2020 Pats: Cam Tests Positive

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,535
Why does the NFL have to be so fucking stupid?

Theres NOTHING stopping them from extending the season a handful of weeks. Theres no competition for eyeballs in March. Why not scatter a few weeks off throughout the season where teams can make up games if needed? I mean, that's a bare MINIMUM ask, and they just decided "fuck it. We change nothing."

This league is run by fucking imbeciles.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
47,437
Hartford, CT
Yeah, they basically turned one of the biggest games on the regular season slate into a farce due to their arbitrary protocols that privilege a perception of safe and orderly completion of any and all games on schedule over actually accomplishing that, and at the cost of better quality of play. It’s a joke the Pats are traveling like 10 hours prior to game time.

And I would and will say the same thing if the roles are reversed where a Pats opponent is traveling same day.
 

Reggie's Racquet

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2009
7,293
Florida/Montana
Yeah, they basically turned one of the biggest games on the regular season slate into a farce due to their arbitrary protocols that privilege a perception of safe and orderly completion of any and all games on schedule over actually accomplishing that, and at the cost of better quality of play. It’s a joke the Pats are traveling like 10 hours prior to game time.

And I would and will say the same thing if the roles are reversed where a Pats opponent is traveling same day.
Well... after yesterday's games at least we can count on the officiating to be competent!
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,653
Santa Monica, CA
Thanks for the link to that story, that's the first I have read of this.

Oh well.
Why does that tweet rule out a false positive? The positive test came up on Friday, there was not going to be time to get him cleared by Monday whether it was a false positive or not, so obviously they would need to put him on the Covid list to get a replacement available for the game. Is there some other information missing?

edit: it goes without saying, but I have no idea if Cam has Covid, is symptomatic, etc. All I know is that he had a positive test result - so he is something like 95% likely to truly have it.
 
Last edited:

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,653
Santa Monica, CA
Yeah, they basically turned one of the biggest games on the regular season slate into a farce due to their arbitrary protocols that privilege a perception of safe and orderly completion of any and all games on schedule over actually accomplishing that, and at the cost of better quality of play. It’s a joke the Pats are traveling like 10 hours prior to game time.

And I would and will say the same thing if the roles are reversed where a Pats opponent is traveling same day.
I don't disagree, but there are not many perfect options this year. Expecting total competitive fairness is, well, not fair. I'm just happy we're getting games to watch at all.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
47,437
Hartford, CT
My primary issue isn’t competitive fairness (which is never achieved to perfection anyways, and you live with that to an extent), it is with the safety risk and impact to quality of play. What is the logic, based on what we know about COVID, for not quarantining the players who were contact traced to Newton? Why do contact tracing at all if all that matters are a few rounds of tests over a few days that we know don’t reliably indicate whether someone has COVID? Hell, the league/teams don’t even customarily test players on game day!

The real reason for this is the NFL is willing to disregard the known guidance on best practices in order to avoid ANY logistical inconvenience. Look at Peter King’s mouthpiece column from this morning, its narrative is all about the parade of horribles the league and teams face if they have to extend the regular season and postseason; it outright assumes the NFL protocols are congruent with best practices for containing spread and that there isn’t a safety risk attendant with their approach. (Note: this is actually a generous assumption I am making, as it is possible King or others don’t care or don’t understand or just are willing to defer to the league because HEY WE HAVE FOOTBALL AND WHY QUIBBLE)

And obviously ALL of this presents safety risk, but that doesn’t make it acceptable or logical to trade logistical risk against against safety risk to any or an arbitrary magnitude. I think they’re engaging in the latter here.

Once one assumes - and the league mouthpieces like King have made this easy to confirm - that the NFL privileges completing the season within its scheduled bounds over safety considerations, all of their decisions make sense. Nobody is seeking or expecting a ‘perfect’ solution. But I don’t think the absence of a perfect solution nullifies a discussion about whether the balance the league seems to be trying to strike is the right balance or is being struck when the league makes decisions on how to respond to confirmed positives. I think they’re fucking up on this, and for the wrong reason.
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
91,058
Oregon
So ... would fake-coughing by the offensive lineman tonight to plant seeds of doubt in the KC rush cost us a second-round pick?
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Why does the NFL have to be so fucking stupid?

Theres NOTHING stopping them from extending the season a handful of weeks. Theres no competition for eyeballs in March. Why not scatter a few weeks off throughout the season where teams can make up games if needed? I mean, that's a bare MINIMUM ask, and they just decided "fuck it. We change nothing."

This league is run by fucking imbeciles.
Other than the Supersized Big Dance, but I agree with you.
 

Oppo

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2009
1,576
Re: complaining about NFL policy
Am I missing a CDC update?
Isolation can end for people that are asymptomatic 10 days after a positive test.
*Isolation can end earlier if you get 2 negative tests at least 24 hours apart*
NFL policy is asymptomatic, 5 days since positive test, and 2 negative pcr tests separated by 24 hours, cleared to return
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,653
Santa Monica, CA
My primary issue isn’t competitive fairness (which is never achieved to perfection anyways, and you live with that to an extent), it is with the safety risk and impact to quality of play. What is the logic, based on what we know about COVID, for not quarantining the players who were contact traced to Newton? Why do contact tracing at all if all that matters are a few rounds of tests over a few days that we know don’t reliably indicate whether someone has COVID? Hell, the league/teams don’t even customarily test players on game day!

