Forum Replies Created

Viewing 30 posts - 21,811 through 21,840 (of 47,659 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: virus news … (+ some dark humor) #112389
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: one traveller’s experience in the current virus crisis #112388
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: new CBA voted in … what it means #112371
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    IMO, all the major sports league should downsize their schedules. NBA, MLB and the NFL. But more games tends to mean more money

    I’m right there with you. I don’t much like the “grow the brand” approach NFL owners are taking now. I much preferred the older view where teams saw themselves as parts of communities. I don’t care if the league makes more money, they have enough money. IMO we’re not that far from (the original) Rollerball.

    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    i’m just willing to wait it out until we know more.

    We know a lot.

    You just have to find it and read it.

    Look at my sticky above, if you read anything about the virus. That links to 2 articles in a thread here. One is about what happened in Italy because they did not stay ahead of this. The other is how much it took for Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan to contain it.

    It;s instructive reading those 2 things.

    It got out of control in Italy. It’s instructive to learn why they let it get out of control, and it’s instructive to see what the results of that were.

    They contained it in the 3 Asian places mentioned. It’s instructive to learn how much it took to do that.

    I would honestly say that if anyone has not read those 2 pieces yet all the way through, then, they don’t really know this situation.

    ….,

    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: new CBA voted in … what it means #112364
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    NFL players approve new CBA, runs through 2030

    https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/28906786/nfl-players-approve-new-cba-2030

    NFL players voted to approve a new collective bargaining agreement with the league’s owners, ensuring NFL labor peace through at least 2030 and clearing the way for a 17-game regular season as early as 2021.

    The vote to approve was close, at 1019-959. Approval required a majority of the players voting.

    “I think that’s something we knew, that it would be close,” new NFLPA president JC Tretter told ESPN of the close vote. “We just came out of our rep meeting and we had a sense of that based on the discussions. But just as with anything, the majority rules.”

    The NFL Players Association tweeted news of the approval, saying: “The result comes after a long and democratic process in accordance with our constitution.” Tretter lauded the greater share of revenues and post-career benefits but added: “We understand that not all deals are perfect, and we don’t take the gains we wanted, but couldn’t get, lightly. We now must unite and move forward as a union.”

    The 10-day voting period, during which any player who paid NFLPA dues during the past calendar year was eligible to vote, concluded at 11:59 p.m. ET on Saturday. Before the voting, the NFLPA estimated that roughly 2,500 players were eligible to vote.

    The league’s owners voted in February to approve the deal, so the players’ approval was all that remained in order to secure it.

    Expanded NFL playoffs are here: Ranking the best just-missed teams of the last 30 years
    Commissioner Roger Goodell also issued a statement, saying: “We are pleased that the players have voted to ratify the proposed new CBA, which will provide substantial benefits to all current and retired players, increase jobs, ensure continued progress on player safety, and give our fans more and better football.”

    The new CBA will allow the NFL to expand its regular season from 16 to 17 games as early as 2021 and expand the playoff field from 12 teams to 14 as soon as the 2020 season. It also includes higher minimum salaries, improvements to benefits for current and former players, expanded rosters and practice squads, and changes to the league’s drug and discipline policies, all of which will go into effect in 2020. The deal would increase the players’ share of league revenue from 47% to 48% in 2021 and to at least 48.5% in any season in which 17 regular-season games are played.

    Now that a CBA has been agreed to, teams are not allowed to use both the franchise tag and transition tag this offseason. Teams could have used both if the league were still operating under the old CBA. Teams with more than one high-profile tag candidate — such as the Cowboys, with Dak Prescott and Amari Cooper — now face a tough decision.

    About an hour after the vote was released, sources told ESPN that the salary cap for the 2020 season would be $198.2 million, an increase of $10 million from last season. Overall player costs, which also counts benefits and the performance-based pay pool, per club are $242.9 million.

    Several high-profile players, including Aaron Rodgers, Russell Wilson and J.J. Watt, had publicly expressed their disapproval of the deal, which encountered several hiccups en route to player approval.

    After the owners voted Feb. 20 to approve the terms of the deal they’d been negotiating with players since April 2019, the union’s board of player representatives was scheduled to vote via conference call the next day. But shortly before that vote was to take place, the NFLPA executive council surprisingly voted 6-5 to not recommend the deal. The ensuing player rep conference call resulted not in a vote but in a decision to petition the owners for further concessions.

    Owners agreed to meet with the players at the scouting combine in Indianapolis on Feb. 25, and during that meeting some minor concessions were made, but the structure of the deal remained the same. Shortly after midnight that night, the board of player reps voted 17-14 with one abstention to send the deal to the full membership for approval.

    The next week, attorneys for the players and for the league met in Washington to hammer out the full, 456-page document outlining the new CBA. That work was completed early in the morning of March 5, and the union announced that voting would begin at 9 a.m. ET that day and run through 11:59 p.m. ET on Thursday.

    This past week, the player reps gathered in South Florida for their annual meeting and had a contentious discussion about the new deal, the 17-game season and the manner in which the deal was negotiated. At that meeting, the players agreed to extend the voting window by two days, but a resolution that would have allowed players who’d already voted to change their votes was rejected. Panthers offensive tackle Russell Okung, a former executive council member and a vocal opponent of the deal and of NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith, filed an unfair labor practices charge with the National Labor Relations Board, alleging that Smith illegally negotiated the deal and impeded debate on the issue. That complaint is still pending.

    Speaking to ESPN, Tretter was asked if he was worried about players such as Okung rebelling now.

    “I don’t think so,” he said. “I think where we ended our meetings and the tone we ended the meetings on, we’re all going to be on the same page.”

    In the meantime, though, the NFL has a deal in place between the players and owners that runs through 2030. The owners can get to work on negotiating new deals with their TV network partners. And while there remains a chance the start of the 2020 league year could be postponed because of the coronavirus, it remains scheduled to begin at 4 p.m. ET on Wednesday, with the “legal tampering” window set to open at noon on Monday.

    NFL CBA approved: What players get in new deal, how expanded playoffs and schedule will work

    https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/28901832/nfl-cba-approved-players-get-new-deal-how-expanded-playoffs-schedule-work

    NFL players voted to approve a proposed new collective bargaining agreement with the league’s owners, ensuring NFL labor peace through at least 2030. The vote was tight, with 1,019 “yes” votes and 959 “no” votes.

    The new CBA will expand the NFL’s playoff field by two teams starting with the 2020 season and allow owners the option to expand the regular season from 16 games to 17 games as early as 2021.

    But those are only the big-headline items. More than just a deal to increase the number of games played each season, this is a document that will establish and govern the rules under which the game is played, contracts are negotiated and rules are administered for the next 11 years, through the 2030 season.

    We thought you might have some questions about what’s in it. Thanks to a copy of the memo the National Football League Players Association (NFLPA) sent to its members, we have some answers:

    You said 11 years? I thought this was a 10-year deal.

    Yeah, important point there, and it depends on how you look at it. The proposed new deal runs through 2030, which means it runs for 10 years after the current deal was set to expire. There are significant changes to certain rules and league structures that will go into effect in 2020 if the deal is approved by the players, however.

    So you could call it an 11-year deal that tears up the final year of the previous CBA and runs for the next 11 years. Or you could call it a 10-year deal that begins in 2021 but alters some rules for the final year of the current deal. Either way, it will run through the 2030 season.

    All right. And the 17-game season?

    Owners will have a window from 2021 to 2023 to expand the regular season from 16 games to 17 games, should they choose to do so (and it’s expected they will).

    At this point, the two sides haven’t had substantive discussions about how the 17-game season actually will work — i.e., which team gets the extra home game and whether there will be more bye weeks — which is why many think 2022 is the soonest it could happen. But it’s very likely to happen.

    I thought the players didn’t want that.

    Some don’t, and that’s the reason the voting process at the NFLPA leadership level has been so contentious. Expanding the regular season is not a well-liked idea among NFL players who already view 16 as too hard on their bodies, so they want to make sure they’re getting enough in return to justify agreeing to something they don’t want to do.

