Plan for a shortened season...

Will there be a cure/vaccine in place in that time or the virus will just be gone? If not, then pushing back 6 weeks is pointless.

In comment 14942842 YAJ2112 said:

Quote:

Will there be a cure/vaccine in place in that time or the virus will just be gone? If not, then pushing back 6 weeks is pointless.

okay I understand. So, what you are saying is we either have a vaccine for the players or cancel the season completely?

In comment 14942845 EricJ said:

Quote:

In comment 14942842 YAJ2112 said: Quote: Will there be a cure/vaccine in place in that time or the virus will just be gone? If not, then pushing back 6 weeks is pointless. okay I understand. So, what you are saying is we either have a vaccine for the players or cancel the season completely?

Not at all. I'm saying proceed on schedule or cancel the season. Waiting 6 weeks changes absolutely nothing, unless a cure/vaccine somehow became available in that time.

Chance to have a season is to have a plan in place to deal with the inevitable positive cases that will surface.

MLB is trying to find a way. It is very possible that games will be cancelled not postponed. Maybe in this season division winners are determined by winning percentage and not number of wins.

Place a minimum of games played to qualify for play offs and best percentages move on.

I understand it is not an equitable way to determine a champion, but if we view Covid as just another Injury that often hurt competitive balance it makes more sense.

The important for the league and us fans is to UCLA s games, and understand it is just not a normal season.

In comment 14942851 YAJ2112 said:

Quote:

In comment 14942845 EricJ said: Quote: In comment 14942842 YAJ2112 said: Quote: Will there be a cure/vaccine in place in that time or the virus will just be gone? If not, then pushing back 6 weeks is pointless. okay I understand. So, what you are saying is we either have a vaccine for the players or cancel the season completely? Not at all. I'm saying proceed on schedule or cancel the season. Waiting 6 weeks changes absolutely nothing, unless a cure/vaccine somehow became available in that time.

Not really sure how shortening the season mitigates your exposure concerns.

The fines for non-compliance with social distancing protocols need to be steep and enforced. That's really the only way to limit exposure. I guarantee you everyone who gets it broke protocols.

Or if they do, they'll be fielding teams full of no-name replacement guys off the street. If they'd relax the stupid roster rules for one year and let them keep a lot of guys -- like a training camp sized roster, they'd at least have replacements who know the playbooks and have been practicing with the team. But they won't.

As YAJ points out, there doesn't appear to be a benefit to pushing the season back (and your response to YAJ certainly didn't provide any reasoning).

That said, I do think reducing the schedule could be a good idea - as discussed in a prior thread, if there are individual games throughout the year that are cancelled due to positive tests on a team, having slack in the schedule for make-up games becomes really important, so having multiple weeks where large portions of the league are off would allow for that.

Play every other week, no byes. Built in 14 day 'quarantine' between games.

...will be constantly interrupted by teams having to reschedule or cancel chunks of their schedules due to CoVid, same as baseball is going through now.

The entire premise to me is ridiculous, impossible to have any semblance of proper football or an actual season in these conditions.

And it is NOT flu season yet.

If they must - just have an 'exhibition' season. Don't count it for score, but let us enjoy a few great games til' it falls apart.

*sterisk season whatever happens. But I recognize that players want to get paid something, and the ratings will probably be through-the-roof high because the fans are so starved for sports.

In comment 14942930 CT Charlie said:

Quote:

*sterisk season whatever happens. But I recognize that players want to get paid something, and the ratings will probably be through-the-roof high because the fans are so starved for sports.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.....
Ratings Crash - ( New Window )

In comment 14943010 HoustonGiant said:

Quote:

In comment 14942930 CT Charlie said: Quote: *sterisk season whatever happens. But I recognize that players want to get paid something, and the ratings will probably be through-the-roof high because the fans are so starved for sports. I wouldn't be so sure about that..... Ratings Crash - ( New Window )

Agenda noted.

but I do think people are used to finding other things to do with their time and coupled with a product lower in quality I think the ratings will take a hit for the NFL too. They will still be strong, especially in the winter months when there's less to do outside, but once teams start having big players on the sidelines the product and interest will suffer.

