Rochesterfan

It seemed like a combination. I believe they knew he was not 100%, but thought he gave them the best chance to win and even as early in the season as it is - the 49ers knew they needed a win. I think they recognized his injury was causing him not to be able to plant and throw - so the injury had a huge part, but he was also legitimately bad. Without the injury - I imagine he does not get benched, but the combination made it the best option.

I totally agree and will take it a step further. What was the point of kicking the extra point on the previous drive - if not to give yourself this exact scenario to go up by 8. The earlier TD - the Vikings had a choice. Up 4 do you go for 2 or 1. 1 puts you in a position to kick a field goal and go up by 8 and you are playing for at worst a tie. Going for 2 puts you either up by 6 or based upon earlier attempts - most likely up by 4. If 6 - the FG wins. If 4 - you have still have a shot at a loss. For me the scenarios unfold as: Up by 4 - failed 2 point - I am going for it like The Vikings did because the Seahawks have a history of scoring and not being afraid to go for 2. I do not want them to have the ball and 7 points is not safe. Up by 5 - kicked the XP - this is the scenario that played out and you kick the FG to go up by 8 - you ensure you can’t lose in regulation and you force Seattle to score and get the 2. I am also playing more aggressive because if Seattle goes over the top and scores quickly - I may still have a shot to get the ball back with worse case being a tie and OT. Up by 6 - converted the 2 pt - you again kick and go up by 2 scores. The issue I have is the Vikings played middle ball earlier with the XP to create the tie scenario and then didn’t follow the same thought process later on and it cost them the game. If you played for 1 earlier - you were playing for a FG and 8 points later on.

It would be a wonderful idea - hmm wonder why it did not happen - because the NFL does not have the ability to do that without agreement from the NFLPA. What we know is the NFLPA blocked the bubbling effort as a hardship. What we have also been told is when the NFL suggested a 2nd bye week - so adding 1 more week to the season - the NFLPA would agree if the players received an extra game check for adding weeks. That ended up as part of the testing negotiations and in the end the NFL determined it was better to leave the schedule alone and utilize their “emergency” power to make COVID adjustments to the schedule as needed. The NFL was already worried about losing money and adding additional benefits/money to add weeks was not going to happen. The same thing with shortening the season - the NFLPA was fine as long as they got paid for the entire 16 game schedule. I believe if both sides wanted to play some hard ball - they could of come to an agreement, but as we saw with baseball - there was the chance that if one side overplayed their hand the season could of crashed. It sounds like the owners decided to just leave things and work around to ensure the games were played. It is also why you won’t have forfeits unless absolutely necessary- the NFL loses money and this year is already a loss and next year with the reduced cap won’t make up for it.

Except - I doubt the NFL would allow it. If the Bills decide not to play - they figure out how to move it to week 18 and the Bills get screwed. The NFL is working hard to get every game in and the Titans bye last week screws the easy move like the Den/NE game.

You really do not want the infective team to travel - that is higher risk than the Bills playing in Tennessee.

😭 - poor guy - try being Buffalo - suck it up baby.

He might have, but that was a low risk exposure between the 2 of them - outside, brief contact. Most likely if Mahomes was exposed, he would of turned up positive Thursday or Friday and he has not. That is the problem with how the NFL is doing the testing - a positive comes back 24 hours later - so you have to contract trace based on contact length and have those players limit exposure as much as possible.

The Falcons player when reviews had no defined close contact based on tracing and the Falcons were not traveling. They decided it was a very low likelihood of spread and went ahead. I think after seeing Tennessee and NE - the evaluation has become more important, but the planning was similar to NE. Even if the Falcon player did spread it to other Falcons at Friday’s practice - those players would not be infectious on Sunday - so you begin to identify on Monday of the next week. The big difference with NE was travel and spending potentially 3 hours on a plane which is a high risk to exposure and then additional time on a bus.