    So, what are the players getting?

    For starters, more money, in the form of a higher share of league revenue beginning in 2021. This year, players will get 47% of all league revenue, in keeping with their number from the current CBA. The expansion of the postseason by two teams will generate an estimated $150 million, according to the NFLPA memo, and 47% of that is $70.5 million. So that will be additional revenue going to the players that they wouldn’t have received without the playoff expansion.

    Starting in 2021, the players will get at least 48% of all league revenue, and that figure could get higher depending on how the league does in negotiating new TV deals. Once the league moves to a 17-game season, the players’ share of revenue includes a “media kicker,” which constitutes an additional share of revenue based on the size of the TV contracts. According to the NFLPA memo, if the league’s TV revenues increase by 60%, the players’ share of revenue increases to 48.5%. That share can climb as high as 48.8% if the league’s TV revenues increase by 120% or more, and it cannot be reduced via “stadium credits” — meaning that any money the owners take off the top of the revenue pile for stadium construction and renovation cannot push the players’ share of revenue below 48% (or whatever the media kicker brings it to) during the life of the deal.

    The new deal also will give the players 70% of incremental revenue from the league’s Los Angeles Stadium project, meaning 70% of any revenue that exceeds projections in any given year. And they will get a share of revenues from legal gambling operations conducted in stadiums, whether that gambling is on NFL football or other sports.

    Which players will benefit the most from the new system?

    It seems the lower-earning players — roughly 60% of NFL players operate on minimum-salary deals — will get the most significant bumps in pay, at least right at the beginning. Minimum salaries are increasing by around 20% immediately. A player with less than one year of NFL experience is set to earn $510,000 this year under the current deal. That number rises to $610,000 in 2020 if the new deal is signed, and the minimum salary for players with less than one year of experience rises incrementally throughout the deal, reaching $1.065 million in 2030.

    Minimum salaries for players in other experience brackets rise too. Players with one year of experience will earn a minimum of $585,000 in 2020 under the current deal and $675,000 under the proposed new one, and that number goes to $1.185 million by 2030. Players with seven or more years of experience will have a minimum salary of $1.05 million in 2020 under the new deal, up from either $810,000 (for players with seven to nine years of experience) or $910,000 (for players with 10 or more years of experience). The minimum salary for that group rises to $1.48 million by 2030.

    What about existing contracts that run into seasons that could expand to 17 games? Will those be adjusted?

    Yes. Any player who is under contract when the new CBA is signed and remains on that contract in a year in which the league plays 17 games will receive a bonus of 1/17th of his salary if he’s on the roster on the date of that 17th game.

    So, to make it simple: If your current contract says you’re scheduled to earn $17 million in 2021, and the league expands to 17 games that season, you get an extra $1 million as long as you’re on the roster on the date of that 17th game.

    Do the players get guaranteed contracts?

    No. As we’ve been trying to explain for years now, the CBA isn’t the place to secure those. NBA and MLB players were able to make guaranteed contracts the standard in their sports because they insisted on them individually in contract negotiations with teams throughout the years. If NFL players want guaranteed contracts, that’s what they’d have to do.

    There is one change in the new CBA that could help, however. For years, teams have cited the antiquated “fully funded rule” as a reason they couldn’t guarantee large sums of money in contracts. That rule, which dates to the wobbly early days of the league when there was some doubt about teams’ abilities to reliably pay their players, requires a team to hold in escrow an amount of money equivalent to the amount of guaranteed money (minus a $2 million deductible) in a player’s contract.

    So, when Kirk Cousins signed for three years and $84 million fully guaranteed two years ago, the Vikings had to put $82 million into an escrow account (the guaranteed amount minus the $2 million deductible). The new deal will raise the deductible to $15 million in the years 2020-28 and to $17 million in 2029 and 2030. The thought is that this could create more fertile ground for players and agents to demand and receive more guarantees in contracts.

    How about expanded rosters?

