Starting to think there is no way they play football in 2020

[Teddy KGB]

I’ve stopped my 3 hour shot put training sessions.     

[PetermansRedemption]

5 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Holy hyperbole. 

 

Asking people to stay home for 30 days means dictatorship, human rights violations and "censorship?"

 

I see it as the only way to save the economy.

China reopened Wuhan today. That could be America if you follow that model.

 

Shut everything down, don't collect mortgage payments, don't collect utility payments, don't collect rent. Just stay home, and then in 30 days you can reopen everything after you fully quarantine everyone who is sick.

 

Prolonging thing will only decimate consumer confidence and wreck the service and hospitality industries, the airline industries and contract GDP. Then other companies will begin laying people off, and the whole thing will snowball. 

What you say is pretty much the only way this happens. You need everyone to stop collecting payments. No car payments, mortgage payments, utilities. You would also need to make food free or pay people what they are making when they work. Needless to say all of this would require massive government intervention, the likes of which this country has never seen. It would involve overreaching in an uncountable amount of private businesses. Think of how many businesses hold mortgages, hold auto loans, how many people and companies collect rent, how many utility companies there are. I’m not sure that kind of legislation could ever be drafted and implemented inside of the constitution and framework of our government. 

Edited March 24, 2020 by PetermansRedemption

[No_Matter_What]

7 minutes ago, PetermansRedemption said:

I was actually being generous going to 99.4%. The true statistics are 99.8% survival rate under the age of 39 and 99.6% for the age group of 40-49. 50-59 it goes down to a 98.7% survivability rate. 
 

source: worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

 

Ok if you only meant young people then you are probably right (based on available sources). However, it is still based on the fact that even people under 60 get appropriate medical care. It probably will not be possible if much higher percentage of population gets infected.

[Motorin']

1 hour ago, thenorthremembers said:

Right now I think mini camps will be cancelled.   However, I cant see this going into July and August.   Maybe a modified season, but I think football still happens.

The real question is going to be, does Covid 19 come back with a vengeance next fall? That's when the 1918 flu wreaked most of it's havoc, in it's second wave that hit in the Fall of 1918 following it's earlier appearance in spring 1918.  

[PetermansRedemption]

2 hours ago, No_Matter_What said:

 

Ok if you only meant young people then you are probably right (based on available sources). However, it is still based on the fact that even people under 60 get appropriate medical care. It probably will not be possible if much higher percentage of population gets infected.

So, theoretically, couldn’t we manage this thing by making everyone over the age of 50 or 60 stay home? Many over the age of 60 are retired and can stay home anyways. Many, many cases under the age of 60 do not require hospitalization. While many over the age of 60 do require hospitalization. 

[Edit: Misleading information confusing case fatality rate statistics with morbidity (serious disease).  About 20% of those infected require hospitalization, though the rate is higher in the old.) Currently in USA, 40% of those hospitalized with severe to critical illness are age 20-54.  If you do the math, as the disease spreads that age range alone will exceed our hospital capacity.  Plus people 50-60 include a lot of critical workers - small business owners, doctors, nurses, etc; people over 60 inevitably have some contact with others even if they do stay home.

[MJS]

Man would it suck to not have football this season when the Bills are looking to kick things into high gear and be contenders.

[Motorin']

Just now, PetermansRedemption said:

No

 

Source: My never ending optimism 

I hope so too! And yet this possibility is something we absolutely have to prepare for, which is why Cuomo is cautioning that this may be a 9 month disruption. 

[jrober38]

5 minutes ago, PetermansRedemption said:

What you say is pretty much the only way this happens. You need everyone to stop collecting payments. No car payments, mortgage payments, utilities. You would also need to make food free or pay people what they are making when they work. Needless to say all of this would require massive government intervention, the likes of which this country has never seen. It would involve overreaching in an uncountable amount of private businesses. Think of how many businesses hold mortgages, hold auto loans, how many people and companies collect rent, how many utility companies there are. I’m not sure that kind of legislation could ever be drafted and implemented inside of the constitution and framework of our government. 

 

It's a 30 day economic holiday. 

 

The alternative is ruining the economy. 

 

The economy can survive a 30 day shut down.

 

It can't survive a prolonged period of negative GDP growth with no timeline on when things will improve by. 

