Max Fischer Posted July 24, 2021 Share Posted July 24, 2021 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 24, 2021 Share Posted July 24, 2021 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... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Fischer Posted July 24, 2021 Share Posted July 24, 2021 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 24, 2021 Share Posted July 24, 2021 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punching Bag Posted July 24, 2021 Share Posted July 24, 2021 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted July 24, 2021 Share Posted July 24, 2021 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeFrommStateFarm Posted July 24, 2021 Share Posted July 24, 2021 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/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Ripster Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 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! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rochesterfan Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 (edited) 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 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
just1hugheser Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 '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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethan in Cleveland Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Ripster Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 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. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 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). 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rochesterfan Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 (edited) 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 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Ripster Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rochesterfan Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 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. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Ripster Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 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. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rochesterfan Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 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. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts