Week 11 COVID-19 News

[CKSteeler]

Just now, MWil23 said:

Are we really going to cite an opinion piece from a Steeler's beatwriter as evidence? Is this serious?

He's actually citing the Washington Post, if you read it. Because the Post also reported that the Ravens went to the union. But the original PFT story from league sources spelled all of this out. The game was on for Tuesday until the Ravens went to the union and threatened to blow this up into something else.

[MWil23]

Let's check out this bio from the truly impartial source that was just quoted:

Quote

 

DEJAN KOVACEVIC, born in Downtown Pittsburgh and raised in Monroeville, is the columnist, creator and owner of DK Pittsburgh Sports.

CAREER:

Five months after graduating Gateway High School in 1984, Dejan began writing for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on a freelance basis while attending Duquesne University. In 1990, he was hired to the PG sports staff and reported on high schools, as well as expanding into editing and page design. He went into writing full-time when assigned to the Penguins beat in 1997 and covered the NHL until 2004, when he covered his first of five Olympics in Athens. The other four were Vancouver (2010), London (2012), Sochi (2014) and Rio de Janeiro (2016). In 2005, he began six seasons on the Pirates beat. In 2011, he switched newspapers, going to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review as lead sports columnist. Later that year, he was recognized by the Associated Press Sports Editors as one of the top four columnists in the country, this in the highest circulation category. In July 2014, he lapsed into temporary insanity and left it all to try this venture, the first of its kind in the U.S. or Canada for an established sports journalist. He also appears on WPXI-TV and on Pittsburgh’s iHeartMedia radio stations.

PERSONAL:

Dejan lives in the Strip District with wife Dali and children Dara and Marko. His passions include collecting superhero comics with a specialty in Green Lantern, playing guitar and all things Pittsburgh with a secondary love of Winnipeg, Starbucks coffee and seeing the planet.

 

 

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

1 minute ago, CKSteeler said:

So Denver players should have threatened to strike. So should Patriots players. Or the Titans when they were forced to play without any practicing. There was certainly no concern of them getting in conditioning work to avoid "muscle strains."

Per my earlier comments, which for some reason grown adults are still failing to comprehend:

Quote

Denver played because it was deemed safe.

Ravens were postponed because it was deemed unsafe.

Again, a 6 year old could understand this.

The NFL does not grant postponements or cancellations because of a competitive advantage. They do so because of health concerns.

Edited December 1, 2020 by AFlaccoSeagulls

[Ray Reed]

3 minutes ago, CKSteeler said:

Sort of like the guy who was complaining about having to play another prime time game in Pittsburgh earlier this year.

Hey, at least its not in prime time anymore.

....in response to a thread full of Steelers fans complaining about how the NFL was screwing the Steelers and favoring the Ravens after the Titans game got pushed back (shocker...almost like history repeats itself).

Yeah, I'll throw my hat in the ring every now and then to bring some reality to the situation when your lot is on one of your typical "NFL always screws the Steelers" rants. 

Thankfully I don't make that my whole shtick on this website, though.

Wears thin. 

 

 

[CKSteeler]

1 minute ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

Please point out where in this article it talks about why Ravens players are threatening to strike. I'll wait.

Please point out where in my post I ever said anything about the why the Ravens were threatening to strike. Because I didn't. I said the league moved this game because they threatened to strike and not because of fear of spread. That's what you are arguing against.

[MWil23]

Just now, CKSteeler said:

He's actually citing the Washington Post, if you read it. Because the Post also reported that the Ravens went to the union. But the original PFT story from league sources spelled all of this out. The game was on for Tuesday until the Ravens went to the union and threatened to blow this up into something else.

The top sentence about weighing their options, absolutely. The rest of that is his own rampant speculation. 

4 minutes ago, CKSteeler said:

The Washington Post learned that some of the Ravens' main players connected virtually with the NFL Players Association today to go over their 'options' within this setting. And by all accounts, they expressed concern not only about playing Tuesday but even about playing Wednesday should the tests come back clean again.

Vague reference to the Washington Post here above

4 minutes ago, CKSteeler said:

My counter to that:

Literally everything else that he says after this is his own opinion and rampant speculation.