Because that is not what happened at all. They had 1 positive (Cam) the day before they had to travel. The travel has been identified as the highest point of possible infection and spread for the team. The NFL needed to do contact tracing to identify the potential exposures and then worked to have them travel separately in a bubble. There was low likelihood of them being infective on Monday because of the exposure date. They travelled and played and as expected there was no field spread. Now the NFL was waiting for the other shoe to drop as we hit 4-5 days from exposure. Then the Pats get word (as predicted) that 2 more players tested positive - the NFL closed the facility and asked people to work remotely and wanting to ensure the NFL has additional time for exposures to Gilmore - they would expect those to come positive on Fri - Sun - so the best thing was to push the game to Monday give time for the positives to show up and then play. The NFL would love to get this game in because then the Pats have a bye week and that would allow the infections to run their course and be done. It all has to do with travel and timing. They know they are dealing with an outbreak in NE that has limited spread - some caused by exposure (a dinner between Cam and Gilmore) and some caused by the travel to KC for exposed players. It does not appear that anything was done to help the Pats - it was done to try and identify the potential prom lens and limit spread as much as possible.

That is it - 😂

Saw my first add for this product watching You Tube - it featured Gronk and the Jokes in this thread barely skim the surface of the innuendo in that add. OMG.

Just DM me directly with the numbers and any PIN codes you have and I will be sure you get what you deserve. 😂

Jerry Jones talked about it on NFL Radio and Chris Brown reiterated it on One Bills Live. Both times in response to people questioning if they have a plan. I have not seen anything written about it - except on places like Wikipedia. I have heard it discussed on the radio multiple times, but always as a last resort.

No - they get paid for 16 weeks and from the discussion on NFL radio with Jerry Jones (I think) he stated they discussed adding weeks and the NFLPA refused without getting a boost for the extra weeks. Basically they said we get paid for 16 games and 17 weeks - if you are adding weeks we need to practice and be available - we want to be compensated. Now - I don’t know how hard they pushed, but it was lumped in with the refusal to bubble. Any schedule changed need approval and it did not sound like it was going to be given without compensation. They were willing to drop a couple of games and stay at 17 weeks, but not change the players salaries- which was a non starter.

Not true - the NFL stated they actual have an agreement with the TB stadium for every Sunday in February and have the ability to shift back the season up to 4 weeks, but they are for emergency use only - the NFLPA did not agree changes to the schedule or additional bye weeks. The biggest problem with a pause right now is that this might not be the apex of the virus for the fall. So if they pause for a couple of weeks - they still have to try to get the 16 games in and now you are left with only 2 potential emergency weeks. The NFL would like to hold onto the weeks if needed because if things get worse - they run out of options.

Again - you are blaming the NFL for something they alone could not approve. The NFLPA would have to agree to any schedule changes and the NFLPA refused bubbling and refused to give back money for a shorter season. They also rejected adding bye weeks without adding another week of pay. In the end the easiest agreement was keeping things the same. Some of that is greed and some is waiting for guidance from the Federal Level that never came. They did not want agreements in place that then got overwritten by federal guidelines. I think it was very difficult to put exact numbers in place - it was always going to be based upon their infectious disease guideline expert. They planned and expected to have to postpone games around testing. They identified that travel (airplane/bus) were the 2 biggest risk factors to transmission (much higher than game play) and therefore - like the Pats game - it wasn’t Cam’s positive that delayed anything - it was needed Int to do contract tracing and determine who were higher risk exposures. Then determining how to transport them safely without infecting others. The protocols were fairly clear and appear to work - the idea - much like baseball was always based upon the players following it. When they don’t bad things happen. The problem was for breaking protocol- the league was not given permission to penalize the players - it comes from the teams. The NFL can fine teams and coaches, but it is the teams job to punish the players. The agreements make it difficult for the league to do everything they would want.

The NFL was hamstrung by the NFLPA. They had to agree to any changes and the NFLPA refused the bubble concept and refused adding weeks without adding pay. It appears they did make an agreement that the NFL would have some flexibility if needed to push back the playoffs if needed for emergency use, but without adding a paycheck for additional weeks of service - they did not want it scheduled that way. There were several NFL proposals on schedule adjustments and basically in the end the decision that they could agree to was keep the schedule as is and have an emergency use if needed. Part of it is greed by both sides - as every change required negotiations- but they had already seen that the baseball protocols worked when followed and I believe they were confident that the protocols in the NFL would work when followed. So far I agree - that seems to be the case (minus the Titans - who screwed everything up and are still screwing up).