[Richard Noggin]

1 hour ago, uticaclub said:

If this doesn’t end next week, football is going to be the least of anyones concern

Why would this end "next week"? I don't think that's an option, given we're still on the upswing...

[LABILLBACKER]

1 hour ago, uticaclub said:

If this doesn’t end next week, football is going to be the least of anyones concern

Isn't that the truth. Kinda hard to watch football if you're dead. Kinda hard to enjoy a stimulus package if you're dead. My wife and I are 61 with diabetes. Scary times......

Edited March 24, 2020 by LABILLBACKER

[dollars 2 donuts]

Absolute worst case scenario:

 

camps start in August (more than 4 full months from now)

2 preseason games

season starts on time, or one week later, with the possibility of no fans...tv is and will be king for nfl, anyways.

 

and that’s at worst.

1 hour ago, thunderingsquid said:

If we do see football in September, it will be sloppy as hell.  Like Thursday night football every game.

 

Jets fans won’t be able to tell the difference.

[PetermansRedemption]

5 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

It's a 30 day economic holiday. 

 

The alternative is ruining the economy. 

 

The economy can survive a 30 day shut down.

 

It can't survive a prolonged period of negative GDP growth with no timeline on when things will improve by. 

I absolutely agree. 30 days would be completely fine. How does it get accomplished legislatively though? 

[jrober38]

10 minutes ago, PetermansRedemption said:

So, theoretically, couldn’t we manage this thing by making everyone over the age of 50 or 60 stay home? Many over the age of 60 are retired and can stay home anyways. Many, many cases under the age of 60 do not require hospitalization. While many over the age of 60 do require hospitalization. 

 

This won't accomplish anything. 

 

You can't force such a large portion of the population to exit the economy and pretend that everything will be fine. 

 

People are not going to go on with their lives as they did a month ago.

No one is booking a family trip. No one is buying a new car. No one is going out to restaurants as regularly as they did. 

 

The die is cast. 

1 minute ago, PetermansRedemption said:

I absolutely agree. 30 days would be completely fine. How does it get accomplished legislatively though? 

 

With real leadership.

 

This is a crisis. The country is essentially at war.

 

Someone needs to step up and make the tough decisions that won't be popular. 

[njbuff]

TC is four months away.

 

And if we can’t take care of this virus in pretty short order (a month it should calm down), then we are screwed in every way, shape and form.

[No_Matter_What]

14 minutes ago, PetermansRedemption said:

So, theoretically, couldn’t we manage this thing by making everyone over the age of 50 or 60 stay home? Many over the age of 60 are retired and can stay home anyways. Many, many cases under the age of 60 do not require hospitalization. While many over the age of 60 do require hospitalization. 

 

I have no idea, I was just originally arguing your death rate numbers.

 

I think total isolation of people over 60 is one of the keys right now. In my country they are not allowed to leave their homes other than for necessary shopping. As of today, all shops are open from 9am to 12noon only for seniors.

 

But I do think that it is worse that you think even under 60. There are more and more stories spreading how badly are people dealing with virus even when they are 35 or so. I guess we will see.

[Richard Noggin]

26 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Holy hyperbole. 

 

Asking people to stay home for 30 days means dictatorship, human rights violations and "censorship?"

 

I see it as the only way to save the economy.

China reopened Wuhan today. That could be America if you follow that model.

 

Shut everything down, don't collect mortgage payments, don't collect utility payments, don't collect rent. Just stay home, and then in 30 days you can reopen everything after you fully quarantine everyone who is sick.

 

Prolonging thing will only decimate consumer confidence and wreck the service and hospitality industries, the airline industries and contract GDP. Then other companies will begin laying people off, and the whole thing will snowball. 

Thanks for being sensible. The anti-media/data/reality gang have some difficulty seeing the truth between extremes.

[NoHuddleKelly12]

15 minutes ago, dollars 2 donuts said:

Absolute worst case scenario:

 

camps start in August (more than 4 full months from now)

2 preseason games

season starts on time, or one week later, with the possibility of no fans...tv is and will be king for nfl, anyways.

 

and that’s at worst.

 

Jets fans won’t be able to tell the difference.

Well...you may have a point there...

[jimmy10]

Smart people I trust who are qualified to offer an opinion on this thing say 3-4 months at least.

[yungmack]

Just so they maintain the 6 foot social distancing, they can go ahead and play.