    Yes. More jobs. That’s another way the players benefit. The game-day active roster will increase from 46 to 48 players (although one of the extra players must be an offensive lineman, which will give teams more flexibility to have three extra linemen). Practice squads will expand from 10 players to 12 in 2020 and 2021 and to 14 starting in 2022. Practice-squad salaries also are going up — the minimum salary is $8,000 per week in the current CBA, and it will rise to $11,500 by 2022 — and those players will be eligible for 401(k) and tuition assistance benefits.

    Two practice-squad players per week may be elevated to the team’s roster, meaning game-week roster sizes could effectively increase from 53 to 55. And a player elevated from the practice squad to the 55-man roster could be sent back to the practice squad two times without having to clear waivers.

    The changes will give teams more flexibility in managing their rosters and, if utilized fully, will offer more opportunity for practice-squad players to earn active-roster salaries.

    Will the franchise and transition tags still exist?

    Yes. Eliminating those is a non-starter for owners, so they remain. The only change in the franchise/transition rules is that, in the final league year (2030), teams will not have the ability to use two tags in the same offseason, as they do if 2020 turns out to be the final year of the current deal.

    So, players won’t get to free agency earlier?

    Not in the vast majority of cases, no. Shorter rookie contracts are not among the gains players made in the proposed new deal. There are a couple of helpful modifications to rookie deals, including:

    Second-round draft picks are now eligible for the proven performance escalator that used to apply only to players drafted in Rounds 3-7. That’s the kicker that increases their fourth-year salary if they play a certain percentage of their team’s snaps in the first three years.

    Players picked outside the first round will be eligible for a new performance escalator based on Pro Bowl selections. (This and the previously mentioned escalator will apply beginning with the 2018 draft class.)

    There will be no more distinction, when calculating fifth-year option prices for first-round picks, between players picked in the top 10 and players picked between 11 and 32. Under the new deal, everyone’s fifth-year option will be based on performance and can be as high as the franchise tag number for his position.

    If a team exercises the fifth-year option on its first-round pick, that option is fully guaranteed. As of now, a fifth-year option is guaranteed for injury only at the time it’s exercised and doesn’t convert to a full guarantee until the start of the league year in which the fifth-year option applies. Teams have to decide on fifth-year options in advance of the player’s fourth season (which is not a change from the previous deal), so having to fully guarantee it at that time could affect some teams’ decisions.

    Any other financial changes that help the players?

    Yes. For one, players will now be paid over 34 weeks (or 36 weeks once the season expands to 17 games). As of now, players are paid in 17 weekly installments during the regular season. The new system will allow them to collect paychecks for eight months of the year instead of just four.

    And there’s a new “Veteran Salary Benefit” that allows a team to re-sign up to two of its own players per year (provided they have at least four years of service time) and exclude as much as $1.25 million of each player’s base salary from each year’s salary cap. Here’s an example: Let’s say you’re a four-year veteran on the Jets, and they want to re-sign you. They can offer you a one-year, $6.25 million deal, and only $5 million of it will count against their salary cap if they designated you as one of their two VSB exceptions. If you left and signed with, say, the Patriots, for one year and $6.25 million, the Patriots will have to count all $6.25 million against their cap. It’s sort of a starter version of the NBA’s midlevel exception rule, as I understand it.

    The new deal also will provide increases in offseason pay, preseason game pay, performance-based pay, postseason pay and benefits for current and former players.

    Did they make any changes to the drug policy?

    Yes, they did. The new CBA will eliminate suspensions for positive marijuana tests, limit the testing period to the first two weeks of training camp and raise the threshold for a positive test from 35 to 150 nanograms of THC. The idea is to focus the drug program on clinical care as opposed to punishment. Basically, if you test positive, your test gets reviewed by a board of jointly appointed medical professionals to determine whether you need any kind of treatment. The NFLPA deal memo also says that “violations of law for marijuana possession generally will not result in suspension.”