In comment 14943010 HoustonGiant said:

Quote:

In comment 14942930 CT Charlie said: Quote: *sterisk season whatever happens. But I recognize that players want to get paid something, and the ratings will probably be through-the-roof high because the fans are so starved for sports. I wouldn't be so sure about that..... Ratings Crash - ( New Window )

What are normal ratings for those leagues? I'm lazy and all that linked article does is compare MLB vs NBA opening nights this year. Completely worthless comparison...

In comment 14943028 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

but I do think people are used to finding other things to do with their time and coupled with a product lower in quality I think the ratings will take a hit for the NFL too. They will still be strong, especially in the winter months when there's less to do outside, but once teams start having big players on the sidelines the product and interest will suffer.

I've been watching Korean baseball!

In comment 14943028 UConn4523 said:

Quote:

but I do think people are used to finding other things to do with their time and coupled with a product lower in quality I think the ratings will take a hit for the NFL too. They will still be strong, especially in the winter months when there's less to do outside, but once teams start having big players on the sidelines the product and interest will suffer.

NBA 'crash' is surprising (if it is a crash) since they have a good chance of finishing things, but they also normally play Fall thru Spring, not Summer when people are more likely to enjoy the outdoors and not watch TV. I suspect their ratings will pick up once the "postseason" hits anyway.

MLB - I bet a lot of people figure its inevitable that they won't finish the season, especially after the Marlins outbreak, so why bother watching. But MLB also typically has poor national numbers because most people don't tune in for games unless their team is playing.

play teams in your own division twice and cross over division once. Cant see a scenario where they pull this off without a bubble. I think they start and stop after 2 weeks or so and then reup 6 weeks later.

8 bubbles: one per division (pick one city within each division.

Only play the divisional schedule. So Giants would play 6 games: 2xPhilly, 2xDallas, 2xWFT

Division winners all enter 'postseason': East vs North, South vs West in Conf Semis.

Conference Championship: winners of EvN and SvW games face off

Finish with SuperBowl

***************
Would need a substantial delay to the beginning of the season before the NFL even considered this though since they'd be losing 10 regular season games per team and the WildCard round of the playoffs.

That said, would require only ~2 month bubble (6 games + 2 weeks before openers) for 24 teams and then an extra month (at most) for the postseason teams.

In comment 14942898 giants#1 said:

Quote:

Play every other week, no byes. Built in 14 day 'quarantine' between games.

Pretty good idea. They would be obviously giving up massive amounts of revenue but 50% is better than nothing...

there is a new strain of COVID that is 3-8 x more contagious than the version from March/April. They should try, but so just can’t see it. This version of the virus is just getting warmed up. With all the travel they will have to do, I can easily see entire teams being infected. I’m just praying nobody gets seriously ill.

In comment 14943040 DaddyM89 said:

Quote:

play teams in your own division twice and cross over division once. Cant see a scenario where they pull this off without a bubble. I think they start and stop after 2 weeks or so and then reup 6 weeks later.

But that isn't really a "bubble". Logistically, it is going to be near impossible to have a bubble of 100 people per team. A bubble would be a designated location that teams would have to stay within. Have meals brought in. Have lodging. Have meeting and practice areas. Even doing that for 4 locations is not feasible.

In comment 14943341 Dave on the UWS said:

Quote:

there is a new strain of COVID that is 3-8 x more contagious than the version from March/April. They should try, but so just can’t see it. This version of the virus is just getting warmed up. With all the travel they will have to do, I can easily see entire teams being infected. I’m just praying nobody gets seriously ill.

LOL. That sounds legit. "3-8x more contagious". That's a pretty big variance there, Chief. If you were told you were going to get a raise between 3-8 x the usual, it is going to throw your planning out of whack.

has become a caricature at this point.

Dave have you mustered the courage to leave your dwelling in the past 5 months?