[Richard Noggin]

4 minutes ago, jimmy10 said:

Smart people I trust who are qualified to offer an opinion on this thing say 3-4 months at least.

Sure are a lot of people who don't understand what qualifies a person to have their own opinion on this. 

 

I'm not personally qualified, but I do like to read and listen to and watch actual experts offer their perspectives, and trust them to lead the way. 

 

And do you (not you personally, jimmy10) know who brings us these qualified perspectives? The dreaded MEDIA...(enter ghostly moaning here)

[Capco]

36 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

You realize, of course, that WAS the chinese model that Rober was advocating for. The ChiCom military was literally dragging people from their homes.

 

I thought they wanted people to stay in their homes.  Wouldn't they be dragging them to their homes?  

[SectionC3]

37 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

This won't accomplish anything. 

 

You can't force such a large portion of the population to exit the economy and pretend that everything will be fine. 

 

People are not going to go on with their lives as they did a month ago.

No one is booking a family trip. No one is buying a new car. No one is going out to restaurants as regularly as they did. 

 

The die is cast. 

 

With real leadership.

 

This is a crisis. The country is essentially at war.

 

Someone needs to step up and make the tough decisions that won't be popular. 

 

A voice of reason.  Completely agree.  We need to act like Italy so that we don’t become Italy.  The economy can handle a 30- or 60-day hard shutdown.  Ask Bill Ackerman.  It’s what the market wants.  But a certain someone in DC flipped his lid yesterday when the S&P dropped below its January 2017 level.  The point re: the S&P is that Americans now have had basically dead money (dividends notwithstanding) for the Trump presidency.  And since Trump measures his presidency by the S&P index . . . An overreaction today was to be expected.  

 

It’s pretty sad that the test of my grandparents generation was getting on a boat and risking limb and life to defend our society.  My generation is asked only to ration food for a little while, binge Netflix, and find a way to make unemployment, savings, and credit cards cover a couple of months of expenses.  And we are failing.  

[PetermansRedemption]

1 minute ago, SectionC3 said:

 

A voice of reason.  Completely agree.  We need to act like Italy so that we don’t become Italy.  The economy can handle a 30- or 60-day hard shutdown.  Ask Bill Ackerman.  It’s what the market wants.  But a certain someone in DC flipped his lid yesterday when the S&P dropped below its January 2017 level.  The point re: the S&P is that Americans now have had basically dead money (dividends notwithstanding) for the Trump presidency.  And since Trump measures his presidency by the S&P index . . . An overreaction today was to be expected.  

 

It’s pretty sad that the test of my grandparents generation was getting on a boat and risking limb and life to defend our society.  My generation is asked only to ration food for a little while, binge Netflix, and find a way to make unemployment, savings, and credit cards cover a couple of months of expenses.  And we are failing.  

You do realize that what you are proposing requires the power of the purse, which is controlled by Congress? 

[RyanC883]

2 minutes ago, PetermansRedemption said:

You do realize that what you are proposing requires the power of the purse, which is controlled by Congress? 

 

stimulus package should happen today.  

[PetermansRedemption]

Just now, RyanC883 said:

 

stimulus package should happen today.  

Which I fear won’t be anything near what would be needed for a complete, extended shutdown. We should find out sometime today. 

[SectionC3]

8 minutes ago, PetermansRedemption said:

You do realize that what you are proposing requires the power of the purse, which is controlled by Congress? 

 

With respect, it doesn’t.  Under these circumstances Trump (or any president) could issue an executive order declaring a shutdown.  Given the deference this country typically has shown executives in times of national crisis, and given the deference the current version of the Supreme Court has shown the executive branch, there’s little practical impediment to what I have suggested.  Enforcing the order is a bit of a different kettle of fish, but there is precedent for the National Guard to assist in that respect.  By the time a challenge to the order would wind its way through the courts, the crisis almost certainly would have either passed or become so severe that nobody in their right mind would question the executive action. 

[Coach Tuesday]

13 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:

Further, infectious disease experts do NOT AGREE with a total lockdown.  

 

see:  https://triblive.com/local/pittsburgh-allegheny/pittsburgh-infectious-disease-expert-discusses-business-shutdown-order-effect-on-society/

 

 

Here is what the ONE GUY in Pittsburgh actually said in the article you linked:

 

This is a very hard decision to make. As the economic shutdown becomes broader, there is a real risk of doing more damage by threatening peoples’ livelihoods as well as their well-being than the virus will do. There is a point where more harm can be done than good. Voluntary social distancing is one thing and advisable, but government force is quite another.

