Ass't Coaches: Rick Dennison (MN) and Cole Popovich (NE) out after refusing vaccine

[Max Fischer]

27 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

No I didn't.  And this discussion is exactly about unvaccinated coaching staff.  No NFL policy says Tier 1 staff have to be fired if they refuse vaccination.  They can remain on staff without player contact.  The is no NFL ultimatum of get vaccinated of be fired.

 

You can link me the Vikings policy that is separate from that of the NFL on this...

 

Also, the Vikings haven't yet fired him....https://www.si.com/nfl/vikings/news/vikings-coach-rick-dennison-hasnt-been-fired-yet-discussions-ongoing

Oh, it's not a “policy” but if he's not vaccinated Dennison won't be able to do his job. Got it. That makes total sense. 

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, Max Fischer said:

Oh, it's not a “policy” but if he's not vaccinated Dennison won't be able to do his job. Got it. That makes total sense. 

 

You said this: "They made clear if staff did not comply, they would be terminated."   You made that up.

 

 

Also, they haven't fired him, in fact.  They are "in discussions" with him.  They can fire him, keep him on staff as a non-Tier 1 "advisor" or convince him to take the vaccine and he stays a Tier 1 staff member.  Pretty simple...

 

 

[Max Fischer]

1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

I can't tell if you're being serious or not.  Regardless, it's not ideal to have players on the same team argue about vaccines on a social media platform when we were told this would be handled in house.  I'm not going to just brush aside the negative impact this could have on our team going into the season.  Especially if we're talking forfeits then it's absolutely fair game for McBeane to cut marginal players that aren't vaccinated.  Same goes for making a tough decision for a guy on a mission at slot WR if it comes to that.

 

Yeah, it's seriously demented that fans regularly get upset by innocuous, trivial and often untrue things that may or may not affect a team’s ability to win. Yet, when faced with the genuine possibility that COVID outbreaks could lead to forfiets, long term illness, career ending ailments or even death, fans will cry that it's all about individual “choice” and unfair to anti-vaxers. 

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

You said this: "They made clear if staff did not comply, they would be terminated."   You made that up.

 

 

Also, they haven't fired him, in fact.  They are "in discussions" with him.  They can fire him, keep him on staff as a non-Tier 1 "advisor" or convince him to take the vaccine and he stays a Tier 1 staff member.  Pretty simple...

 

 

 

So if he’s fired or placed in limbo like the NE coach, Isn't that justified? 

[Mr. WEO]

5 minutes ago, Max Fischer said:

 

Yeah, it's seriously demented that fans regularly get upset by innocuous, trivial and often untrue things that may or may not affect a team’s ability to win. Yet, when faced with the genuine possibility that COVID outbreaks could lead to forfiets, long term illness, career ending ailments or even death, fans will cry that it's all about individual “choice” and unfair to anti-vaxers. 

 

So if he’s fired or placed in limbo like the NE coach, Isn't that justified? 

 

Look, I said they don't have to fire him.  That's all.  They don't and they haven't.  They have no such policy, nor does the NFL.  I don't know what you are arguing now with the above post, but....well, good luck.

[Punching Bag]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

A lot of people's idea of discussing Beasley, Diggs, Hughes, Feliciano on Twitter is to insert their information or misinformation, general opinions,and beliefs about covid-19 and/or politics into the discussion, which we're requested to stay out of:

Policing this places a pretty large burden on the mods, since people can not or will not restrain themselves and then of course, get all fluffy about it. 

Failing to police this degrades this FOOTBALL board into a Covid and Politics Sewer PDQ as was demonstrated last summer - the reason this rule was implemented.
 

Discussing other football relevant topics, including light-hearted ones, is something this board is intended to do whether or not Beasley on Twitter is being discussed.  Describing said discussions as "pretending everything is OK" seems egocentric to me ("only the discussion I wish to engage in counts as football discussion, everything else is just Ostrich-Town"), but Hey - You do You.

 

A sub board should be created for those threads and anybody starting outside get warnings and increasing punishment as appropriate.

The good news it would take them off front page which increases responses.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

29 minutes ago, Limeaid said:

 

A sub board should be created for those threads and anybody starting outside get warnings and increasing punishment as appropriate.

The good news it would take them off front page which increases responses.