The virus is on clear course to be essentially a non-event by September for the NFL, except in the cities which have locked down too much and are yet to give their pound of flesh to the virus.

1. Start with teams in the states where COVID is already basically over: NY/NJ (Giants/Jets/Bills), MA (Pats), MI (Lions), DC (Football Team), MD (Ravens), IL (Bears), IN (Colts), PA (Steelers, Eagles), CO (Broncos)

2. Arizona/Florida/Texas/Los Angeles (Cardinals, Cowboys, Texans, Jaguars, Dolphins, Buccaneers, Rams, Chargers) are clearly on the down slope, have likely hit the 15% seroprevalence where herd immunity, boosted by T-cell response, has appeared to kick in in most geographies around the globe. You can see this in the state-by-state hospital data, which for each of these three states shows hospitals rapidly emptying despite Google/Apple/OpenTable/Other "mobility tracking" data suggesting VERY little changes in behavior by the population.

3. States that are clearly peaking and *likely* to follow those in #2 trailing by a week or two: Georgia (Falcons), Ohio (Bengals, Browns), TN (Titans), NC (Panthers)

4. States on the upslope that have a problem for now, but will obviously follow behind #3 a couple weeks: NV (Raiders), MN (Vikings), LA (Saints), WA (Seahawks)

5. States that have so far gotten away without a problem (these are the most likely to be problems, because you cannot hide from the virus forever, lockdowns merely shift the deaths in time): Wisconsin (Packers), MO (Chiefs), SF (49ers)


So at the moment, the data looks like four teams might still be on the downslope and not yet out of the woods by season starting, three more teams are in areas that will likely have to face the virus at some point despite getting away easy so far, but that means 25 teams are in regions that will be basically done with the disease, nearing herd immunity by the beginning of September.

League should probably postpone the first two games and play a 14 game season and you will probably have 30/32 teams in regions almost fully in the clear by then.

In comment 14943373 Azul Grande said:

Quote:

The virus is on clear course to be essentially a non-event by September for the NFL, except in the cities which have locked down too much and are yet to give their pound of flesh to the virus. 1. Start with teams in the states where COVID is already basically over: NY/NJ (Giants/Jets/Bills), MA (Pats), MI (Lions), DC (Football Team), MD (Ravens), IL (Bears), IN (Colts), PA (Steelers, Eagles), CO (Broncos) 2. Arizona/Florida/Texas/Los Angeles (Cardinals, Cowboys, Texans, Jaguars, Dolphins, Buccaneers, Rams, Chargers) are clearly on the down slope, have likely hit the 15% seroprevalence where herd immunity, boosted by T-cell response, has appeared to kick in in most geographies around the globe. You can see this in the state-by-state hospital data, which for each of these three states shows hospitals rapidly emptying despite Google/Apple/OpenTable/Other "mobility tracking" data suggesting VERY little changes in behavior by the population. 3. States that are clearly peaking and *likely* to follow those in #2 trailing by a week or two: Georgia (Falcons), Ohio (Bengals, Browns), TN (Titans), NC (Panthers) 4. States on the upslope that have a problem for now, but will obviously follow behind #3 a couple weeks: NV (Raiders), MN (Vikings), LA (Saints), WA (Seahawks) 5. States that have so far gotten away without a problem (these are the most likely to be problems, because you cannot hide from the virus forever, lockdowns merely shift the deaths in time): Wisconsin (Packers), MO (Chiefs), SF (49ers) So at the moment, the data looks like four teams might still be on the downslope and not yet out of the woods by season starting, three more teams are in areas that will likely have to face the virus at some point despite getting away easy so far, but that means 25 teams are in regions that will be basically done with the disease, nearing herd immunity by the beginning of September. League should probably postpone the first two games and play a 14 game season and you will probably have 30/32 teams in regions almost fully in the clear by then.

I’ve been an optimist from the start and have analyzed the data to call out more (CNN) bullshit than most ... but this is over the top dude. Sell your research to the hedge funds - lot of $$$ to be made on your theory that this is over. Don’t waste your time with us with your gold Jerry gold research