    The policy on performance-enhancing drugs will change as well. A first failed test for stimulants or diuretics will result in a two-game suspension. A first failed test for anabolic steroids will result in a six-game suspension. And “manipulation and or substitution and use of a prohibited substance” will land players an eight-game suspension. A second violation for stimulants or diuretics results in a five-game suspension. A second violation for anabolics results in a 17-game suspension.

    The new deal also increases the punishment for DUI to a three-game suspension.

    Suspended players now will be permitted to be at the team facility during the second half of their suspension period.

    Will the commissioner still be judge, jury and executioner on the discipline policy?

    Sounds like no. The new deal will provide neutral arbitration for most discipline cases, including personal conduct policy violations. And the NFLPA memo says the deal carries “significant reductions” in club fines and on-field player fines.

    This has been a point of contention among players who have felt the discipline and appeals process has been unfair since the people in charge of imposing the discipline have been the ones who hear the appeals. That will no longer be the case in most discipline matters, according to the memo.

    Wow. Sounds like the players will be able to get away with just about anything!

    No, not anything. One thing the owners set out to get in this deal was stricter punishment for training camp holdouts, and it looks as if the new deal will increase fines for holdouts and players who leave camp without permission.

    A “player playing under a contract signed as a veteran who fails to report to his club’s preseason training camp on time or reports and leaves the club for more than five days” cannot have his fines waived by the team upon return and will not earn an accrued season for that season. Harsh, but note that it specifies “a contract signed as a veteran.” So it seems as if the new anti-holdout rules won’t apply to players holding out for more at the end of their rookie contracts, as Ezekiel Elliott did last year, for example.

    How’s training camp going to work under the new deal?

    The players got some concessions here as well, although not to the extent that vocal anti-17-gamers such as Aaron Rodgers were seeking in last week’s meeting with NFL owners. There will be a limit of 16 padded practices in camp, and no more than three in a row. (The previous limit was 28, and no restrictions on consecutive days except built-in days off.) There will be a five-day “acclimation period” at the start of camp with restrictions on the types of activities permitted. After the acclimation period, players can be on the field for no more than four hours per day between their two practices, and no practice can last longer than 2.5 hours. Players are not allowed to be at the team facility for more than 12 hours in any given day, and that number decreases in subsequent seasons. And in any 17-game season, players will get a mandatory “bye week” after the third preseason game.

    Teams also are not permitted to add any padded practices in the regular season once the season expands to 17 games.

    How about these expanded playoffs? How will that work?

    Each conference will have seven playoff teams instead of six, meaning three wild-card teams and a total of six playoff games on the first weekend of the postseason. The 2019 first-round matchups would have been Chiefs-Steelers, Patriots-Titans and Texans-Bills in the AFC and Packers-Rams, Saints-Vikings and Eagles-Seahawks in the NFC. Only one team in each conference would get a bye, so the 2019 bye-week teams would have been the Ravens and the 49ers.

    One key change: In the past, players on teams that had bye weeks in the first round of the playoffs didn’t get paid for that week, while players who were playing in games that week did. That will change under the new deal. Starting in 2021, players on division winners will get $42,500 for that weekend while players on wild-card teams will get $37,500. Players participating in the divisional round will get $42,500. Players playing in conference championship games will get $65,000. Players on the losing team in the Super Bowl will get $75,000 and players on the Super Bowl champion team will get $150,000. And those amounts will increase in subsequent years.

    And the expanded season? Is this just the beginning? Is the NFL eventually going to 18 games?

    Not until 2031 at the earliest. This deal specifies that 17 is the maximum number of games that can be played in any of its seasons.

    The deal also limits the number of international games the league can hold to 10 in any season through 2025. After that, players and owners could meet to determine whether more international games are warranted. If a team plays more than one international game in a season, its players each get $5,000 stipends for each additional game. This will help offset the tax implications of, say, the Jaguars having to play two home games a year in London.

    in reply to: tweets … 3/13 thru 3/16 #112362
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Sosa K@QBsMVP
    Got no clue what to make of Marcus Peters. I think people forget who he was in K.C. He was the same. Sometimes elite, sometimes a major liability. I’m confident it’ll show up in Baltimore too. His lack of consistency has always hampered him, regardless of team/defense/city.

    ==

    Adam Schefter@AdamSchefter
    Jaguars and Ravens have agreed to a trade in principle that would send Pro Bowl DE Calais Campbell to Baltimore for a 2020 fifth-round pick, per sources. Campbell will try to finalize an extension with Baltimore.

    Chris Wesseling@ChrisWesseling
    Jaguars missed their window, but Calais Campbell played at All-Pro level all 3 years after leaving Arizona as 30 y/o. One of the better defensive free agents of decade, if not ever.

    Sosa K@QBsMVP
    Jags are freeing up CAAAAAP. What a trade for Baltimore!

    in reply to: Exit poll discrepancy & other voter suppression news #112361
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: politics & the virus #112358
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    How the coronavirus crisis revealed the danger of the decades-long conservative movement

    link https://www.alternet.org/2020/03/how-the-coronavirus-crisis-revealed-the-danger-of-the-decades-long-conservative-movement/?fbclid=IwAR3iRJu9lkt5LLJp70djSmU1MqwlOZGNwVsEkypVyU7CL3u8-thzqXzraXY

    Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell smelled an evil liberal conspiracy on Thursday, one designed to steal away his decades of tireless work to kneecap the federal government. The Democratic-majority House had passed a large emergency bill, designed to combat the coronavirus pandemic, and McConnell was absolutely certain Democrats, led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, were trying to pull one over on him.

    “Unfortunately, it appears at this hour that the speaker and House Democrats instead chose to produce an ideological wish list that was not tailored closely to the circumstances,” McConnell said. He accused Democrats of exploiting this situation, saying the bill addresses “various areas of policy that are barely related, if at all, to the issue before us.”

    There’s a lot at stake here, but apparently the big sticking point for McConnell was a provision requiring employers to offer paid sick leave to employees, which McConnell claims would “put thousands of small businesses at risk.”

    In reality, of course, this is just common sense. As the New York Times editorial board noted, companies that don’t offer paid sick leave “are endangering their workers and customers.” A lot of workers with public-facing jobs — such as food service workers and retail employees — come into close contact with dozens or hundreds of people a day. But they are the people least likely to be allowed to stay home without losing their jobs, or at least losing a paycheck.

    McConnell is so poisoned by his right-wing ideology that he can’t see this, or chooses not to. Instead, he’s standing firm on the long-standing Republican tendency to view employers as feudal lords who should be allowed to treat employees however they wish — even, apparently, if that means allowing a deadly disease to rip through the population, potentially killing hundreds of thousands of people if it is not checked.

    So far, most of the panic over the coronavirus outbreak has been driven by the undeniable incompetence of Donald Trump. At every turn, Trump has made this situation worse — even going so far as to try to discourage testing to bamboozle the public and, I suspect, tanking the markets by screwing up an Oval Office address because he’s too vain to wear glasses so he can see well enough to read a teleprompter.

    That’s all true. But it’s also important to understand that the larger Republican Party, even without Trump, is also to blame for what looks to be a serious public health crisis. Right-wing ideology, often marketed as “rugged individualism” but perhaps better understood as an aversion to the very concept of a common good, is one major reason why the U.S. government, hamstrung for decades by Republican power, isn’t better equipped to handle a crisis.

    This isn’t just a Trump problem. This is a widespread Republican problem. For decades, GOP strategy has been consistent: Whenever they get power, they slash regulations and gut spending, with the goal of making government less effective. This is a deliberate strategy to make the public broadly distrustful of government, and therefore increasingly open to shifting more and more power to the wealthy individuals who control the private sector.

    This ideological commitment to an every-man-for-himself ideology, which is terrible in any circumstances, is exposed as particularly dreadful in the face of a pandemic. Disease is a reminder that humans are a herd species, wholly dependent on each other for survival, and that government must be a way to formally organize that joint survival pattern. It’s not some villain in a racism-inflected right-wing morality fable about the importance of “personal responsibility.”

