(09-02-2021, 08:09 AM)Dimson Wrote: [ -> ]OK so my buddy and his immediate family all got covid. The people in his house, did not have the vaccine and none of them ended up in the hospital. Though my buddy did tell me he had it pretty bad and he took a while to recover. His two family members who had the vaccine you ask? They both ended up in the hospital and one is still having major issues but is not on the vent thankfully. So yeah, having the vaccine doesn't guarantee crap.
The plural of anecdote isn't data.
And nobody who knows anything ever said that the vaccine guarantees a thing. You're still flailing away at straw men while ignoring the actual facts here:
1. There *are* rules in place that make unvaccinated players less appealing than vaccinated ones. No room for debate on that.
2. Given that, players being vaccinated *is* preferable to teams, because in the same situations it improves their availability and reduces the chance of forfeiting a game.
There's no scope for discussion here; whether you want to try and twist the figures to claim that being vaccinated isn't a good thing or not, that doesn't affect the rules that are in place in the NFL right now in black and white.
We have a thread for this in the political section. Not that it matters. People are irrational.
(09-01-2021, 06:29 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ] (09-01-2021, 04:28 PM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ]correct. I don't think anyone has gotten cut over refusal to take the vaccine (and good luck proving that allegation).
Guys are getting cut because they are not talented enough to outweigh the risk, they're past their prime and too expensive or not significantly better than younger players on the squad. There's plenty of guys who haven't gotten the shot that made it through cuts unscathed.
Again, Meyer said it on video. When you say it was considered in the evaluation of which players to keep, you are guaranteed that it was used to put players on the roster and remove others.
Saying they are not talented enough to outweigh the risk is cutting them because they are unvaccinated. When you have 2 players you are deciding between them, they will use all of the analysis to decide who to keep, if vaccinated status was listed or known, that became an issue when Meyer opened his mouth.
The analysis is subjective and it is hard to prove bias normally. You usually don't have people making hiring decisions openly breaking hiring laws. If Meyer keeps his mouth shut, you can't prove much. Meyer saying it was a factor, a player pulls up the depth chart at his position and says the bottom player is vaccinated and I'm not, plays Meyer on video, and case is over.
These are not criminal cases, they don't have to provide 100% proof that they were cut because they were unvaccinated while the other player was. They just have to show that it was used in the analysis and Meyer already admitted to it.
Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk
but that's just it. There is a HUGE difference between "it is a factor" vs. "we cut anyone who didn't get stuck". The statement to which I responded was "A player should not get cut for refusing to take the shot" (paraphrased), and my contention was that they specifically were not cut solely for that one reason. Their lack of performance (not outplaying the guy who didn't get cut) is justification enough when culling to 53. We see it all the time, factors like age, contract, effort, discipline all factor into the coach or GM's choice. Had the player outperformed the others, their shot status would have weighed less in the overall evaluation.
So you're a boss, looking to hire a team lead. You have two internal candidates with whom you've worked with in the past. Both perform at about the same level, have similar experience, interviewed well, and get along with their coworkers just fine. One of the candidates, though, has a history of showing up late or calling out of shifts on short notice, while the other has been more dependable. Which would you hire? Why?
(09-01-2021, 07:26 PM)Eric1 Wrote: [ -> ]Out of the 24 players let go by the Jags yesterday, only 1 was unvacc'd.. The other 23 were vacc'd.. The Jags are in the top 5 of unvacc'd players in the league.. So again, this "investigation" is a big fat nothing burger.
https://twitter.com/JeffDarlington/statu...7265748994
BUT MAH OUTRAEG
(09-01-2021, 07:26 PM)Eric1 Wrote: [ -> ]Out of the 24 players let go by the Jags yesterday, only 1 was unvacc'd.. The other 23 were vacc'd.. The Jags are in the top 5 of unvacc'd players in the league.. So again, this "investigation" is a big fat nothing burger.
https://twitter.com/JeffDarlington/statu...7265748994
I think that pretty much slams the door on the whole thing.
(09-02-2021, 12:20 AM)OzJohnnie Wrote: [ -> ] (09-01-2021, 06:07 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]This discussion isn't about "anti-vaxers" or "vaxers". The players are grown men and can choose their own health decisions. The discussion is about the NFLPA investigating Coach Meyer for a comment that he made.
Keep the discussion to about whether or not a team can or can not make a decision based on vaccinated or not.
I reckon the answer has to be yes. If being unvaccinated results in special punishments for player and team then the cost of rostering an unvaccinated player is higher. So if you’re a borderline cut then vaccination status is a very clear variable for consideration. The NFL rules have made it so.
In fact, it’s so obviously the case that NFL with either have to let the non-vax penalty quietly disappear or the PA will need to put vax status into the category of medical justifications for a cut. The nfl penalty for non-vax makes the situation no different than a borderline player with chronic knee issues.
The real can of worms comes when this precedent is used for other vaccinations. What about a player without a TB vaccination? Or measles? My bet is that the NFL quietly let’s the penalty disappear but you never know now days.
Here's the stickler, too. If any coach out there is dense enough to jettison players solely based on whether they got jabbed, he's allowing his talented players to end up on the competition, and that coach likely ain't gonna stick around long.
Let's be brutally honest here, we didn't cut any MVPs. For each and every one of the players cut on Tuesday, there is plenty of other reasoning to justify how they didn't make the final roster. I kinda thought Cole Beasley might end up let go, but he's been so vocal against the matter that the team is almost held hostage, as dismissing him could easily be construed as a retaliation.
I can remember student teaching in college, before I was ever allowed on a county school campus I had to get proof of vaccinations. IIRC it was TB test that they inject a ton of fluid at the base of your wrist, check back in two days to see if there's still swelling or inflammation, and I missed my first confirmation check so had to get that welt of fluid a second time. I did it, though, because I wanted to be able to do the thing I was pursuing as a career.
The NFLPA is a union. What union does not seize any and every opportunity to undercut its employer?
(09-02-2021, 01:33 AM)ChrisJagBoy Wrote: [ -> ]I love Meyers 100% honest mentality. Don't care if people don't like it, I love honesty especially from a position where you just heard "the right answers" constantly.
My beef isn't that he's honest, it's that his honesty may catch heat from the league office, and that's what you want to avoid.
Sometimes name, rank, serial number is all you need to respond with. He'll learn.
(09-02-2021, 08:49 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]We have a thread for this in the political section. Not that it matters. People are irrational.
Our Knight in shining armor! He has all the answers and will guide the way!
(09-02-2021, 07:25 AM)iapetus Wrote: [ -> ] (09-01-2021, 06:56 PM)rfc17 Wrote: [ -> ]But even ignoring all that, an ample amount of evidence is beginning to show unvaxxed people who have recovered from covid have much stronger and more lasting immunity (and presumably less likely to spread) than vaxxed people that never had covid. So in essence a vaxxed person that never had covid is more of a danger to his teammates than an unvaxxed player that has already recovered from it.
And an ample amount of evidence also shows that vaxxed people who have recovered from covid have even stronger and more lasting immunity. If you haven't had covid, you're better protected with the vaccine. If you have had covid, you're better protected with the vaccine. It's not rocket science.
I haven't read any evidence of the first (got vaxxed then got covid) but it would make sense. The evidence regarding the latter (got covid, then got a vaccine later) doesnt show that immunity is much stronger than if you got covid, recovered, and then didnt get the vaccine later. Evidence says there is a benefit but isn't much.
And nothing you said addresses the main crux which is that unvaxxed people who have recovered from covid have far stronger immunity than vaxxed that never had it. And the NFL policy, which is outdated, severely punishes the former and not the latter. It makes no sense. No player that recovered from covid, vaxxed or not, should be treated differently than a vaccinated player.
I'm noticing a recent trend of StroudCrowd posts getting way sidetracked.
Heck, his Avatar thread in the Political Section has a page of Yo Mama jokes.
The real issue seems to be the difference in procedures for vaccinated vs unvaccinated. Meyer said about Josh Allen, it appears he hasnt been vaccinated but as he was in contact with someone who tested positive, he had to isolate for 2 weeks even though he didnt have it.
That seems to be the main issue, as the old saying goes, the best ability is availability.
(09-02-2021, 08:09 AM)Dimson Wrote: [ -> ] (09-02-2021, 07:25 AM)iapetus Wrote: [ -> ]And an ample amount of evidence also shows that vaxxed people who have recovered from covid have even stronger and more lasting immunity. If you haven't had covid, you're better protected with the vaccine. If you have had covid, you're better protected with the vaccine. It's not rocket science.
OK so my buddy and his immediate family all got covid. The people in his house, did not have the vaccine and none of them ended up in the hospital. Though my buddy did tell me he had it pretty bad and he took a while to recover. His two family members who had the vaccine you ask? They both ended up in the hospital and one is still having major issues but is not on the vent thankfully. So yeah, having the vaccine doesn't guarantee crap.
Pretty sure no one ever said anything about the vaccine guaranteeing anything....Wearing a seatbelt doesn't guarantee that I'll survive an accident, but I wear it every time I'm in a car. Wearing a helmet doesn't guarantee football players won't get a traumatic brain injury, but it helps reduce the chances.
The only thing being vaccinated guarantees is that players that have been vaccinated can return from Covid protocol sooner than non-vaccinated players, and games/paychecks won't be forfeited if an outbreak originates from a vaccinated player. To not take those things into consideration when compiling your roster would be incredibly shortsided and unacceptable.
(09-02-2021, 11:03 AM)Dewboy01 Wrote: [ -> ] (09-02-2021, 08:09 AM)Dimson Wrote: [ -> ]OK so my buddy and his immediate family all got covid. The people in his house, did not have the vaccine and none of them ended up in the hospital. Though my buddy did tell me he had it pretty bad and he took a while to recover. His two family members who had the vaccine you ask? They both ended up in the hospital and one is still having major issues but is not on the vent thankfully. So yeah, having the vaccine doesn't guarantee crap.
Pretty sure no one ever said anything about the vaccine guaranteeing anything....Wearing a seatbelt doesn't guarantee that I'll survive an accident, but I wear it every time I'm in a car. Wearing a helmet doesn't guarantee football players won't get a traumatic brain injury, but it helps reduce the chances.
The only thing being vaccinated guarantees is that players that have been vaccinated can return from Covid protocol sooner than non-vaccinated players, and games/paychecks won't be forfeited if an outbreak originates from a vaccinated player. To not take those things into consideration when compiling your roster would be incredibly shortsided and unacceptable.
You don't put seatbelts or helmets inside your body.
(09-02-2021, 10:54 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]I'm noticing a recent trend of StroudCrowd posts getting way sidetracked.
Heck, his Avatar thread in the Political Section has a page of Yo Mama jokes.
I read that as Yo Yo Ma and thought it was rude to make jokes about a Cellist
just havin a day over here.
(09-02-2021, 01:02 PM)Dimson Wrote: [ -> ] (09-02-2021, 11:03 AM)Dewboy01 Wrote: [ -> ]Pretty sure no one ever said anything about the vaccine guaranteeing anything....Wearing a seatbelt doesn't guarantee that I'll survive an accident, but I wear it every time I'm in a car. Wearing a helmet doesn't guarantee football players won't get a traumatic brain injury, but it helps reduce the chances.
The only thing being vaccinated guarantees is that players that have been vaccinated can return from Covid protocol sooner than non-vaccinated players, and games/paychecks won't be forfeited if an outbreak originates from a vaccinated player. To not take those things into consideration when compiling your roster would be incredibly shortsided and unacceptable.
You don't put seatbelts or helmets inside your body.
But you do put medicine inside your body...
Not horse medicine though.
![[Image: tyler-hynes-hynies.gif]](https://c.tenor.com/YviIkAMYSHMAAAAM/tyler-hynes-hynies.gif)