Dynasty League Football Forum

I have no doubt the season will start. Greed and arrogance will make it so. Although without a bubble protocol in place, the likelihood it finishes are slim.

FantasyFreak wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 3:45 pm With what's going on in MLB right now, it's really not looking good for football.

Agreed. Bills Rookies being sent home already feels pretty damning too.

I really don't know what to think anymore with the NFL. They don't have a plan. The plan appears to be "players are going to get it, and that's fine, it is what it is". Wish they'd flown the whole league down here to New Zealand like that ESPN piece suggested.

Imagine if one of the more elderly coaches catches this thing and dies or has serious health complications as a result. The league will never be able to wash that blood off their hands... (and god knows they're already bloody enough)

I think they should bubble the 8 divisions, play each team 3 times, top team moves on. AFC east only plays itself etc etc

mild wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 4:59 pm

FantasyFreak wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 3:45 pm With what's going on in MLB right now, it's really not looking good for football.

Agreed. Bills Rookies being sent home already feels pretty damning too.

I really don't know what to think anymore with the NFL. They don't have a plan. The plan appears to be "players are going to get it, and that's fine, it is what it is". Wish they'd flown the whole league down here to New Zealand like that ESPN piece suggested.

Imagine if one of the more elderly coaches catches this thing and dies or has serious health complications as a result. The league will never be able to wash that blood off their hands... (and god knows they're already bloody enough)

This is the type of hyperbole that adds zero value to rational discourse around COVID ... any coach or player that wants to opt out for personal consideration should be free to do so without anyone questioning their decision. On the flip side, any player or coach who will participate in the season is doing so fully knowing the risks ... no one should claim ignorance to the risk ... we all have free will and should make the best decisions for us and our families. Blaming the league is just BS.

I don’t understand why anyone would be against The use of hydroxychloroquine. Many doctors have stated that it has saved lives and it has been FDA approved forever. Seems like it should be looked at positively.

wickerkat1212 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 4:54 pm I think we're on the same page here. I've been home for four months. Haven't left the house except to pick up groceries at Target, take a walk with the dog, or pick up a prescription at Walgreens. I tested positive two days ago. My wife and kids tested negative. I don't know how I got it. Grocery delivery? Wife a carrier (she went to three stores one day, with mask). Luckily I'm asymptomatic. Seems to be a mild case. But I don't know what the long-term effects will be.

Sorry to hear that, sounds like you were being responsible. Hope all goes well. Do you mind me asking why were you tested, being that you’re asymptomatic?

If you are not comfortable answering, feel free to ignore or tell me to go kick rocks.

That's a little hyperbolic the other way isn't it? I think an organization like the NFL definitely has a responsibility to attempt to operate in the safest way possible - a responsibility they have seemingly ignored. And sure they know the risks but if it's a lower tier coach or equipment manager etc who isn't making millions per year is it really fair to say "they know the risk they can give up their paycheck for a year"? What about the cleaning and other support staff?

Not everyone employed by the NFL is raking in the cash. Some might not really have the means to just decide to be unemployed. The league should be doing something to lower risk to its employees.

Csl312 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 6:05 pm That's a little hyperbolic the other way isn't it? I think an organization like the NFL definitely has a responsibility to attempt to operate in the safest way possible - a responsibility they have seemingly ignored. And sure they know the risks but if it's a lower tier coach or equipment manager etc who isn't making millions per year is it really fair to say "they know the risk they can give up their paycheck for a year"? What about the cleaning and other support staff?

Not everyone employed by the NFL is raking in the cash. Some might not really have the means to just decide to be unemployed. The league should be doing something to lower risk to its employees.

They are.

FantasyFreak wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 6:22 pm They are.

But is it enough? Anything short of a bubble is basically admitting that the risk of a player catching COVID is an acceptable one, and the price of doing business in 2020.

I'm not being hyperbolic; I'm just pointing out the obvious. If players catching COVID is acceptable practice (and even fans if you believe some of these teams) then where does that buck stop? If Andy Reid bites the big one (knock on wood, but he might be the highest risk coach out there) because he doesn't want to be the one not showing up for his team - then yes, he will have died fully knowing the risk he took.

But the immediate public discourse will be "to what end" and "did we really need football in a pandemic" (no) and "could the league have done more to prevent this" (yes). It is not hyperbolic nor hard to foresee this.

azthecrow wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 5:46 pm I don’t understand why anyone would be against The use of hydroxychloroquine. Many doctors have stated that it has saved lives and it has been approved forever. Seems like it should be looked at positively.

Yes, it is one drug that us under review, I dont know that I've seen anything from many doctors, but the WHO doesn't think much if it, and the FDA has removed its emergancy use authorization and stated it may do more harm then good, please seek your physician for a case by case recommendation. Time will tell, but If an already common drug had a significant effect in treatment, why has covid spread so much?

millworkguy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:14 pm

azthecrow wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 5:46 pm I don’t understand why anyone would be against The use of hydroxychloroquine. Many doctors have stated that it has saved lives and it has been approved forever. Seems like it should be looked at positively.

