Jump to content

HappyDays

Community Member
  • Posts

    26,605
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by HappyDays

  1. The problem with Tyrod is he got worse every season. We only have 2 years of data to look at for Allen but he's consistently gotten better from college to his rookie season, again into his 2nd year, and I think he played better the 2nd half of his 2nd year too. You can't just take Tyrod's numbers for 3 years with the Bills and make a 1:1 comparison with Allen's sophomore season.

  2. 14 minutes ago, VW82 said:

     

    Picks lose value as soon as you take someone until such time that the player proves they can play at a level commensurate with where they were selected. It's the same in all pro sports leagues.

     

    The main thing Tua has going for him is no one has seen him fail in the NFL yet whereas everyone has seen Josh go through the typical growing pains you often see from a young QB. Tua also has two more years than Josh on his rookie contract which is super valuable if you think he can perform right away. 

     

    Do you think any team would trade Josh Allen for Justin Hebert right now if they had the option? If not I would say the floor for a Josh Allen trade is pick #6.

  3. 6 hours ago, VW82 said:

    Teams aren't trading high draft picks for unproven guys.  

     

    Using a draft pick on a college QB is exactly that, though. Does Allen have a better chance of being a franchise QB than Tua? What about Justin Hebert? In this hypothetical scenario some team would give up an early 1st round pick for him.

  4. 17 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

    I'm saying I dont care who their QB is because our D is legit we just need to score.  

     

    Yeah even with Newton and assuming he is healthy the whole sesson, the Patriots are still a defensive team first. And they lost 3 starters on defense in free agency. Newton in the shape he's in is at best a lateral move from Brady. To beat them we need to score points. If Allen can do that, Newton isn't going to put the team on his back.

    • Like (+1) 1
  5. 14 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

    He has played with dog ? in Carolina

     

    The Patriots offense this year is as bad as he ever saw in Carolina. The last few games he played his body looked shot. There's a reason he got an incentive based contract that maxes out at $7.5 million. I'm sure Belichick is going to run the ball a ton this year so in that sense Newton is a good fit for them. All in all they are still a worse team than last year.

    • Like (+1) 1
  6. 2 hours ago, SCBills said:

    Aren’t many of the states with mandatory mask rules also the ones that are way behind the non-mandatory mask states in re-opening?... Pretty sure that is a way bigger reason than masks.  

     

    That's one possible factor - states that don't require masks may also have lenient policies across the board that contribute to the percentage increase. But that article also shows that the stringency of the mask policy itself also correlates to a rise or fall in cases. States that have a mask policy only in certain businesses also have seen cases drop, but not as much as states that have a universal mask policy. States that only require certain employees to wear masks have still seen an increase in cases, but not as much as states that have no mask policy at all. There is some level of correlation from mask policies to cases of the virus, even accounting for other factors.

     

    I always refer back to that hair salon where 2 stylists tested positive, but not one of their 140 customers or 6 co-workers tested positive after the fact. Everyone in that hair salon was required to wear a mask. Washing your hands and staying six feet apart is also important but I'm seeing more evidence that masks are the most important preventative measure. The virus doesn't appear to spread on surfaces very well. If you touch a door knob that a covid carrier touched you probably won't get it. If you talk to the carrier face to face that's where the risk is.

    • Like (+1) 1
    • Awesome! (+1) 3
  7.  

    This is some of the firmest evidence I've seen to indicate that wearing a mask is the best preventative measure one can take. From the linked article:

     

    Quote

    Sixteen states currently recommend, but do not require, that residents wear masks in public. In those states new coronavirus cases have risen by 84% over the last two weeks...


    In the 11 states that mandate wearing masks in public new cases have fallen by 25% over the last two weeks.

    Other states that are less stringent and require mask-wearing by employees and patrons of certain businesses have seen an overall 12% drop in cases.

    Meanwhile, states that require masks only for employees of certain businesses have seen a 70% increase, on average, in new cases.

     

     

    Not only does a mandate to wear masks directly correlate to a rise or fall in positive cases, the stringency of the mandate itself also correlates to how much the cases rise or fall.

     

    The more evidence that comes out the more convinced I am wearing a mask in public should be mandated nationally until a vaccine is developed.

    • Like (+1) 3
    • Awesome! (+1) 2
    • Thank you (+1) 1
  8. On 6/24/2020 at 4:19 PM, dwight in philly said:

    Just heard people of color do not have to wear masks in an oregon county.. as i have heard about the "science" on here.. what kind of "science"is that ? seriously .. i want to learn 

     

    I heard about that, it's a stupid policy with flimsy reasoning. But that's just one county. Don't let that confuse you. The science is still clear.

    On 6/24/2020 at 5:15 PM, Coach Tuesday said:


    Got a link?

     

    https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/24/us/oregon-county-people-of-color-mask-trnd/index.html

     

    Not to get off topic too much but the policy is very real and very stupid.

    [Edit: per the link above it sounds as if the county in question rescinded their stupid policy so, there's that]

  9. 26 minutes ago, dwight in philly said:

    my point is that masks should be up to the individual because of the unproven :"science"  about masks

     

    What sources do you have for the claim that this science is unproven? Here are a few sources I found that show the opposite:

     

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7191274/

     

    In the community, masks appeared to be effective with and without hand hygiene, and both together are more protective.

     

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

     

    Face mask use could result in a large reduction in risk of infection with stronger associations with N95 or similar respirators compared with disposable surgical masks or similar

     

    ^Both of the above were meta analyses, meaning they reviewed a number of different studies and essentially combined the results into a single conclusion

     

    https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2020.00818

     

    This study provides evidence from a natural experiment on effects of state government mandates in the US for face mask use in public issued by 15 states plus DC between April 8 and May 15.



    Mandating face mask use in public is associated with a decline in the daily COVID-19 growth rate by 0.9, 1.1, 1.4, 1.7, and 2.0 percentage-points in 1–5, 6–10, 11–15, 16–20, and 21+ days after signing, respectively. Estimates suggest as many as 230,000–450,000 COVID-19 cases possibly averted By May 22, 2020 by these mandates. The findings suggest that requiring face mask use in public might help in mitigating COVID-19 spread.

     

    And if peer reviewed science isn't your thing, how do you explain this:

     

    https://www.livescience.com/hair-stylists-infected-covid19-face-masks.html

     

    Two hair stylists in Missouri interacted with a total of 140 clients and six coworkers before learning they both had COVID-19 — thankfully, the stylists didn't pass the virus on to any of these contacts, according to a statement from the local health department. 



    Appointment times had been staggered to limit potential contamination between customers, and the salon chairs were placed farther apart than usual. Stylists also remained 6 feet (1.8 meters) away from clients when not cutting their hair, and the salon required that both stylists and customers wear masks during appointments

    the health department concluded that no client or coworker contracted the virus from either infected stylist. 

    "This is exciting news about the value of masking to prevent COVID-19," Clay Goddard, director of the health department, said in the statement.

     

    So now the ball is in your court. If you want to engage in a real scientific discussion then read through these snippets and come back with some of your own. If you want to bury your head in the sand that is also your right. Just don't bring that mindset into a legitimate scientific discussion.

    • Like (+1) 2
    • Awesome! (+1) 1
    • Thank you (+1) 1
  10. Last month they were working on modified helmets with surgical face mask material attached:

     

    https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-testing-n95-surgical-mask-material-on-modified-face-masks-in-hopes-of-fighting-covid-19-spread/

     

    This may ultimately be the solution. But I don't know what has come of it since then. Masks have been shown to be extremely effective in preventing the spread of the virus. They just have to find a way to build it into the helmet. It will look weird but better than no football at all.

    • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...