NFL may have fans sign a waiver to attend games

[SCBills]

13 minutes ago, PetermansRedemption said:

It’s pretty great that every thread these days turns into a coronavirus pissing match between ultimate freedom vs freedom restrictions. A nice microcosm of the US population. 

Why can’t we just be rational and have constant PSA’s about distancing/washing hands/masks, mandates for indoor use of masks, along with capacity guidelines AND also let people live their lives should they choose to do so?

 

I say this by acknowledging those who should stay home, should stay home, and we should recognize that fiscally.  
 

Im sure the NFL will have plenty of safety guidelines in place.  If I want to sign a waiver to go to an outdoor stadium (for the most part) why can’t I?... especially when I can protest in massive crowds and/or stand in lines at crowded grocery stores? 
 

I hate to see how so many are so ok with bowing down to whatever the government and/or their media tells them.    Some stuff, especially outdoors stuff, is ok - lets take a step back and stop being paralyzed by fear and/or unwarranted obedience.  

 

Same goes for the anti-mask idiots. 
 

 

Edited July 2, 2020 by SCBills

[jimmy10]

18 minutes ago, PetermansRedemption said:

It’s pretty great that every thread these days turns into a coronavirus pissing match between ultimate freedom vs freedom restrictions. A nice microcosm of the US population. 

Only one side of that equation decided to make it a pissing match. 

[billsfan89]

3 hours ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

Agree as a Nets fan on Atkinson.  NY Post today said that Steven A was blabbering that the Knicks might wait 1 year for Doc Rivers.

 

Rivers isn't leaving a Clippers team with a Big 2 and good organizational structure in place. The Clippers will have at least 2 to 3 more years of championship opportunities and Rivers isn't leaving to go to the Knicks.

 

The Knicks need a coach who can develop young talent. Atkinson is exactly that. Give Kenny Atkinson three seasons of a hard rebuild and they will see results.

4 hours ago, NewEra said:

have a feeling the Knicks screw up and grab tibs.  He had exactly what the Knicks are trying to build when he was in Minnesota.....and he was terrible.  Is he going to build a team of 33 year old free agents that’ll respect him and give it their all?   I don’t see why anyone would hire Tibs as a HC after what happened in Minnesota and to a lesser degree in Chicago.  He was built on the coattails of Danny Ainge/Doc putting together that 2008 team imo. 

 

My buddy thinks KD will miss the first half of next season, if not more.

 

Thibs would be the absolute worst hire. I thought Thibs was a good coach in Chicago got a lot out of a team that lost an MVP due to injury. I actually thought he would have worked in Minny bringing in Butler to help KAT and get Wiggins into gear.

 

But Thibs proved in Minny he can't handle younger players and he doesn't know how to not overplay starters. The Knicks need a development guru not a guy who can't work with younger players. 

[NewEra]

4 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

Rivers isn't leaving a Clippers team with a Big 2 and good organizational structure in place. The Clippers will have at least 2 to 3 more years of championship opportunities and Rivers isn't leaving to go to the Knicks.

 

The Knicks need a coach who can develop young talent. Atkinson is exactly that. Give Kenny Atkinson three seasons of a hard rebuild and they will see results.

 

Thibs would be the absolute worst hire. I thought Thibs was a good coach in Chicago got a lot out of a team that lost an MVP due to injury. I actually thought he would have worked in Minny bringing in Butler to help KAT and get Wiggins into gear.

 

But Thibs proved in Minny he can't handle younger players and he doesn't know how to not overplay starters. The Knicks need a development guru not a guy who can't work with younger players. 

Agreed.  

[Mr. WEO]

10 hours ago, Irv said:

So, NY can't have fans.  Other states can have fans.  Wrecks any home field advantage for Bills.  Thanks Cuomo!  Another spit in the eye for Upstate. 

4 of their 6 losses were at home last year.

[Franco_92]

9 hours ago, iinii said:

A full season that crowns a champ? Business as usual? And what do you own? Is this a money bet or a line bet? 

"It's fun to pretend there will be a season this year."

"I'd bet you anything I own there'll be a season this fall."

He set the bet by laughing off the idea that football will happen. I'm betting that an NFL season will happen. I don't pretend to know the way it will happen, the way he's pretending to know there won't be any football this fall. So we'll see what he stumbles to from there.

[major]

[LB3]

On 7/2/2020 at 3:57 PM, aristocrat said:

people were talking it seriously until a few weeks ago and then 5 million people stopped social distancing 

Fake news. Rioting didn't cause the uptick. Rioting makes you immune.

[SirAndrew]

On 7/2/2020 at 5:31 PM, SCBills said:

Why can’t we just be rational and have constant PSA’s about distancing/washing hands/masks, mandates for indoor use of masks, along with capacity guidelines AND also let people live their lives should they choose to do so?

 

I say this by acknowledging those who should stay home, should stay home, and we should recognize that fiscally.  
 

Im sure the NFL will have plenty of safety guidelines in place.  If I want to sign a waiver to go to an outdoor stadium (for the most part) why can’t I?... especially when I can protest in massive crowds and/or stand in lines at crowded grocery stores? 
 

I hate to see how so many are so ok with bowing down to whatever the government and/or their media tells them.    Some stuff, especially outdoors stuff, is ok - lets take a step back and stop being paralyzed by fear and/or unwarranted obedience.  

 

Same goes for the anti-mask idiots. 
 

 

Yeah, people have turned to a vaccine as the answer that ends it all, with the assumption that one will be ready very soon. The cold reality is that it could be years away. You look at it differently if you aren’t making the assumption we have a vaccine before the 2021 or 2022 NFL season. There’s a chance the 2021 season will be no different than 2020 on that front. At what point must the show go on ? All of our actions are being based on the assumption of a vaccine becoming available quickly. In reality, it isn’t some sure thing before herd immunity is achieved. 

Edited July 4, 2020 by SirAndrew

[Irv]

On 7/2/2020 at 9:59 PM, Mr. WEO said:

4 of their 6 losses were at home last year.

Had you cheered a little harder that would not have been the case.  Shame on you. 

On 7/2/2020 at 12:05 PM, RiotAct said:

not sure if serious or a poor attempt at sarcasm?

You obviously don’t live in NY.  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 7/2/2020 at 6:34 AM, Greg S said:

https://nypost.com/2020/07/01/nfl-may-make-fans-sign-coronavirus-liability-waivers/

 

So much for that normal season the league was hoping to have.

 

So the source for this NY Post article is "According to a Report by the Athletic"

 

One news media citing a "report" in another news media as their source, warning sign of a possible "nothingburger"

 

So let's look at the Athletic article. 

https://theathletic.com/1904561/2020/07/01/nfl-may-ask-fans-to-sign-covid-19-liability-waivers-to-attend-games/

It cites "sources" and a "source familiar with plans from a stadium reopening working group", and that it's a proposal this group may forward to clubs.

I think that makes it a long way from a sure thing.

 

The NFL is considering requiring fans attending games this season to sign liability waivers shielding the teams from COVID-19 lawsuits, sources said.  The waiver proposal is likely to be forwarded to clubs by the middle of next week as part of a broad range of league recommended best practices for re-opening stadiums amid the coronavirus pandemic. 

“It is probably something you do electronically, just trying to figure out the operational challenges associated with waivers,” said one source familiar with plans under development by the stadium reopening working group headed by NFL Sr. VP of Security Cathy Lanier. “Just have to work out how best to do that.”

The league has said almost from the beginning of the pandemic that it expects to play its season as normally as possible. Teams are preparing for a range of scenarios, from no fans to nearly full stadiums, and the NFL is leaving those choices to the clubs and local health authorities.

 

On several groups I frequent, every time a liability waiver is brought up, lawyers out themselves and tell us they don't really mean anything, and the parties mandating the waiver can still be sued.

 

Is a waiver worth anything?  I don't know.  If the stadium takes precautions in keeping with the best public health advice currently available - ensures that all fans are wearing a mask when they enter, clearly communiciates expectations for behavior, spatially distances seating, whatever other precautions they can take to reduce density - maybe?

If the football game turns into a super-spreader event and my Granny who signed no waiver gets infected and dies as a result of being cared for by a friend of a friend who was there, can I sue?  If she can't get the best medical care because the hospitals are overwhelmed and contact tracing indicates the game was a major spreading event?  ?‍♀️

 

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 7/2/2020 at 4:31 PM, SCBills said:

Why can’t we just be rational and have constant PSA’s about distancing/washing hands/masks, mandates for indoor use of masks, along with capacity guidelines AND also let people live their lives should they choose to do so?

 

I say this by acknowledging those who should stay home, should stay home, and we should recognize that fiscally. 

 

Here's the problem I have with this "let people live their lives should they choose to do so" line of thought. 

 

It has been shown, over and over again, that it very difficult to protect vulnerable groups from transmission of a widely circulating epidemic disease.  Nonetheless, their risk can be minimized - but not by simply saying "stay home if you're part of that group" or even giving such groups a living allowance.  They need groceries, they need medical care, they need personal care, they need other services. 

That means that effective measures to control and contain disease among those PROVIDING those services need to be taken.

Are we taking such measures to an appropriate degree?  No.  No, we are not, not even for the most obviously and markedly vulnerable groups.  Congregate living facilities (nursing home, long term care home, assisted living home) employees, ombudsmen and watchdog groups will tell you that in many parts of the country employees of such facilities still are not given adequate PPE, regular testing, paid time off to quarantine pending test results, paid sick time to encourage them to stay home while ill etc etc.  Instead, such facilities are being GIVEN liability protection, without any mandate to implement effective measures to protect their patients.

 

And that's not even getting to the people who are living in private apartments and homes, but who still need groceries.

 

We are not islands.  What we do affects our families, friends, and neighbors,  It's Not Just You.

 

 

[Punching Bag]

On 7/3/2020 at 10:51 AM, major said:

 

Where did you get a NFLPA pen?  Jason Peter's agent had one of them and uses it every day now until end of eternity.

[SirAndrew]

6 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Here's the problem I have with this "let people live their lives should they choose to do so" line of thought. 

 

It has been shown, over and over again, that it very difficult to protect vulnerable groups from transmission of a widely circulating epidemic disease.  Nonetheless, their risk can be minimized - but not by simply saying "stay home if you're part of that group" or even giving such groups a living allowance.  They need groceries, they need medical care, they need personal care, they need other services. 

That means that effective measures to control and contain disease among those PROVIDING those services need to be taken.

Are we taking such measures to an appropriate degree?  No.  No, we are not, not even for the most obviously and markedly vulnerable groups.  Congregate living facilities (nursing home, long term care home, assisted living home) employees, ombudsmen and watchdog groups will tell you that in many parts of the country employees of such facilities still are not given adequate PPE, regular testing, paid time off to quarantine pending test results, paid sick time to encourage them to stay home while ill etc etc.  Instead, such facilities are being GIVEN liability protection, without any mandate to implement effective measures to protect their patients.

 

And that's not even getting to the people who are living in private apartments and homes, but who still need groceries.

 

We are not islands.  What we do affects our families, friends, and neighbors,  It's Not Just You.

 

 

“Stay home if you’re part of that group” also doesn’t work because people who work with vulnerable populations need to buy groceries. Every time someone chooses to make a “political statement” by not wearing a mask, they could potentially kill dozens of people by infecting a health care worker. Sometimes I feel awkward being out wearing a mask amongst all the non mask wearing people. Believe what you want, but I don’t understand why the mask thing has become a political debate. It has nothing to do with politics.   It’s simply a rule right now to keep us safe, I don’t see people running around openly protesting other such rules. 

Edited July 4, 2020 by SirAndrew

[T master]

In todays world this will become the norm there is someone out there that will try it anyway because of some BS reason just to try to cash in but turn their responsibility to what ever team they choose to go see probably the Redskins even if they change their name just because of all the hurt they caused by the name ! 

 

Then coming very soon they will be giving out a trophy for all teams that didn't win the lombardi but did participate in the season so no one will feel less than each other it's only right ...

[KD in CA]

I had to sign a waiver to play tennis this morning.  Not a whole lot of interaction within six feet in that game.
 

It’s just CYA so you can’t sue someone for getting COVID.  You’ll probably need to start signing them to enter buildings once the lockdown ends.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

19 minutes ago, KD in CA said:

I had to sign a waiver to play tennis this morning.  Not a whole lot of interaction within six feet in that game.
 

It’s just CYA so you can’t sue someone for getting COVID.  You’ll probably need to start signing them to enter buildings once the lockdown ends.

 

Lockdown has been ended for some time?  

[Just Jack]

On 7/4/2020 at 11:35 AM, Hapless Bills Fan said:

The NFL is considering requiring fans attending games this season to sign liability waivers shielding the teams from COVID-19 lawsuits, sources said.  The waiver proposal is likely to be forwarded to clubs by the middle of next week as part of a broad range of league recommended best practices for re-opening stadiums amid the coronavirus pandemic. 

“It is probably something you do electronically, just trying to figure out the operational challenges associated with waivers,” said one source familiar with plans under development by the stadium reopening working group headed by NFL Sr. VP of Security Cathy Lanier. “Just have to work out how best to do that.”

 

So if they have the season ticket holder on record sign the waiver, then said STH sells their seats to someone else that did not sign a waiver, can they still sue? I guess we'll find out if/when it happens. 

 

[LB3]

10 hours ago, Just Jack said:

 

So if they have the season ticket holder on record sign the waiver, then said STH sells their seats to someone else that did not sign a waiver, can they still sue? I guess we'll find out if/when it happens. 

 

I wonder if they could build the waiver into the ticket. Use of ticket acts as a signed waiver.

[Gordio]

On 7/4/2020 at 11:35 AM, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

So the source for this NY Post article is "According to a Report by the Athletic"

 

One news media citing a "report" in another news media as their source, warning sign of a possible "nothingburger"

 

So let's look at the Athletic article. 

https://theathletic.com/1904561/2020/07/01/nfl-may-ask-fans-to-sign-covid-19-liability-waivers-to-attend-games/

It cites "sources" and a "source familiar with plans from a stadium reopening working group", and that it's a proposal this group may forward to clubs.

I think that makes it a long way from a sure thing.

 

The NFL is considering requiring fans attending games this season to sign liability waivers shielding the teams from COVID-19 lawsuits, sources said.  The waiver proposal is likely to be forwarded to clubs by the middle of next week as part of a broad range of league recommended best practices for re-opening stadiums amid the coronavirus pandemic. 

“It is probably something you do electronically, just trying to figure out the operational challenges associated with waivers,” said one source familiar with plans under development by the stadium reopening working group headed by NFL Sr. VP of Security Cathy Lanier. “Just have to work out how best to do that.”

The league has said almost from the beginning of the pandemic that it expects to play its season as normally as possible. Teams are preparing for a range of scenarios, from no fans to nearly full stadiums, and the NFL is leaving those choices to the clubs and local health authorities.

 

On several groups I frequent, every time a liability waiver is brought up, lawyers out themselves and tell us they don't really mean anything, and the parties mandating the waiver can still be sued.

 

Is a waiver worth anything?  I don't know.  If the stadium takes precautions in keeping with the best public health advice currently available - ensures that all fans are wearing a mask when they enter, clearly communiciates expectations for behavior, spatially distances seating, whatever other precautions they can take to reduce density - maybe?

If the football game turns into a super-spreader event and my Granny who signed no waiver gets infected and dies as a result of being cared for by a friend of a friend who was there, can I sue?  If she can't get the best medical care because the hospitals are overwhelmed and contact tracing indicates the game was a major spreading event?  ?‍♀️

 

 

 

 

 

Do you consider the protests a public safety hazard in what you described above.  If not I would be interested in hearing your reasons why.