Jump to content

CJ Mosley opts out


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Inigo Montoya said:

 

There have not been "many studies" that demonstrate that COVID19 causes lasting cardiac issues or any other long term consequences.  The virus hasn't even been around for a year yet.  How can there be any solid studies that look at the long term health consequences of this virus when it hasn't even been a year since the very first person on the planet contracted it?  

 

Any severe respiratory infection, COVID or otherwise, can damage the lungs permanently, especially if you end up on a vent.  COVID is not unique in that respect at all. 

 

You strike me as a skeptic, rather than a medical professional. I live with medical professionals, and try my best to keep up on what the peer-reviewed scientific community is learning and sharing about this novel coronavirus. You're absolutely correct that long term health effects of COVID-19 have not been studied and reported upon due its recency. But you're positing a false equivalency when you lump it in with "any severe respiratory infection" with respect to lung damage AND you're using a red herring by focusing on lung damage specifically, when the post you're responding to focuses on deleterious cardiac issues.

 

Also the stay-home-if-you're-immuno-compromised-or-scared argument you shared previously is NOT one shared by public health officials or medical experts, because it's not about each of us protecting ourselves...it's about each of us protecting society by not contracting and spreading the virus. 

 

So I'm suggesting your points are slanted away from science. And that downplaying the virus and our responsibilities in this time of crisis is how the NFL could lose the season, and many people could unnecessarily and prematurely lose their lives. Which often gets lost in all this: people are dying when they don't have to. We should really try to prevent that. 

 

And maybe the NFL is going to discover its plan is not insular and cautious enough to be sustainable. (I sure hope not, by the way.)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, machine gun kelly said:

Sarasota, you’re northern Tampa neighbor, I don’t see the NBA not as a contact sport and also no pads new helmets if they approve them and so on.

 

I’m only saying the NBA guys have more fluids than just about any sport all over each other, and the MLB guys unless we’re talking Umpires, Catchers, and hitters being even remotely close.  Who knows and although I’m in the medical field, not just about anyone really knows everything to protect everyone.

 

Only part I have researched and only bringing up to help my friends here Is there is some work that a cocktail of otc, vitamins c,d, and zinc can help a little in prophylaxis.  Now some docs added if we had access like in many parts of the world to otc hydrochloroquine at a very low does meaning 200 mg., twice a week, there are some early promising results in lower incidences.  Not a doctor, just work with them for 25 years so I’m not going to proclaim an authority, just do you’re own hw.  See if the investment at least in the vitamins might be a good decision for you.  Everyone should figure out what’s best for them.  Kind of stinks as Hydro has been used  as a prophylaxis since the Korean War for malaria.  It probably was used more for yellow fever which was a true virus vs, malaria as a parasite infection, and before the funny responses, not yellow fever the attraction to asian women.  I know you guys so thought I would get ahead of it.  Hope this helps for those want to look into it on their own.

WTF? 

 

There is so much flawed medical commentary in one post to refute. 

 

Please cite a peer-reviewed study that supports using hydroXYchloroquine (fixed the spelling for ya) in any way to combat COVID-19. It would be great if you were correct. There ARE drugs that help treat patients infected with the virus, but the one you're pushing is not among them. 

 

HOWEVER, I completely agree that the NBA is absolutely a contact sport and that those guys swap all kinds of spit and snot repeatedly. You're spot-on there. But that's why the bubble is the key. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Richard Noggin said:

You strike me as a skeptic, rather than a medical professional. I live with medical professionals, and try my best to keep up on what the peer-reviewed scientific community is learning and sharing about this novel coronavirus. You're absolutely correct that long term health effects of COVID-19 have not been studied and reported upon due its recency. But you're positing a false equivalency when you lump it in with "any severe respiratory infection" with respect to lung damage AND you're using a red herring by focusing on lung damage specifically, when the post you're responding to focuses on deleterious cardiac issues.

 

Also the stay-home-if-you're-immuno-compromised-or-scared argument you shared previously is NOT one shared by public health officials or medical experts, because it's not about each of us protecting ourselves...it's about each of us protecting society by not contracting and spreading the virus. 

 

So I'm suggesting your points are slanted away from science. And that downplaying the virus and our responsibilities in this time of crisis is how the NFL could lose the season, and many people could unnecessarily and prematurely lose their lives. Which often gets lost in all this: people are dying when they don't have to. We should really try to prevent that. 

 

And maybe the NFL is going to discover its plan is not insular and cautious enough to be sustainable. (I sure hope not, by the way.)

 

 

I don't know what you feel I'm being a skeptic about.  I actually do follow the science because it's my job.  I admitted a COVID19 patient with pneumonia three hours ago.  You say that I am "slanted away from science" which is completely off base.  The science as it currently stands supports my position.  If the science changes, then my position will change with it.  I don't have a dog in this fight one way of the other.  I have taken this pandemic very seriously from the start.  I lived in my garage for the entire month of April sleeping in my backpacking tent and had zero personal contact with my family because I was worried about infecting them with COVID19 if I contracted it at work.  We knew very little about the virus then. We know a lot more about it now.

 

The article about heart issues with COVID19 sited by the TBD member I replied to is typical of the "science" the public gets their information from.  It was not a peer reviewed or controlled study. It wasn't even a real study, it was a collection of data.  The article was written in a way to gin up fear about heart complications from COVID19.   Did the article mention that many everyday infections also cause myocarditis such as the common cold, the flu, mono, and strep throat?  Or did the author simply state that COVID19 is causing serious heart issues without providing any of that context at all?  Does it compare the rates of myocarditis between patients infected with influenza or strep versus COVID19 ?  Did it quantify the severity of the myocardits in these patients?   Are any of them actually symptomatic with the myocarditis?  My guess is that the overwhelming majority of the patients had no idea they even had it.  

 

This virus is only going away in one of three ways.  1.  We develop herd immunity as a society.  2. We develop an effective vaccine and people take it.   3. It burns out on its own like many viruses do.  I don't think any of those three are happening in the near future.  Take away message is that we are going to have to live with it for a while longer. Back to the issue at hand.... the risk of serious illness or death to young healthy people like football players from COVID19, according to the science, is almost zero.  That is not in dispute.  People with significant comorbidities and the elderly should self quarantine as much as is practically possible until one of those three things listed above occurs.  That too, despite what you assert, is not in dispute.

 

How this pandemic has become a political issue is simply beyond me.  Appreciate the conversation my friends, but I'm done. 

 

 

Edited by Inigo Montoya
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, YoloinOhio said:

What a terrible contract 


Just unbelievably bad contract for the Jest.  It’ll be interesting to see how their strategy of massively overpaying for free agents at LB (Mosley) and RB (Bell) while trading away their elite safety (Adams) works out.  Maybe rolling the dice on questionable players across their entire OL will help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ScottLaw said:

The Mosley and Bell signings were made by their previous GM Maccagnan who was fired before last season.... just awful use of cap space. As for Adams, I’m not sure how anyone can blame the Jets for trading away that #######. That guys the opposite of a leader. He cried himself off the team. 


Adams is an elite safety who can play the pass, the run and rush the passer.  He did the smart thing by finding a way off of a train wreck of a team.  And while you’re right that the GM has been swapped out, I’d remind you that the owner and HC are the same and that the owner was the one said to be pushing for those two deals.  So the GM switch isn’t all that meaningful.  

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, 1ManRaid said:

A certain poster over on the Jets forum already has his reason why they "won" over us this year.  CJ being injured was the main reason the loss didn't count last year (that and mono).

 

Too bad.  Injuries are part of the game.

 

13 hours ago, BuffaninSarasota said:

if there is a week 1.......seriously

 

Seriously -- MLB is about to cancel, who knows what the NBA bubble will produce, and the NHL is a crapshoot. About the only pro sport in action is the PGA.

 

We'll see if they cancel.  And if they do, it's because the Marlins were idiots.  They're a cautionary tale for the rest of the leagues.

 

11 hours ago, Rocbillsfan1 said:

If there isn’t a bubble, then they aren’t really giving it a go. They are going to get paid either way. Screw roger goodell and his greedy ass but I’m sure people like yourself will just blame the players. 

 

Huh?  They're "giving it a go" without a bubble.  Hopefully the players have been inculcated with what they need to do to keep as safe as possible, again using examples like the Marlins or, say, a guy like Pasternak, i.e. selfish behavior.

 

And it's not my call to have the season.  The owners have bills to pay and so do players.  The vast majority of players don't have millions in the bank lie the stars who can conveniently opt-out do.

 

44 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

Just unbelievably bad contract for the Jest.  It’ll be interesting to see how their strategy of massively overpaying for free agents at LB (Mosley) and RB (Bell) while trading away their elite safety (Adams) works out.  Maybe rolling the dice on questionable players across their entire OL will help.

 

I don't think it was a bad contract.  It was basically a 3-year $36M deal with most of the money upfront because they had tons of cap room.  That bad part is that Mosley got hurt midway through his first game with them and the COVID hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Doc said:

 

Too bad.  Injuries are part of the game.

 

 

We'll see if they cancel.  And if they do, it's because the Marlins were idiots.  They're a cautionary tale for the rest of the leagues.

 

 

Huh?  They're "giving it a go" without a bubble.  Hopefully the players have been inculcated with what they need to do to keep as safe as possible, again using examples like the Marlins or, say, a guy like Pasternak, i.e. selfish behavior.

 

And it's not my call to have the season.  The owners have bills to pay and so do players.  The vast majority of players don't have millions in the bank lie the stars who can conveniently opt-out do.

 

 

I don't think it was a bad contract.  It was basically a 3-year $36M deal with most of the money upfront because they had tons of cap room.  That bad part is that Mosley got hurt midway through his first game with them and the COVID hit.

The contract was bad imo because it was well above market for the next closest LB at the time, which seemed unnecessary given his status, but they had to overpay to get him to leave Baltimore. They basically gave him a contract he financially couldn’t turn down but he really didn’t want to go there. That’s what leads to below average ROI sometimes.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

The contract was bad imo because it was well above market for the next closest LB at the time, which seemed unnecessary given his status, but they had to overpay to get him to leave Baltimore. They basically gave him a contract he financially couldn’t turn down but he really didn’t want to go there. That’s what leads to below average ROI sometimes.

 

Sorry, my numbers were off.  It's basically a 3-year $51M deal.  I still don't know if $17M/year for a guy of his caliber (4 time Pro Bowler and 2nd team All-Pro in his first 5 years) is a bad deal, in so far as star players have to be paid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Sorry, my numbers were off.  It's basically a 3-year $51M deal.  I still don't know if $17M/year for a guy of his caliber (4 time Pro Bowler and 2nd team All-Pro in his first 5 years) is a bad deal, in so far as star players have to be paid.

It looks more reasonable after this FA period but he blew the LB market out of the water in 2019. It was considered unexpected and unnecessary given where he stands among LBs. They gave him about 20 mill more than he was worth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

The guys a complete #######. The Jets had absolutely no choice and got a haul for him. He vocally trashed the entire organization. How do you keep that guy on the team? You cant blame the Jets at all for that trade. 
 

The HC will be fired either during or right after the season. That’s a guarantee. Again, their new GM didn’t hire Gase. And yes, their ownership is questionable. But then again, so are the Pegulas as owners. They seemed to have gotten it right with McBeane. The same may happen with the Jets as Joe Douglas is highly regarded. 


Adams does not have a history of problem behavior.  The Jest do.  What are we, two years removed from the Osemele fiasco?  That’s where the team supplied an old MRI tof his shoulder to him so it wouldn’t show his injury and he Would keep playing rather than get surgery.  It’s also the organization with an owner who might be heading to jail soon.  I do not blame Adams one bit for finding a way out of there. 

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, YoloinOhio said:

It looks more reasonable after this FA period but he blew the LB market out of the water in 2019. It was considered unexpected and unnecessary given where he stands among LBs. They gave him about 20 mill more than he was worth. 

 

Fair enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, MJS said:

You were berating them for their opinion. My opinion is similar to yours, but I think it is just as valid to be happy the Jets lost a good player and that the Bills will have an easier schedule as a result.

 

Ok you are right, I wouldn't call it berating but I was unnecessarily aggressive. I think my point stands (its unsportsmanlike and it is also bad for Bills/league) but I could've and should've say it in more civil way. Thanks for feedback. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

 

Prioritizing money over human life is a big part of the reason over 25,000 American died from Covid-19 in July, alone.

 

A record number of Americans are on unemployment, either furloughed or laid off due to the virus.  I'm sorry, but millionaire players and billionaire owners don't get an ounce of sympathy from me.  Give me a ***** break.

If players choose to play, then that it is their choice. People should be careful, but we cant lose site of how important it is for individuals to make their own choices. I'd rather have a few individuals make bad choices then for us to have a top down mentality where one bad choice ruins things for everyone. If they want to play, let them play. And to me, they are doing America a favor. We need some entertainment. Some happiness. I'd rather limp forward, then curl up and quit on life. Let's move on. Carefully, thoughtfully, but forward. I'm looking forward to football. A wonderful escape for a little while. THANK YOU NFL AND NFL PLAYERS AND COACHES. THANK YOU.

Edited by mykidsdad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Rocbillsfan1 said:

If there isn’t a bubble, then they aren’t really giving it a go. They are going to get paid either way. Screw roger goodell and his greedy ass but I’m sure people like yourself will just blame the players. 


 

Man what is up with this take?  You do know that so called “greedy” Roger Goodell and the owners wanted a bubble format, but the NFLPA rejected it from the beginning.

 

The NFL floated several plans to the players, but got a lot of rejection.  

  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/1/2020 at 2:22 PM, jeremy2020 said:

 

Gonna be tough to win when there are zero players on the field for either side ;)

Yep cause if both teams and coaches all test negative everyday for the 6 days prior to the game... all players and coaches on the field that day are negative , that virus is gonna go crazy....

 

 

Question is, of the 65 players including the practice squad players... can they dress 46? Players are going to get it... but it won’t be from the field or each other. It’s gonna come from outside.

 

 

Edited by CEN-CAL17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...