday and no fucking way should Cam be allowed to show up later this week.
Click to expand...
Can you stop saying this over and over and over and over and over again. WE GET IT. But you don't.
 
DJnVa

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
55,474
Ed Hillel said:
You don’t say. Someone else testing positive four days after patient zero? What a surprise!

NFL is stupid, no way they should have played yesterday and no fucking way should Cam be allowed to show up later this week.
Click to expand...
It has not been confirmed that Murray tested positive. Anyone that is in close contact with someone that tested positive can be placed on list. Let’s wait until we get more info.

Also, Cam cannot show up until he tests negative twice. If he does why should he be kept away?
 
Ed Hillel

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
48,534
Here
johnmd20 said:
Can you stop saying this over and over and over and over and over again. WE GET IT. But you don't.
Click to expand...
You said “over“ five times, but this is literally the second time I’ve said it’s too risky to play a game 3-4 days after someone tests positive, as it’s the peak time for the virus to show up in systems and It can take up to two weeks to do so. I understand they are tested every day, but tests are a snapshot and we are just hoping it doesn’t become live right before or during a game. When you have over 100 players or coaches who were in the same locker room and facilities as someone or someones infected, it’s a pretty substantial risk.
 
epraz

epraz

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2002
6,332
Yup makes sense and definitely doesn't contradict the known incubation period for covid-19 and testing sensitivity
 
DJnVa

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
55,474
soxhop411 said:
Again, NFL gives zero shits about player safety.. Thats not how the Virus works...
Click to expand...
epraz said:
Yup makes sense and definitely doesn't contradict the known incubation period for covid-19 and testing sensitivity
Click to expand...
Well, he tested positive, so the chances for 2 false negatives are very low. Most of them come if you test too soon after contracting it. That's not the case here. It's same system MLB used.
 
Oppo

Oppo

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2009
1,576
soxhop411 said:
Again, NFL gives zero shits about player safety.. Thats not how the Virus works...
Click to expand...
Maybe you should tell the CDC, who recommends isolation for 10 days for asymptomatic patients but that it can be shorter if 2 negative tests at least 24 hours apart.
But go ahead and play doctor.
 
NJ_Sox_Fan

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
11,679
NJ
Oppo said:
Maybe you should tell the CDC, who recommends isolation for 10 days for asymptomatic patients but that it can be shorter if 2 negative tests at least 24 hours apart.
But go ahead and play doctor.
Click to expand...

Thank you. This is the exact process we follow at my work - in nursing homes.
 
DJnVa

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
55,474
View: https://twitter.com/ZackCoxNESN/status/1314194999983173633

Also, got email from DraftKings:

We are writing to inform you that we have added the following player(s) to the Player Pool for the Thu - Mon, Sun - Mon, and Sunday Main NFL contests set to take place on Thu (10/8) at 8:20 PM ET and Sun (10/11) at 1:00 PM ET respectively:

Cam Newton - $6,700
Adam Humphries - $4,000
Ryquell Armstead - $4,000
Click to expand...
Vegas gets inside info, perhaps DK knows something?
 
johnmd20

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
63,590
New York City
Super Nomario said:
They know they don't mind if you waste your money
Click to expand...
Draftkings (not including the sports book) takes a cut of every "game" that is played on their website. There is always a winner and loser and DK keeps 10%. They don't care what players are chosen in any contest. That isn't a Vegas line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom