Packers Huddle

Yoop wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 12:47

Beasley is acting just like the 35% of radical right wing nuts, defiant, and like Rand Paul think they know more then the thousands of medical and science people, these people are the reason the USA is one of the slowest nations to recover from the pandemic, and the reason the delta strain is spiking so quickly in these un vaccinated sections of the country.

I thought the same when you said you don't believe any of the media reporting or press conference regarding the Rodgers situation. Instead just relying on your own interpretation of the situation.

That's what happens when you get overly attached from an emotional standpoint. You cling to something so hard that any evidence to the contrary must be denied immediately.

Just thought it was an observation I was noticing during the Rodgers discussions. I was honestly very proud to see your SI article regarding Wolf. It takes a big person to try and open the mind to other possibilities.

go pak go wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 12:56

Yoop wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 12:47

Beasley is acting just like the 35% of radical right wing nuts, defiant, and like Rand Paul think they know more then the thousands of medical and science people, these people are the reason the USA is one of the slowest nations to recover from the pandemic, and the reason the delta strain is spiking so quickly in these un vaccinated sections of the country.

I thought the same when you said you don't believe any of the media reporting or press conference regarding the Rodgers situation. Instead just relying on your own interpretation of the situation.

That's what happens when you get overly attached from an emotional standpoint. You cling to something so hard that any evidence to the contrary must be denied immediately.

Just thought it was an observation I was noticing during the Rodgers discussions. I was honestly very proud to see your SI article regarding Wolf. It takes a big person to try and open the mind to other possibilities.

thanks, I still think Rons plan is better, unless you have the ability to take a guy like Rodgers who's college skillset made him the best prospect, or a Favre who although a gunslinger still had all the tech skills, then just draft a 2nd or 3rd rounder every season, at this point we'd be grooming 3 QB's under Rodgers, and still have a couple more years to grab a couple more, we double up on other positions all the time, keep the best of the bunch, as I showed, once ya get past the top 1 or 2 the bust rate is pretty consistent in every round.

I think if the news is true that Rodgers refused a extension and more money, then it must be about power and control, and I wont go along with that.

we know the league is short on quality starting QB's, and it seems to me it's deue to the league not making it easier for teams to groom them up, imo it's not as much a union issue as it is the owners.

paco wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 12:40

I'm putting this here, but guess most of the conversation should probably end up in Members Huddle. Sure to cause a buzz.

Oh my! The NFL just threw down the gauntlet.

Will the new vaccine policy cause impromptu player retirements? Gonna get interesting now...

.
When it comes to the NFL - Follow the money...

"Kevin Seifert also notes that in the event of a forfeit, neither team's players will receive their weekly salary "
.

BSA wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 15:02

.
When it comes to the NFL - Follow the money...

"Kevin Seifert also notes that in the event of a forfeit, neither team's players will receive their weekly salary "
.

wait neither team? whhaaaaaaa

wild

worth noting, that this all might be a much-ado-about-nothing scare tactic.

The policy is not "if there's an outbreak, there's a forfeit." It's "If there's an outbreak and the game cannot be rescheduled there's a forfeit.

To me that means they might not jump through quite so many hoops to reschedule as they did last year, but also, the league made it through the regular season without a "game that cannot be rescheduled." So it's unlikely to happen. But the threat of it is likely to increase peer pressure within the locker rooms to get vaccinated

I like Hopkins stance. "My Body My Choice" is apparently a thing until it comes to the vaccine.....

Packfntk wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 15:42

I like Hopkins stance. "My Body My Choice" is apparently a thing until it comes to the vaccine.....

It's still each person's choice, but choices have consequences. Vaccines, in particular, are mandated in many walks of life. Tons of colleges, military service, travel...

The NFL will let you play regardless of your choice, but that choice comes with extra precautions. The comparison to other times when "my body, my choice" is used are entirely moot. Providing someone with consequences and accountability for the choices they make is far different than banning the choice.

Packfntk wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 15:42

I like Hopkins stance. "My Body My Choice" is apparently a thing until it comes to the vaccine.....

Or any other situation in which your body can affect the health/well being of another body and/or require another body to minister to yours with more resources that would have otherwise been needed.

Yoop wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 12:47

APB wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 10:53

Yoop wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 10:37

Cole Beasly seems dumber then a box of rocks, all about politics and money

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/cole-beasl ... 36371.html

I read Beasley's tweet as more a statement to highlight and begin a conversation about the profiteering big pharma is realizing than any effort to actually profit from an endorsement deal or anything silly like that. At least I hope it is. Otherwise, I agree, he's an idiot.

I think that take is consistent with Beasley's continued criticism's of the whole framing of the virus and the media/govt push for everybody, regardless of susceptibility to serious illness, to get the jab.

From your linked article:

Pfizer reported a $3.5 billion profit from the vaccine in the first quarter of 2021, and could exceed $26 billion in the fiscal year...

The author goes on to deflect from the profit report stating the vaccine is "free" to everybody. It may not be costing John Q. Taxpayer at the doctor's office but it'll damn sure be costing him at tax time for years to come - and Pfizer shareholders as well as company senior leadership are all seeing massive profits from that.

seriously do you think people care about what there % of tax they will shell out for the covid vaccine is, what price do you put on a persons health?

It amazes me how consistently you seem to miss the entire point of a post.

I am talking about profiteering. The article YOU posted alludes to it but quickly backs away. Pfizer, in the 1st quarter of 2021 alone, has profited $3.5 billion from the vaccine that is "free". Expectations are as high as $26 billion IN PROFIT for the year.

I don't care about past stock values or market rebound metrics. I'm talking about taking advantage of a situation here and now and using this public health emergency to profit immensely off it.

APB wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 16:29

Yoop wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 12:47

APB wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 10:53

I read Beasley's tweet as more a statement to highlight and begin a conversation about the profiteering big pharma is realizing than any effort to actually profit from an endorsement deal or anything silly like that. At least I hope it is. Otherwise, I agree, he's an idiot.

I think that take is consistent with Beasley's continued criticism's of the whole framing of the virus and the media/govt push for everybody, regardless of susceptibility to serious illness, to get the jab.

From your linked article:



The author goes on to deflect from the profit report stating the vaccine is "free" to everybody. It may not be costing John Q. Taxpayer at the doctor's office but it'll damn sure be costing him at tax time for years to come - and Pfizer shareholders as well as company senior leadership are all seeing massive profits from that.

seriously do you think people care about what there % of tax they will shell out for the covid vaccine is, what price do you put on a persons health?

It amazes me how consistently you seem to miss the entire point of a post.

I am talking about profiteering. The article YOU posted alludes to it but quickly backs away. Pfizer, in the 1st quarter of 2021 alone, has profited $3.5 billion from the vaccine that is "free". Expectations are as high as $26 billion IN PROFIT for the year.

I don't care about past stock values or market rebound metrics. I'm talking about taking advantage of a situation here and now and using this public health emergency to profit immensely off it.

seriously whats new about Pharm industry gouging patients for there products? not a thing, they've been doing so for eons, I don't like it either, and didn't miss your point, thing is no one is writing legislation capping what Pharma can charge, why sit here and argue cost to tax payer anyway, you act as though it'll cost you more then the coins in your pocket, lis who cares about what it'll cost joe tax payer to save peoples lives, you and I will never see eye to eye concerning covid or the vaccine, why even bother.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 15:49

Packfntk wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 15:42

I like Hopkins stance. "My Body My Choice" is apparently a thing until it comes to the vaccine.....

It's still each person's choice, but choices have consequences. Vaccines, in particular, are mandated in many walks of life. Tons of colleges, military service, travel...

The NFL will let you play regardless of your choice, but that choice comes with extra precautions. The comparison to other times when "my body, my choice" is used are entirely moot. Providing someone with consequences and accountability for the choices they make is far different than banning the choice.