[SectionC3]

15 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:

 

this post is a Nancy Pelosi sounding nonsensical rant. (those who disagree with me don’t believe in science). 

 

First, China and the WHO for months said there was no person to person contact, despite the contrary evidence in China.  If you think China is telling the truth now you are nuts.  China exported this all over the world.  

 

Further, infectious disease experts do NOT AGREE with a total lockdown.  

 

see:  https://triblive.com/local/pittsburgh-allegheny/pittsburgh-infectious-disease-expert-discusses-business-shutdown-order-effect-on-society/

 

 

Did you read the article?  The expert quoted therein acknowledged that the medical benefits of a shutdown must be weight against the costs of a stoppage of economic activity.  I’m glad that the infectious disease expert has dusted off his or her apparent background in economics to share with us.  That sarcasm aside, there is a point to be made that a cost/benefit analysis is required with respect to a shutdown.  But it’s not fair to say that experts do NOT AGREE with a total lockdown based on that article. 

[PetermansRedemption]

4 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

With respect, it doesn’t.  Under these circumstances Trump (or any president) could issue an executive order declaring a shutdown.  Given the deference this country typically has shown executives in times of national crisis, and given the deference the current version of the Supreme Court has shown the executive branch, there’s little practical impediment to what I have suggested.  Enforcing the order is a bit of a different kettle of fish, but there is precedent for the National Guard to assist in that respect.  By the time a challenge to the order would wind its way through the courts, the crisis almost certainly would have either passed or become so severe that nobody in their right mind would question the executive action. 

It does if you want any money tied to it. Sure Trump could order any industry shuttered. But he would be doing it without any economical strings. I suppose congress could address that shortly thereafter. But I don’t have much faith in them. 

[SectionC3]

Just now, PetermansRedemption said:

It does if you want any money tied to it. Sure Trump could order any industry shuttered. But he would be doing it without any economical strings. I suppose congress could address that shortly thereafter. But I don’t have much faith in them. 

“Shutdown” and “bailout” are two different things.  You’re talking about a bailout, and that does require Congressional approval.  The problem we’re running into right now is the philosophical discord over “bottom up” funding (Democrats) or “top down” help (Republicans).  We’re also hitting the point that Democrats don’t want Trump to have unfettered discretion over hundreds of billions of dollars in aid.  A compromise on the first point probably is in order, but with the way this administration has hurt labor (read the Janus decision of the Supreme Court to see how unions have been gutted recently) I have a hard time believing that anyone who reads this message board and who pays some attention to national politics shouldn’t lean more toward the Democratic position on that issue.  With respect to the question of discretion . . . I have my views on the matter, as I’m sure everyone here does.  Those points probably are best left for a different forum.  

[Success]

It's being discussed, but the crux of the issue is balancing the positives and negatives to achieve the best outcome for everyone.

 

If only health experts and those in the medical profession were making the decision, we'd probably be on lockdown for a year at minimum.  But their only priority would be containing the spread and eventually eliminating the threat.  

 

Politicians and the business community have to weigh that against the adverse effects of the shutdown on people's lives & livelihoods. At a certain point, more suffering is likely caused by too much economic hardship.

 

I'm just glad there are smarter people than me working on this one.  Getting back to work is going to be a tough decision to make - but at a certain point, it will have to happen.

 

[DrDawkinstein]

6 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

“Shutdown” and “bailout” are two different things.  You’re talking about a bailout, and that does require Congressional approval.  The problem we’re running into right now is the philosophical discord over “bottom up” funding (Democrats) or “top down” help (Republicans).  We’re also hitting the point that Democrats don’t want Trump to have unfettered discretion over hundreds of billions of dollars in aid.  A compromise on the first point probably is in order, but with the way this administration has hurt labor (read the Janus decision of the Supreme Court to see how unions have been gutted recently) I have a hard time believing that anyone who reads this message board and who pays some attention to national politics shouldn’t lean more toward the Democratic position on that issue.  With respect to the question of discretion . . . I have my views on the matter, as I’m sure everyone here does.  Those points probably are best left for a different forum.  