Yes, it is one drug that us under review, I dont know that I've seen anything from many doctors, but the WHO doesn't think much if it, and the FDA has removed its emergancy use authorization and stated it may do more harm then good, please seek your physician for a case by case recommendation. Time will tell, but If an already common drug had a significant effect in treatment, why has covid spread so much?

Maybe because it has not been prescribed/used enough?
Also, my understanding is that it does not stop the spread but it has been an effective treatment for some patients helping them to recover more quickly.

azthecrow wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:56 pm

millworkguy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:14 pm

azthecrow wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 5:46 pm I don’t understand why anyone would be against The use of hydroxychloroquine. Many doctors have stated that it has saved lives and it has been approved forever. Seems like it should be looked at positively.

Yes, it is one drug that us under review, I dont know that I've seen anything from many doctors, but the WHO doesn't think much if it, and the FDA has removed its emergancy use authorization and stated it may do more harm then good, please seek your physician for a case by case recommendation. Time will tell, but If an already common drug had a significant effect in treatment, why has covid spread so much?

Maybe because it has not been prescribed/used enough?
Also, my understanding is that it does not stop the spread but it has been an effective treatment for some patients helping them to recover more quickly.

The available evidence does not support its use in the treatment of COVID-19 in any capacity. There’s now enough literature to pretty conclusively say that it doesn’t improve morbidity and mortality when given to patients with COVID. We also have not demonstrated benefit as post-exposure prophylaxis.

Now, I’m a physician. So these are opinions that I have because it’s my job to review this evidence and make these decisions. I’m wondering why you seem to have such a favorable opinion of this drug.

azthecrow wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 6:13 pmYes, I do remember that. Right now the polls say Biden will win. Deja vu?

azthecrow wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 6:03 pmDrew Brees was asked his opinion and he gave it. He should not have apologized. He is not ignorant, nor is he racist. He does not expect others to fall in line with his opinion unlike the bullies who are attacking him.
As for the team I think (hope) this will all blow over by the time the season starts.

Ah. There it is. It’s wild how predictable these things are.

OhCruelestRanter wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 8:21 pm

azthecrow wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:56 pm

millworkguy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:14 pm

Yes, it is one drug that us under review, I dont know that I've seen anything from many doctors, but the WHO doesn't think much if it, and the FDA has removed its emergancy use authorization and stated it may do more harm then good, please seek your physician for a case by case recommendation. Time will tell, but If an already common drug had a significant effect in treatment, why has covid spread so much?

Maybe because it has not been prescribed/used enough?
Also, my understanding is that it does not stop the spread but it has been an effective treatment for some patients helping them to recover more quickly.

The available evidence does not support its use in the treatment of COVID-19 in any capacity. There’s now enough literature to pretty conclusively say that it doesn’t improve morbidity and mortality when given to patients with COVID. We also have not demonstrated benefit as post-exposure prophylaxis.

Now, I’m a physician. So these are opinions that I have because it’s my job to review this evidence and make these decisions. I’m wondering why you seem to have such a favorable opinion of this drug.

azthecrow wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 6:13 pmYes, I do remember that. Right now the polls say Biden will win. Deja vu?

azthecrow wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 6:03 pmDrew Brees was asked his opinion and he gave it. He should not have apologized. He is not ignorant, nor is he racist. He does not expect others to fall in line with his opinion unlike the bullies who are attacking him.
As for the team I think (hope) this will all blow over by the time the season starts.

Ah. There it is. It’s wild how predictable these things are.

Yes, you are wildly transparent in that regard as well.

azthecrow wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 8:27 pm

OhCruelestRanter wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 8:21 pm

azthecrow wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:56 pm

Maybe because it has not been prescribed/used enough?
Also, my understanding is that it does not stop the spread but it has been an effective treatment for some patients helping them to recover more quickly.

The available evidence does not support its use in the treatment of COVID-19 in any capacity. There’s now enough literature to pretty conclusively say that it doesn’t improve morbidity and mortality when given to patients with COVID. We also have not demonstrated benefit as post-exposure prophylaxis.

Now, I’m a physician. So these are opinions that I have because it’s my job to review this evidence and make these decisions. I’m wondering why you seem to have such a favorable opinion of this drug.

azthecrow wrote: ↑Wed Jul 08, 2020 6:13 pmYes, I do remember that. Right now the polls say Biden will win. Deja vu?

azthecrow wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 6:03 pmDrew Brees was asked his opinion and he gave it. He should not have apologized. He is not ignorant, nor is he racist. He does not expect others to fall in line with his opinion unlike the bullies who are attacking him.
As for the team I think (hope) this will all blow over by the time the season starts.

Ah. There it is. It’s wild how predictable these things are.

Yes, you are wildly transparent in that regard as well.

Somebody explain to this guy that transparent and predictable mean different words.

But yes, I’m transparent: I make decisions based on the best available evidence. I will continue to do so. If the evidence changes, I will change my practice.

That’s different from pretending to be a physician when you’re not and offering completely unqualified medical opinions based on the position of the political party that your identity is tied to.

Any odds on the Patriots getting caught for cheating by trying to falsify positive tests for key players on their opponents the week they play them this year?