And on that note. Say a player takes the vaccine and has a reaction to it and can't play the rest of the year. Is that a football injury or not?

Raptorman wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2021 19:19

And on that note. Say a player takes the vaccine and has a reaction to it and can't play the rest of the year. Is that a football injury or not?

Its a non-football injury, but it doesn't change anything as far as getting paid, healthcare coverage or accruing a year of service toward Free Agency or vet minimum pay. I can't imagine a scenario where that happens, but the NFL lawyers already covered every reasonable happenstance before rolling out these rules, per Andrew Brandt.

That's why they aren't mandating vaccination, only describing the consequences for non-vaccination.

Last year Tyrod Taylor got stuck with a pain- killing needle, injured his lungs and lost his starting job. That was ruled a non-football injury - and that's in the players best interest because it preserves their rights to sue. Their first efforts to seek remedy are through the NFLPA and the League- but if that is unsatisfactory- the player can take it to court. Its a steep hill to climb, but they can do it. The first thing the court looks at is loss of earnings and in Taylor's case he was demoted- but still got paid. So you'd have to prove medical malfeasance AND prove that losing his starting job with Chargers impacted his future earnings in a material way.

If they get hurt in a designated "football injury", they can't seek remuneration because that's waived as part of standard contract language. An injured player will often reach a settlement with the team prior to getting cut- but he can't sue the league.

paco wrote: ↑

23 Jul 2021 13:15

Here's a problem. If the coaches are required to get the vaccine but the players are not, they are opening themselves up for a lawsuit they can't win. Either it's optional for everyone or no one. As far as I know, the NFL still has to abide by Federal Employment laws.

Raptorman wrote: Here's a problem. If the coaches are required to get the vaccine but the players are not, they are opening themselves up for a lawsuit they can't win. Either it's optional for everyone or no one. As far as I know, the NFL still has to abide by Federal Employment laws.

The players have a CBA that protects them from things like this. The coaching staff does not. The company I work for is setup essentially the same way. We pilots are unionized and protected under the CBA from the whims of senior leadership, the company admin and support staff are not.

The league can absolutely mandate vaccinations under their workplace safety umbrella and guys like Dennison - employees without any sort of organized contractual protections - will be forced to either comply or face termination. There are no federal protections that forbade this. Yes, even for an emergency approved vaccine.

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/e ... e-covid-19

Raptorman wrote: ↑

23 Jul 2021 17:47

paco wrote: ↑

23 Jul 2021 13:15

Here's a problem. If the coaches are required to get the vaccine but the players are not, they are opening themselves up for a lawsuit they can't win. Either it's optional for everyone or no one. As far as I know, the NFL still has to abide by Federal Employment laws.

I haven't looked in a bit, but I don't believe it was a firing situation. I think he technically quit. Not that it really matters.

paco wrote: ↑

23 Jul 2021 18:05

Raptorman wrote: ↑

23 Jul 2021 17:47

Here's a problem. If the coaches are required to get the vaccine but the players are not, they are opening themselves up for a lawsuit they can't win. Either it's optional for everyone or no one. As far as I know, the NFL still has to abide by Federal Employment laws.

I haven't looked in a bit, but I don't believe it was a firing situation. I think he technically quit. Not that it really matters.

I don’t think he quit but if he did he was essentially forced out. Here is the verbiage from the league as reported by ESPN:

The vaccine is required for all Tier 1 staff, including coaches, front-office executives, equipment managers and scouts. Players are not required to receive the COVID-19 vaccine but will face strict protocols during training camp and throughout the season that vaccinated players will be able to forgo.

In a memo released by the league this summer, the NFL said any unvaccinated Tier 1 staff member must provide a valid religious or medical reason for not receiving the vaccine. Losing Tier 1 status prohibits coaches from being on the field and in meeting rooms and having direct interactions with players.

Pretty tough to coach if you’re not allowed any direct interaction with the players you’re supposed to be coaching.

no ones going to tell him what to do, he'll show them, he's got state and fed under employment benefits coming