 

Oh, is this message board going to surprise you.

[billsfan89]

I think at worst they delay the start of the season until October and push camp deep into August and pre-season in September. But who knows just how far reaching this crisis could be. The NFL still has months before they have to make these decisions. This could be winding down in May or getting worse. Who knows. 

[RyanC883]

20 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:

Here is what the ONE GUY in Pittsburgh actually said in the article you linked:

 

This is a very hard decision to make. As the economic shutdown becomes broader, there is a real risk of doing more damage by threatening peoples’ livelihoods as well as their well-being than the virus will do. There is a point where more harm can be done than good. Voluntary social distancing is one thing and advisable, but government force is quite another.

 

that ONE GUY is an infectious disease expert at John Hopkins.  He's not just some random guy.  He also talks about the harm from cancelling voluntary surgery procedures unless absolutely necessary.  

19 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Did you read the article?  The expert quoted therein acknowledged that the medical benefits of a shutdown must be weight against the costs of a stoppage of economic activity.  I’m glad that the infectious disease expert has dusted off his or her apparent background in economics to share with us.  That sarcasm aside, there is a point to be made that a cost/benefit analysis is required with respect to a shutdown.  But it’s not fair to say that experts do NOT AGREE with a total lockdown based on that article. 

 

really, it is totally fair to say that all experts do not agree with a total lock-down.  There is an expert, saying that a total lock-down is likely to cause more harm than good.  And what is a "total lock-down" anyway.  

[Best Player Available]

Fine print in new CBA states. Any cancelation of 2020 NFL season. Shall result in Patriots receiving an extra 2 first round picks in 2021

draft. Sad.....

[ColoradoBills]

We will all have to wait week by week to see how this progresses.

No one KNOWS for sure.

 

Patience is needed.

[DrDawkinstein]

2 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:

 

that ONE GUY is an infectious disease expert at John Hopkins.  He's not just some random guy.  He also talks about the harm from cancelling voluntary surgery procedures unless absolutely necessary.  

 

really, it is totally fair to say that all experts do not agree with a total lock-down.  There is an expert, saying that a total lock-down is likely to cause more harm than good.  And what is a "total lock-down" anyway.  

 

There is always "one guy" who can be bought to say what someone wants to hear. That isnt enough to build a real argument. One, or even a few, economic experts disagreeing with every Healthcare and Disease official around the world shouldnt be enough to sway anyone with half a brain.

[jrober38]

2 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:

 

that ONE GUY is an infectious disease expert at John Hopkins.  He's not just some random guy.  He also talks about the harm from cancelling voluntary surgery procedures unless absolutely necessary.  

 

really, it is totally fair to say that all experts do not agree with a total lock-down.  There is an expert, saying that a total lock-down is likely to cause more harm than good.  And what is a "total lock-down" anyway.  

 

Clearly really smart people must be developing models on this at MIT, Carnegie Mellon, etc, right?

 

Right?

 

Like in a week or so the smartest mathematicians in the world will have models in place to project the outcomes for each scenario, lock down vs do nothing. 

 

Someone has thought of that right?

[DrDawkinstein]

Just now, ColoradoBills said:

We will all have to wait week by week to see how this progresses.

No one KNOWS for sure.

 

Patience is needed.

 

Patience and strict compliance with the social distancing mandate.

[RyanC883]

2 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

There is always "one guy" who can be bought to say what someone wants to hear. That isnt enough to build a real argument. One, or even a few, economic experts disagreeing with every Healthcare and Disease official around the world shouldnt be enough to sway anyone with half a brain.

 

this isn't "one guy."  This is a noted infectious disease expert at Hopkins.  Besides, where are the people who are arguing for a Wuhan-type response of total lockdown?  The goal is to avoid that by what most people are doing now, avoid nonessential socializing, etc.  

3 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Clearly really smart people must be developing models on this at MIT, Carnegie Mellon, etc, right?

 

Right?

 

Like in a week or so the smartest mathematicians in the world will have models in place to project the outcomes for each scenario, lock down vs do nothing. 

 

Someone has thought of that right?

 

the idea of a Wuhan lock-down v. do-nothing is a false dichotomy.  The middle ground, which is what most states do with their "shelter in place", etc. orders is done to prevent a lock-down, while keeping small businesses running to the extent practicable (take out, delivery, etc.).