They are doing everything they can to get games in. Does it suck - maybe, but other options screw other teams. I am trying to look at the big picture and recognize - the NFL has a protocol in place that obviously works when followed. You have 1 team (one less than in baseball) that decided not to follow the protocol. The league is looking for every option they can - the fairest thing is to get the game in, but in doing that it screws the Bills. Not playing the game this week potentially screws the Bills later and a forfeit screws other teams (and doubly the Chiefs).

This is total Bull. The NFL has been fine - ONE TEAM did not follow protocol and specific directives. The only thing embarrassing to me is these constant takes.

The NBA and NHL also only had to do it for essentially the playoffs. The players in both sports said they would not have agreed for a longer period. It was also noted that some players/teams just wanted out and they purposely “tanked” to get away from the bubble. I can’t imagine trying to do an NFL season (and say you are the Jets) and your season is over after week 3 or 4, but you still have 14 more bubble weeks - it would have been a nightmare. I think the NFL recognized this, but there are so few other options to try and bubble. Division bubbles in an area where you could play 2 games - the logistics of even just players, staff, trainers - would have been over 1000 people and you get no contact with family. Even if you then break things up to give people time to see family and then re-quarantine you are either extending the season by several weeks or cutting the schedule both of which impact TV deals and players pay.

I believe the plan that the NFL proposed was each team would individually bubble. The team would rent a hotel, bus and their stadium and the players would stay within the hotel similar to the NBA in Disney. The NFL plan was to allow immediate family to be in the bubble (wife, kids), but they would of needed to tested and stay within the bubble. Basically the hotel becomes the de facto compound for the team and staff - probably 600 - 1000 people - with strict guidelines for hotel staff and food service. The players would shuttle to the stadium, airport, and other stadium - staying strictly in their pods to minimize contact. They had no logistical plans to be able to have hub cities with multiple teams because the size of each group was to big. Some teams - like the Cowboys did this during training camp. I believe the Bills met with the players and immediate family to talk about the protocol and how important safety was. The problem always was the size of the bubble and who to include as several players take care of not only their family, but elderly parents and others and being locked in a bubble that was logistically impossible. It also meant kids could attend school - had to be remote or out of the bubble - so you might not see you family for months. Therefore - the NFLPA rejected it and it was always a non starter in negotiations or the year.

Thanks - it is close - tough to tell the exact point it leaves the field of play. I don’t think it matters where he is down anymore - it is now marked at the spot the bill leaves the field of play when nothing else the touches inbound. So it would be someplace in the jump prior to where he lands out of bounds. Probably around the 15 maybe 14.5 yard line. I thought it was much closer than they gave him credit for - god what an effort by JA and Diggs on that play. Years ago - that would of been a first down because it was where they landed, but they changed that up - thanks SyHaung for the exact wording of the rule.

Has their been an image showing anything other than him going out of bounds. I thought they marked him a little short of where he was, but I have not seen a view that showed the ball in the field of play and across the marker.

Yes the tie has me flummoxed because NE/Tennessee do not play. So you are creating a game on the schedule that does not exist and not just moving the Broncos game forward, but then having the Bills play them a second time totally outside of the schedule. So since both the Bills and Broncos were traveling- someone suggested a neutral site game and then keeping the later game on the road. Okay, but it becomes more difficult because Refs are not assigned based upon teams, but location - so we most likely have to find an open stadium around either NE or Tennessee as those Refs have been assigned. I also did not understand why NE is being punished- they had positives, but appear to be following protocol. They went so far as to split the team from close contacts on a separate plane and bus there and back. If they are doing the right thing they should not be saddled if the issues created by the Titans.

Actually - the NFL planned for this and have already made an agreement with the city and the stadium for every Sunday in February- giving them up to and additional 4 weeks of fall back dates if needed. The limited Fans they were planning to allow and limited press made it significantly easier this year to do that.