 

As I understand it, creating boards and sub-boards is a big deal with the software this board uses.

 

However, any member here at any time is free to start a club to discuss any topic that they feel is currently of interest to a number of others.

 

Let me repeat that: Any member here at any time is free to start a club to discuss any topic that they feel is currently of interest to others.

[JakeFrommStateFarm]

Looks like unvaccinated players are going to be much lighter in the wallet.

 

"According to ESPN.com, the league will fine unvaccinated players $14,650 for each violation of the league's COVID-19 protocols, such as not wearing a mask in areas where it is mandated to do so, or attending a crowded, indoor event. "

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-will-fine-unvaccinated-players-14650-for-violating-covid-protocols/

[The_Ripster]

3 hours ago, JakeFrommStateFarm said:

Looks like unvaccinated players are going to be much lighter in the wallet.

 

"According to ESPN.com, the league will fine unvaccinated players $14,650 for each violation of the league's COVID-19 protocols, such as not wearing a mask in areas where it is mandated to do so, or attending a crowded, indoor event. "

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-will-fine-unvaccinated-players-14650-for-violating-covid-protocols/

that's insane!

[Rochesterfan]

2 hours ago, The_Ripster said:

that's insane!

 

 

Why - they got agreement with the NFLPA on the protocols and now the league has several players upset and openly talking about ignoring said agreed to protocols.
 

How do you fix that - you start taking away the only leverage you have - Money and Games.  Fines and suspensions are teams only options and the NFL has given them the guidance and ability to use those.

 

They didn’t have a ton of options last year as teams broke out - now they are putting info out there ahead of time based upon what they saw.  They will make minor adjustments, but now some of last years misadventures will have repercussions.

 

 

Edited July 25, 2021 by Rochesterfan

[just1hugheser]

'i dont want the vaccine because they made it too fast'- so you are not getting something that you know will reduce your chance of infection and of infecting other people, as well as significantly reduce the severity and strength of infection because you are afraid of some thing that may or may not happen in the future or long term because they made the vaccine too fast and your scared something might happen in the future when all current evidence suggests otherwise

 

'i dont want the vaccine because i feel like people/my employer/the govt are trying to force my decision'- same principle as above only not being led necessarily by fear but out of oppositional defiance aka spite.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

On 7/23/2021 at 11:26 AM, BillsfaninSB said:

Between the NFL and college I can’t believe how these coaches manage to stay around forever.  It’s like a job for life as long as you are okay moving every two years. 

If you are white

6 hours ago, The_Ripster said:

that's insane!

really? How much money do you think the NFL would lose if they have to cancel a game?  

[The_Ripster]

4 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

Why - they got agreement with the NFLPA on the protocols and now the league has several players upset and openly talking about ignoring said agreed to protocols.
 

How do you fix that - you start taking away the only leverage you have - Money and Games.  Fines and suspensions are teams only options and the NFL has given them the guidance and ability to use those.

 

They didn’t have a ton of options last year as teams broke out - now they are putting info out there ahead of time based upon what they saw.  They will make minor adjustments, but now some of last years misadventures will have repercussions.

 

 

It is insane because they're employed by a quasi-monopoly. 

We can jest about the players earning so much that it is insignificant or they should "suck it up", yet the fact still remains they are employed by a quasi-monopoly and have limited employment opportunities outside the NFL. They most likely will be out of work indefinitely if they choose to exercise their God given right of free will which is very different from most of the population.

If you were part of a labor union and disagreed with the approach of the union issuing fines against you for not wanting to subject your body to a medical procedure to continue with employment, you could always A) start your own private business or B) search for a union who is not requesting that demand.

Options they don't really have.

Secondly, we know for a fact vaccinated players can still contract and spread the virus. Imagine the league issuing fines against a healthy COVID-free 'unvaccinated' player for not wearing a mask while 'vaccinated' players are simultaneously spreading the virus amongst each other without penalty. That seems like an unethical and immoral tactic and I can understand why players would be frustrated with the NFLPA. 
 

[Doc Brown]

45 minutes ago, The_Ripster said:

It is insane because they're employed by a quasi-monopoly. 

We can jest about the players earning so much that it is insignificant or they should "suck it up", yet the fact still remains they are employed by a quasi-monopoly and have limited employment opportunities outside the NFL. They most likely will be out of work indefinitely if they choose to exercise their God given right of free will which is very different from most of the population.

I see help wanted signs all over the place.

 

45 minutes ago, The_Ripster said:

Secondly, we know for a fact vaccinated players can still contract and spread the virus. Imagine the league issuing fines against a healthy COVID-free 'unvaccinated' player for not wearing a mask while 'vaccinated' players are simultaneously spreading the virus amongst each other without penalty. That seems like an unethical and immoral tactic and I can understand why players would be frustrated with the NFLPA. 

That's exactly what will happen.  If you don't want to get fined get the vaccine.  If you don't want to get the vaccine you have to abide by last year's rules.  Life is full of making decisions about whether the risk is worth the reward.  These two coaches determined the risk (getting vaccinated for whatever reason) wasn't worth the reward (staying employed).

[Rochesterfan]

4 hours ago, The_Ripster said:

It is insane because they're employed by a quasi-monopoly. 

We can jest about the players earning so much that it is insignificant or they should "suck it up", yet the fact still remains they are employed by a quasi-monopoly and have limited employment opportunities outside the NFL. They most likely will be out of work indefinitely if they choose to exercise their God given right of free will which is very different from most of the population.

If you were part of a labor union and disagreed with the approach of the union issuing fines against you for not wanting to subject your body to a medical procedure to continue with employment, you could always A) start your own private business or B) search for a union who is not requesting that demand.

Options they don't really have.

Secondly, we know for a fact vaccinated players can still contract and spread the virus. Imagine the league issuing fines against a healthy COVID-free 'unvaccinated' player for not wearing a mask while 'vaccinated' players are simultaneously spreading the virus amongst each other without penalty. That seems like an unethical and immoral tactic and I can understand why players would be frustrated with the NFLPA. 
 

 

They have been employed by this “quasi-monopoly” for years.  The NFL existed before the pandemic and will exist after the pandemic and the players have always had to play by the rules bargained for.  The “quasi-monopoly” is the reason they get paid huge money to play a game because if you take away the exclusive TV rights - the NFL becomes the CFL and that hurts the players way more than the millionaire owners. At least they have a Union and can bargain - the players just do a terrible job of representing themselves because just like politics most players are uninformed and don’t care about the issues just as long as it is not them that has to go to meetings.  

 

This is no different than the drug testing done in the past - some players liked to smoke pot - other didn’t - but the rules for testing were in place and established and the players had to abide and those that couldn’t were issued fines and suspensions - along with more drug testing and rehab plans - even if the player didn’t want it.  

 

Players that tested positive for drugs were treated different from players that had not tested positive (even if said player was a known pot head or worse) by having a whole litany of additional testing and other “commitments” to fulfill that were not required of their teammates. Those players had the exact same options the unvaccinated players have - follow the rules or face the consequences and if you really hate the rules - pull a Ricky Williams and retire - go do something else - there are 10 more guys willing and able to fill in.

 

Most companies and businesses are having to make the exact same choice the NFL is making - some have union representation and many don’t, but they are having to navigate unvaccinated versus vaccinated and rules.  We have had to establish that unvaccinated employees are masked at all times and in break rooms or meetings must maintain a 5 foot social distance, but unvaccinated employees can return to normal - no mask required (still recommended) and less social distancing.  
 

As a leader - I have to know the vaccination status of all of my employees and have to enforce the rules and just like the NFL - there are consequences to their actions.  Our employer has decided that unvaccinated employees get 1 “verbal reminder” then 1 “verbal warning” before written disciplinary action begins that includes suspensions and firings.  

 

 

 

Edited July 25, 2021 by Rochesterfan

[The_Ripster]

5 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

They have been employed by this “quasi-monopoly” for years.  The NFL existed before the pandemic and will exist after the pandemic and the players have always had to play by the rules bargained for.  The “quasi-monopoly” is the reason they get paid huge money to play a game because if you take away the exclusive TV rights - the NFL becomes the CFL and that hurts the players way more than the millionaire owners. At least they have a Union and can bargain - the players just do a terrible job of representing themselves because just like politics most players are uninformed and don’t care about the issues just as long as it is not them that has to go to meetings.  

 

This is no different than the drug testing done in the past - some players liked to smoke pot - other didn’t - but the rules for testing were in place and established and the players had to abide and those that couldn’t were issued fines and suspensions - along with more drug testing and rehab plans - even if the player didn’t want it.  

 

Players that tested positive for drugs were treated different from players that had not tested positive (even if said player was a known pot head or worse) by having a whole litany of additional testing and other “commitments” to fulfill that were not required of their teammates. Those players had the exact same options the unvaccinated players have - follow the rules or face the consequences and if you really hate the rules - pull a Ricky Williams and retire - go do something else - there are 10 more guys willing and able to fill in.

 

Most companies and businesses are having to make the exact same choice the NFL is making - some have union representation and many don’t, but they are having to navigate unvaccinated versus vaccinated and rules.  We have had to establish that unvaccinated employees are masked at all times and in break rooms or meetings must maintain a 5 foot social distance, but unvaccinated employees can return to normal - no mask required (still recommended) and less social distancing.  
 

As a leader - I have to know the vaccination status of all of my employees and have to enforce the rules and just like the NFL - there are consequences to their actions.  Our employer has decided that unvaccinated employees get 1 “verbal reminder” then 1 “verbal warning” before written disciplinary action begins that includes suspensions and firings.  

 

 

 

I don't agree with how you are trying to compare unvaccinated players to 'pot heads' and vaccinated players as non-marijuana users. 

[Rochesterfan]

11 minutes ago, The_Ripster said:

I don't agree with how you are trying to compare unvaccinated players to 'pot heads' and vaccinated players as non-marijuana users. 

 

So think of it another way.  Whatever you need to understand.  There are bargained rules to follow and those rules are different depending on vaccination status or drug status.  It doesn’t have to be pot - it could be PEDs or a drunk driving indictment, but any kind of entrance into the drug program creates 2 different classes of athletes.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

20 minutes ago, The_Ripster said:

I don't agree with how you are trying to compare unvaccinated players to 'pot heads' and vaccinated players as non-marijuana users. 

 

Respectfully, I think you are missing his point.  Many people believe that marijuana should be like alcohol - legal for recreational use, or at least accepted for medical use in pain relief and treatment of certain diseases. 

 

Regardless of popular opinion (and individual player opinion) NFL had rules that required testing for marijuana and players who tested positive had consequences - they received additional testing requirements and penalties for future tests.

 

The point isn’t “pot head” vs “non user”, the point is that it’s not a new thing for the NFL to have unpopular (and arguably, detrimental) rules that the players must still either follow, or have consequences, and the marijuana policies are given as an example.

 

 

 

[The_Ripster]

36 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Respectfully, I think you are missing his point.  Many people believe that marijuana should be like alcohol - legal for recreational use, or at least accepted for medical use in pain relief and treatment of certain diseases. 

 

Regardless of popular opinion (and individual player opinion) NFL had rules that required testing for marijuana and players who tested positive had consequences - they received additional testing requirements and penalties for future tests.

 

The point isn’t “pot head” vs “non user”, the point is that it’s not a new thing for the NFL to have unpopular (and arguably, detrimental) rules that the players must still either follow, or have consequences, and the marijuana policies are given as an example.

 

 

 

No, I see the end goal of his analogy crystal clear; the NFLPA doesn't listen to all the wants and needs of their players.

It is a bad analogy because it is proposing that perfectly healthy sober individuals are now lumped in with players wanting to take substances which alter their mental state without penalty, which is completely messed up. 
 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

21 minutes ago, The_Ripster said:

No, I see the end goal of his analogy crystal clear; the NFLPA doesn't listen to all the wants and needs of their players.

 

1) no one, especially an employer,can listen to “all the wants and needs” of their employees.  That’s not an “end goal” that’s just a fact.

 

Anyone who has ever led or supervised people knows this, it isn’t news.

 

The end goal of a business is to deliver product, not please employees;  most businesses try to meet employee needs because “needs” are what you require to do your job.  Most businesses accommodate some wants as long as it doesn’t interfere with product because high-morale employees do better work.

 

But Fergoshsakes, anyone who thinks a union can listen to “all the wants and needs” of the employees they represent, much less negotiate for that, is air dreaming.

 

 

[Rochesterfan]

29 minutes ago, The_Ripster said:

No, I see the end goal of his analogy crystal clear; the NFLPA doesn't listen to all the wants and needs of their players.

It is a bad analogy because it is proposing that perfectly healthy sober individuals are now lumped in with players wanting to take substances which alter their mental state without penalty, which is completely messed up. 
 

 

Not the point at all.

 

The point is the players have rules to follow and fines and suspensions have been used for other issues and therefore the fines and suspensions for this are not as you said “insane”, but an already utilized function.

[The_Ripster]

2 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

1) no one, especially an employer,can listen to “all the wants and needs” of their employees.  That’s not an “end goal” that’s just a fact.

 

Anyone who has ever led or supervised people knows this, it isn’t news.

 

The end goal of a business is to deliver product, not please employees;  most businesses try to meet employee needs because “needs” are what you require to do your job.  Most businesses accommodate some wants as long as it doesn’t interfere with product because high-morale employees do better work.

 

But Fergoshsakes, anyone who thinks a union can listen to “all the wants and needs” of the employees they represent, much less negotiate for that, is air dreaming.

 

 

Chill, you're blowing out of proportion my usage of the word "all". The issue at hand was reduced to 2 specific issues. Vaccines and recreational drug use.

As for the NFL being a business. I can't think of any other business in the USA fining their employees $10,000+ for not wearing a mask, regardless of income.

And one could argue it's the NFL's patrons, in fact, who are the to be high-morale benefactor's from this harsh outcome and not the NFL's employee's (players).

[ColoradoBills]

2 minutes ago, The_Ripster said:

As for the NFL being a business. I can't think of any other business in the USA fining their employees $10,000+ for not wearing a mask, regardless of income.

 

I recently retired from a business that terminated employees for not wearing a mask.  The NFLPA has bargained so that doesn't happen to

it's members.  Instead it bargained for the rules they now have.  You can disagree with that all you want but it won't change it.

[The_Ripster]

1 minute ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

I recently retired from a business that terminated employees for not wearing a mask.  The NFLPA has bargained so that doesn't happen to

it's members.  Instead it bargained for the rules they now have.  You can disagree with that all you want but it won't change it.

Totally agree with you. 

[Rochesterfan]

9 minutes ago, The_Ripster said:

Chill, you're blowing out of proportion my usage of the word "all". The issue at hand was reduced to 2 specific issues. Vaccines and recreational drug use.

As for the NFL being a business. I can't think of any other business in the USA fining their employees $10,000+ for not wearing a mask, regardless of income.

And one could argue it's the NFL's patrons, in fact, who are the to be high-morale benefactor's from this harsh outcome and not the NFL's employee's (players).

 

We suspend and fire employees for not wearing masks if not vaccinated. 
 

Never was comparing vaccines and drug use - just the use of fines and suspensions for different things that NFLPA agreed to and various players disagree with.  

[The_Ripster]

2 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

We suspend and fire employees for not wearing masks if not vaccinated. 
 

Never was comparing vaccines and drug use - just the use of fines and suspensions for different things that NFLPA agreed to and various players disagree with.  

You did though. You could've said 'skipping mandatory minicamp' or something which disregards the validity of their ability to play in good health.

You chose to use marijuana/recreational drugs for your comparison of fines and suspensions, which is problematic, in my opinion. 

[TBBills]

33 minutes ago, The_Ripster said:

Chill, you're blowing out of proportion my usage of the word "all". The issue at hand was reduced to 2 specific issues. Vaccines and recreational drug use.

As for the NFL being a business. I can't think of any other business in the USA fining their employees $10,000+ for not wearing a mask, regardless of income.

And one could argue it's the NFL's patrons, in fact, who are the to be high-morale benefactor's from this harsh outcome and not the NFL's employee's (players).

My job would fire you if you didn't wear a mask while not vaccinated. I had to get vaccinated if I wanted to stop wearing a mask for my job. I did it without problem... Mostly b.c I am not ignorant. 

 

Sad to see these millionaires threaten to retire just b.c of ignorance, but the NFL isn't always about brains, it's about talent.

 

They can retire and live comfortably, I would get fired and not be able to afford my bills.

[Rochesterfan]

9 minutes ago, The_Ripster said:

You did though. You could've said 'skipping mandatory minicamp' or something which disregards the validity of their ability to play in good health.

You chose to use marijuana/recreational drugs for your comparison of fines and suspensions, which is problematic, in my opinion. 

 

Players are not suspended for skipping mandatory minicamp.  Players also had most fines rescinded for mandatory minicamps in the past - so not a good equivalent.  
 

But if that works for you - fine - is it insane that the NFL fines players for missing mandatory minicamps?  
 

My goodness.

12 minutes ago, The_Ripster said:

You chose to use marijuana/recreational drugs for your comparison of fines and suspensions, which is problematic, in my opinion. 

 

This statement is just idiotic.  You stated the fines and suspensions were insane and I gave you an example of another situation where some players disagree with the agreement and the NFL has fines and suspensions in place.  
 

 

[The_Ripster]

10 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

Players are not suspended for skipping mandatory minicamp.  Players also had most fines rescinded for mandatory minicamps in the past - so not a good equivalent.  
 

But if that works for you - fine - is it insane that the NFL fines players for missing mandatory minicamps?  
 

My goodness.

That is not insane at all. They should be with their teams if they are healthy and happy with their contracts. 

 

Edited July 25, 2021 by The_Ripster

[Rochesterfan]

4 minutes ago, The_Ripster said:

Not at all! They should be with their teams if they are healthy and happy with their contracts. 

 

They can be with their team if they are healthy and happy - they just need to follow protocols.  If they can’t follow protocols- then they get in trouble.

[Rochesterfan]

Just now, The_Ripster said:

I will repeat what I said earlier, which is we know for a fact vaccinated players can still contract and spread the virus. Imagine the league issuing fines against a healthy COVID-free 'unvaccinated' player for not wearing a mask while 'vaccinated' players are simultaneously spreading the virus amongst each other without penalty. That seems like an unethical and immoral tactic and I can understand why players would be frustrated with the NFLPA. 

 They are less of a threat to each other than they are to older people like myself and if I'm already protected then what's the big deal?

 

Yep - and I will say again - this is what the NFLPA agreed to.  They wanted as much freedom as possible and to get there they left the protocols in place for unvaccinated players.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

42 minutes ago, The_Ripster said:

That is not insane at all. They should be with their teams if they are healthy and happy with their contracts. 

 

Not following your point at all here.  Injured players can report to mandatory minicamp.  They receive treatment for their injuries and rehab protocols to follow over the months between minicamp and training camp.  Wealthy vets may prefer their own guys, but don’t overlook the benefit of team-provided treatment and rehab to young guys just trying to make a team.

Are you saying that it’s OK for players unhappy with their contracts to miss mandatory minicamp and they shouldn’t be fined?  Or what point are you trying to make?

[The_Ripster]

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Not following your point at all here.  Injured players can report to mandatory minicamp.  They receive treatment for their injuries and rehab protocols to follow over the months between minicamp and training camp.  Wealthy vets may prefer their own guys, but don’t overlook the benefit of team-provided treatment and rehab to young guys just trying to make a team.

Are you saying that it’s OK for players unhappy with their contracts to miss mandatory minicamp and they shouldn’t be fined?  Or what point are you trying to make?

I feel like you are nitpicking my posts and reaching hard. Of course injured players and all contractually obligated players should be at mandatory team events.

My point is unvaccinated players are just as healthy and ready to play as vaccinated players. Stigmatizing them is not winning football. 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

8 minutes ago, The_Ripster said:

I feel like you are nitpicking my posts and reaching hard. Of course injured players and all contractually obligated players should be at mandatory team events.

My point is unvaccinated players are just as healthy and ready to play as vaccinated players. Stigmatizing them is not winning football. 

 

Then why put that out there?

 

My rebuttal to your point is that the current health status of players is not the reason for the Covid protocols, it’s maintaining the health status and availability of players.   Whether the NFL/NFLPA current protocols will do that effectively may be open to question, but that’s the rationale.

 

No one is “stigmatizing” players by asking them to follow health protocols that account for the different risk to health status and availability due to vaccination.

 

[T master]

I drive a 45' Prevost bus/entertainer coach with a 16' trailer to haul our gear all around the US to gigs because this vehicle has DOT numbers on the vehicle (and we are for hire) i have to have a Class A CDL & go through a bunch of testing (both written & driving) in order to drive this vehicle .

 

But any one of you that has the kind of money to buy a Prevost bus could drive this vehicle toting a trailer or a vehicle behind it down the road registered as camper with a every day normal class E license (i believe) and have little to no testing or even experience/training to drive this vehicle the same one i drive which i need a Class A CDL because it has DOT numbers on it and it be perfectly legal in most states and the feds are good with it too. 

 

Too add to this if I drive this vehicle with a trailer that is registered for 10k lbs or under i only need a Class B CDL but if it's registered for 12k lbs or over you need a Class A CDL even though both trailers are the exact same in length just different axle weight ratio go figure . 🤔

 

Seems to be a lot of similarities in the laying out of the rules with in the NFL and Federal standards . 

[Thurman#1]

On 7/25/2021 at 3:50 PM, The_Ripster said:

It is insane because they're employed by a quasi-monopoly. 

We can jest about the players earning so much that it is insignificant or they should "suck it up", yet the fact still remains they are employed by a quasi-monopoly and have limited employment opportunities outside the NFL. They most likely will be out of work indefinitely if they choose to exercise their God given right of free will which is very different from most of the population.

If you were part of a labor union and disagreed with the approach of the union issuing fines against you for not wanting to subject your body to a medical procedure to continue with employment, you could always A) start your own private business or B) search for a union who is not requesting that demand.

Options they don't really have.

Secondly, we know for a fact vaccinated players can still contract and spread the virus. Imagine the league issuing fines against a healthy COVID-free 'unvaccinated' player for not wearing a mask while 'vaccinated' players are simultaneously spreading the virus amongst each other without penalty. That seems like an unethical and immoral tactic and I can understand why players would be frustrated with the NFLPA. 
 

 

 

The whole "vaccinated people can spread it too," thing is a ridiculous argument. 

 

Yeah, they can spread it too, but unlike the unvaccinated, they have done the single best thing they can do to prevent themselves from spreading it. The unvaccinated have not. Yeah, the vaccinated can spread it, but they do so at much lower rates. They have done everything that can reasonably be done. So of course they can spread it without penalty, since they've done something making spreading it much more difficult. The unvaccinated have gone out of their way to avoid doing their best to prevent spreading it. So of course it's mroe reasonable for them to expect to get penalized.

 

And yeah, I understand why some people would be frustrated with the NFLPA. Same reason my kid gets frustrated with me when I don't let her eat ice cream before dinner. She wants to do what she wants when she wants, and she wants to do it without consequences. Consequences are frustrating.

 

If your argument is that working in a quasi-monopoly is so very tough, I would point you towards the salaries they earn when in that industry. No, they won't be able to earn the same money elsewhere but most of them can make a perfectly fine living elsewhere, as football coaches, insurance salesmen, whatever. Nobody's stopping them from earning a living. Actions have consequences.

 

 

Edited July 26, 2021 by Thurman#1

[Jerome007]

Has the NFLPA consulted with the players first before agreeing to all this? Did the players vote on this?

 

As for the coaches, probably no one is "on their side" but their own lawyers might have a say in this

 

 

Edited July 26, 2021 by Jerome007

[Rc2catch]

Rules are about to change for vaccinated staff it sounds. Frank Reich just got covid and he’s fully vaccinated and is now on quarantine. I think Shefter mentioned the league is discussing more frequent testing of vaccinated staff and players now. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, Jerome007 said:

Has the NFLPA consulted with the players first before agreeing to all this? Did the players vote on this?

 

That’s not how collective bargaining works AFAIK.  The players have representatives from each team and a committee to study the issue.  Every issue does not go to a vote of the membership and it probably shouldn’t.

 

 

 

 

[ColoradoBills]

52 minutes ago, Rc2catch said:

Rules are about to change for vaccinated staff it sounds. Frank Reich just got covid and he’s fully vaccinated and is now on quarantine. I think Shefter mentioned the league is discussing more frequent testing of vaccinated staff and players now. 

 

It seems to me the new "variants" are causing this.  I see this whole thing as being very fluid as the year progresses.  The NFL is going to

have to be adapting its rules just like the rest of the country.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

55 minutes ago, Rc2catch said:

Rules are about to change for vaccinated staff it sounds. Frank Reich just got covid and he’s fully vaccinated and is now on quarantine. I think Shefter mentioned the league is discussing more frequent testing of vaccinated staff and players now. 

 

This is going to have to happen.  The testing cadence as it stands won’t enable a full season.