The real reason for this is the NFL is willing to disregard the known guidance on best practices in order to avoid ANY logistical inconvenience. Look at Peter King’s mouthpiece column from this morning, its narrative is all about the parade of horribles the league and teams face if they have to extend the regular season and postseason; it outright assumes the NFL protocols are congruent with best practices for containing spread and that there isn’t a safety risk attendant with their approach. (Note: this is actually a generous assumption I am making, as it is possible King or others don’t care or don’t understand or just are willing to defer to the league because HEY WE HAVE FOOTBALL AND WHY QUIBBLE)

And obviously ALL of this presents safety risk, but that doesn’t make it acceptable or logical to trade logistical risk against against safety risk to any or an arbitrary magnitude. I think they’re engaging in the latter here.

Once one assumes - and the league mouthpieces like King have made this easy to confirm - that the NFL privileges completing the season within its scheduled bounds over safety considerations, all of their decisions make sense. Nobody is seeking or expecting a ‘perfect’ solution. But I don’t think the absence of a perfect solution nullifies a discussion about whether the balance the league seems to be trying to strike is the right balance or is being struck when the league makes decisions on how to respond to confirmed positives. I think they’re fucking up on this, and for the wrong reason.
I haven't followed the Pats situation that closely, but I know the NFL has implemented technology that gives it much more detailed and reliable contract tracing data than we would have for any normal patient. That could explain some of the decision-making this week (and also the differences between the decisions in the Titans case and here).

I mean, also the NFL could just be dumb. But there's another plausible possibility here, at least based on the limited stuff I've read.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,702
deep inside Guido territory
I haven't followed the Pats situation that closely, but I know the NFL has implemented technology that gives it much more detailed and reliable contract tracing data than we would have for any normal patient. That could explain some of the decision-making this week (and also the differences between the decisions in the Titans case and here).

I mean, also the NFL could just be dumb. But there's another plausible possibility here, at least based on the limited stuff I've read.
Each player wears a bracelet that tracks their movements within the facility and on the field so they know who is in close contact.
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,487
I haven't followed the Pats situation that closely, but I know the NFL has implemented technology that gives it much more detailed and reliable contract tracing data than we would have for any normal patient. That could explain some of the decision-making this week (and also the differences between the decisions in the Titans case and here).

I mean, also the NFL could just be dumb. But there's another plausible possibility here, at least based on the limited stuff I've read.
I think the bigger question is more why aren't those close contacts in quarantine. A negative test a day or two after exposure doesn't mean much.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
45,099
Here
You don’t say. Someone else testing positive four days after patient zero? What a surprise!

NFL is stupid, no way they should have played yesterday and no fucking way should Cam be allowed to show up later this week.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
62,162
New York City
You don’t say. Someone else testing positive four days after patient zero? What a surprise!

NFL is stupid, no way they should have played yesterday and no fucking way should Cam be allowed to show up later this week.
Can you stop saying this over and over and over and over and over again. WE GET IT. But you don't.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,352
You don’t say. Someone else testing positive four days after patient zero? What a surprise!

NFL is stupid, no way they should have played yesterday and no fucking way should Cam be allowed to show up later this week.
It has not been confirmed that Murray tested positive. Anyone that is in close contact with someone that tested positive can be placed on list. Let’s wait until we get more info.

Also, Cam cannot show up until he tests negative twice. If he does why should he be kept away?
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
45,099
Here
Can you stop saying this over and over and over and over and over again. WE GET IT. But you don't.
You said “over“ five times, but this is literally the second time I’ve said it’s too risky to play a game 3-4 days after someone tests positive, as it’s the peak time for the virus to show up in systems and It can take up to two weeks to do so. I understand they are tested every day, but tests are a snapshot and we are just hoping it doesn’t become live right before or during a game. When you have over 100 players or coaches who were in the same locker room and facilities as someone or someones infected, it’s a pretty substantial risk.
 

epraz

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2002
6,216
Yup makes sense and definitely doesn't contradict the known incubation period for covid-19 and testing sensitivity
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,352
Again, NFL gives zero shits about player safety.. Thats not how the Virus works...
Yup makes sense and definitely doesn't contradict the known incubation period for covid-19 and testing sensitivity
Well, he tested positive, so the chances for 2 false negatives are very low. Most of them come if you test too soon after contracting it. That's not the case here. It's same system MLB used.
 

Oppo

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2009
1,576
Again, NFL gives zero shits about player safety.. Thats not how the Virus works...
Maybe you should tell the CDC, who recommends isolation for 10 days for asymptomatic patients but that it can be shorter if 2 negative tests at least 24 hours apart.
But go ahead and play doctor.
 

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
11,164
NJ
Maybe you should tell the CDC, who recommends isolation for 10 days for asymptomatic patients but that it can be shorter if 2 negative tests at least 24 hours apart.
But go ahead and play doctor.

Thank you. This is the exact process we follow at my work - in nursing homes.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,352
View: https://twitter.com/ZackCoxNESN/status/1314194999983173633

Also, got email from DraftKings:

We are writing to inform you that we have added the following player(s) to the Player Pool for the Thu - Mon, Sun - Mon, and Sunday Main NFL contests set to take place on Thu (10/8) at 8:20 PM ET and Sun (10/11) at 1:00 PM ET respectively:

Cam Newton - $6,700
Adam Humphries - $4,000
Ryquell Armstead - $4,000
Vegas gets inside info, perhaps DK knows something?
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
62,162
New York City
They know they don't mind if you waste your money
Draftkings (not including the sports book) takes a cut of every "game" that is played on their website. There is always a winner and loser and DK keeps 10%. They don't care what players are chosen in any contest. That isn't a Vegas line.