4 minutes ago, CKSteeler said:

Where was all this concern before today? Why wait until the situation's finally as close to settled as it could be to share worry with anyone, much less union officials? Why was this not a thing over the weekend?

Oh, yeah, I know: Because that scheduled kickoff had already been pushed back! Right!

Try to absorb this: A bunch of NFL players got together to try to figure out how to not play an NFL game, and they did so with not a hammer in sight. If they'd have refused to report for the Tuesday game, the league would've had zero choice but to assign a forfeit. And I'll reiterate: All of them tested negative! And all of them went out and practice by nightfall Monday!

...

The NFL postponed this game (for a third time) to get an extra day of COVID test results and allow #Ravens players time to train and avoid muscle strains, etc. -- not because of who wouldn't be available. But, Baltimore gets a big boost for a big game anyway. https://t.co/67iJixffJF

— Tom Pelissero (@TomPelissero) November 30, 2020
Wow.

 

[CKSteeler]

1 minute ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

The NFL does not grant postponements or cancellations because of a competitive advantage. They do so because of health concerns.

You asked for a citation and I provided one from PFT. Which you guys are awfully silent on.

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

1 minute ago, CKSteeler said:

Please point out where in my post I ever said anything about the why the Ravens were threatening to strike. Because I didn't. I said the league moved this game because they threatened to strike and not because of fear of spread. That's what you are arguing against.

And I am arguing that it is entirely plausible that Ravens players, out of health concerns because as of the meeting time they hadn't even gone one day without a positive test, were threatening to strike if they were forced to play on Tuesday while the virus was not contained within their building.

[CKSteeler]

1 minute ago, MWil23 said:

The top sentence about weighing their options, absolutely. The rest of that is his own rampant speculation. 

1. You once again are choosing to ignore the very first link provided from PFT, the source that broke the story

2. You are also choosing to ignore the frequent quoting of other NFL reporters on the subject.

[CKSteeler]

Just now, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

3 minutes ago, CKSteeler said:

 

And I am arguing that it is entirely plausible that Ravens players, out of health concerns because as of the meeting time they hadn't even gone one day without a positive test, were threatening to strike if they were forced to play on Tuesday while the virus was not contained within their building.

Which has nothing to do with why the league caved to Ravens players demands. Which is what I actually said.

[MWil23]

Just now, CKSteeler said:

1. You once again are choosing to ignore the very first link provided from PFT, the source that broke the story

2. You are also choosing to ignore the frequent quoting of other NFL reporters on the subject.

Then a bit of a suggestion for you: 

Next time, don't post a bunch of opinion pieces that are quotes from Pittsburgh's beat writer with "opinion" in the headline. It actually does more harm than good. As for the PFF piece, it addresses the legal ramifications of the threatened strike, which says nothing as to why they did this specifically. You decided to post an opinion piece on the back of tangible evidence from a credible source to try and show how "right" you were, when now the opposite has happened. It's akin to this:

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

1 minute ago, CKSteeler said:

Which has nothing to do with why the league caved to Ravens players demands. Which is what I actually said.

Oh so you know why the NFL caved to the players' demands, but you don't even know why the players were threatening to strike?

Weird.

[CKSteeler]

Just now, MWil23 said:

As for the PFF piece, it addresses the legal ramifications of the threatened strike, which says nothing as to why they did this specifically.

It actually makes very clear why the league is giving into the Ravens threats. Which is what was being argued - why the league did what they did. But you keep doing you.

And said opinion piece, once again, cites other NFL reporters verbatim throughout along with the reporting of sources like the Post.

[MWil23]

This is exactly why I talk about implicit and explicit bias when I make my students print off current events. It's hilarious.

[CKSteeler]

1 minute ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

Oh so you know why the NFL caved to the players' demands, but you don't even know why the players were threatening to strike?

Weird.

Why would I care why the players were threatening to strike? It's entirely irrelevant to my argument. The league's stance was that the game was on until they threatened to strike and as the source explained to PFT, they threatened to open a massive can of worms.