    Simply put, we need our government to be able to protect us from disease. Republicans have spent years tearing it down, and even in a crisis are incapable of accepting that “small government” is not always a good thing.

    As Max Moran at Talking Points Memo argued, the fact that Vice President Mike Pence — deemed a “normal” Republican — is in charge of the coronavirus comforts some people, because they believe he is more adult and responsible than Trump. Pence’s track record suggests otherwise. As governor of Indiana, he oversaw an HIV outbreak that led to 10% of the population people in a single county becoming infected because Pence thought preaching the value of personal responsibility was better than following the recommendations of public health experts.

    “[A] Pence-led response is dangerous, not in spite of, but precisely because he is a typical Republican,” Moran writes, because normal Republicans “apply their competence and considerable resources” to the task of “protection for the powerful, callousness for the afflicted, and a special disdain for the ‘other.’”

    The right-wing idiocy that is going to get people killed is all over the Republican response to this situation. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy joined McConnell in denouncing the Democratic bill, even though everything in it — including expanding food-stamp spending — will either help slow the spread of the disease or stimulate the American economy to offset the inevitable slowdown caused by this epidemic.

    Instead, McCarthy is resorting to racism instead of sensible public health measures, calling the coronavirus the “Chinese coronavirus” for no apparent purpose except to feed the assumptions of the Fox News base than their whiteness and their racist attitudes will somehow protect them. (This assumption, by the way, is leading many older Americans to take serious and completely unnecessary risks with their health.)

    The right-wing ideology poisoning is so bad that the coronavirus bill was held up in part because Republicans wanted to inject some anti-abortion language into it. There is absolutely no reason to believe that helping people protect themselves against a viral epidemic will lead to more abortions, but that’s the modern GOP for you: They’re always worried that somehow or other the Democrats have a sneaky agenda to “let” women have sex. (Which women will undoubtedly do, whether the Democrats authorize it or not.)

    Even the so-called Republican “moderates” are to blame for this situation. For instance, Politico reporter Michael Grunwald uncovered this little tidbit about Sen. Susan Collins of Maine from his book about the Obama era.

    Zooming out, it’s easy to see how decades of damage to our government are likely to make this epidemic worse. Republicans have been stingy about health care spending and have blocked Democratic efforts to increase access, especially when it comes to the Medicaid expansion under the Obama administration. The result is that we have fewer doctors and hospitals ready to handle what we know is coming, and we will probably have a lot of infected people who won’t get tested, either because they can’t afford it or don’t even know where to go for testing and treatment.

    By all means, blame Trump for the current crisis. His incompetence is especially central to the panicked reaction of the financial markets. Even a slightly steadier president, whatever his or her party or ideology, would bolster investor confidence a whole lot more.

    But this isn’t just about Trump. Republicans have a profound hostility to good government, and whatever slapdash response they may grudgingly accept in an effort to save their skins at the ballot box this November will be hamstrung by the fact that they refused, for decades, to invest in the infrastructure necessary to weather the big shock that is hitting us right now. Viruses are the ultimate reminder that humans are interconnected and need each other, and that the ideal of “rugged individualism” is childish and often racist nonsense.

    in reply to: new CBA voted in … what it means #112356
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    ==

    NFL’s new CBA explained: A look at all the roster, salary and season changes
    Highlighting all the most notable inclusions of the new CBA

    https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfls-new-cba-explained-a-look-at-all-the-roster-salary-and-season-changes/

    NFL players voted to ratify the new CBA on Saturday night. The new CBA will take effect starting in 2021 and will run until 2030. A simple majority of the players need to vote “yes” for the proposed deal to go through. The final vote was 1,019 to 959, the NFLPA released in a statement. There are roughly 2,500 players in the players union, so an estimated 79.1% of the players voted on the CBA.

    A number of big-name NFL players were vocal in their displeasure with the new CBA.

    What, exactly, has some players riled up? What changes are coming to rosters, salaries and the season structure as a result of the new CBA? What kind of player-desired changes — like the added “offseason recovery time” advocated by Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers — might be missing from the proposal?

    Here are some of the most notable rules, regulations and changes that would go into effect under the proposed CBA:

    Season structure
    2020: 16-game regular season, with postseason expanded from 12 to 14 teams
    Starting in 2021, the NFL has the option to expand the regular season from 16 to 17 games
    If/when NFL moves to 17 games, each team receives a bye week in place of a fourth preseason game
    Annual revenue split
    2020: Owners receive 53 percent; players receive 47 percent
    2021-2030: Owners receive 52 percent; players receive 48 percent
    From 2021-2030, the base percentage of annual player revenue is “set at 48 percent … irrespective of whether (the) regular season consists of 16 or 17 games.” However, in the event the NFL moves from 16 to 17 games, players would receive a “media kicker” — an additional share of revenue based on the league’s overall growth in TV contracts. A 60-percent increase would boost annual player revenue to 48.5 percent. The boosted player share could go as high as 48.8 percent with a TV revenue jump of more than 120 percent.

    Player salaries
    Immediate increases in minimum salaries
    $1 million minimum salaries by 2029
    Any players carrying current above-league-minimum contracts into the new CBA will receive a bonus equivalent to 1/17 their salary if/when the NFL moves from 16 to 17 regular season games
    Drug policies
    Increased emphasis on clinical care rather than punishment (no suspensions for players receiving clinical care)
    Significant reduction of penalties for marijuana use (no suspensions for positive tests; annual testing limited to first two weeks of training camp; higher thresholds for positive tests — 150 grams instead of 35; violations of law for possession “generally will not result in suspension”)
    Increased discipline for DUIs (three-game suspension for each violation)
    Players permitted at team facilities during the second half of suspension period
    Work rules
    Vested veterans (players with four or more accrued seasons) receive up to five days of absences for workouts, including one OTA, without losing offseason workout bonus
    Mandatory three days off after a Thursday game
    Maximum of 12 hours at team facilities per day
    No more than three consecutive days of padded practices at training camp; maximum of 16
    Rosters
    Teams can designate an additional player to return from injured reserve each year (three instead of two)
    Active game-day rosters increased from 46 to 48 players
    Practice squads expanded from 10 to 12 players in 2020-2021, then to 14 players starting in 2022 (including between two and four players with unlimited accrued seasons per team)
    Holdouts
    Increased fines for holdouts and players who leave training camp without permission
    Players under contract who fail to report to camp on time or leaves the team for more than five days without permission will no longer be eligible to earn an accrued season for that year
    International games
    No more than 10 international games per season from 2020-2025
    Any team playing more than one international game in a season will pay players a $5,000 stipend for each additional game

    in reply to: politics & the virus #112354
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Disabled vet fighting U.S. propaganda@100_Disable_vet
    Healthcare Industry stock went up about $40 billion the day after Super Tuesday.

    Somebody is praying for a Biden Presidency and it’s not the 87 million people uninsured or under insured

    in reply to: tweets … 3/13 thru 3/16 #112353
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Cameron DaSilva@camdasilva
    Now that the new CBA is approved, does ANYONE know how the NFL will handle the home/away split of a 17-game season?

    So we get an expanded playoff field (7 teams per conference) in 2020 and a 17-game season (3-game preseason) starting as early as 2021

    How the new CBA impacts the Rams in 2020 and beyond https://wp.me/p7aESa-2DRC

    – Can’t tag Fowler and Littleton (were unlikely to anyway)
    – Cap is probably spiking in coming years (hi Jalen Ramsey)
    – Rosters are expanding
    – Easier path to playoffs in tough NFC West

    Josh Clark@jaclark21
    couldn’t they restructure a couple deals to push a little cap into next season, when the cap does go up?

    Cameron DaSilva@camdasilva
    Goff would free up $16.8M, so yes. But Snead seemed reluctant to say they’ll do that for sure

    Snake@Sammy_GD
    This is nice for the Rams. NFC West is rough. So, I’m assuming that only the top seed gets a bye now correct?

    Cameron DaSilva@camdasilva
    Correct.

    in reply to: new CBA voted in … what it means #112352
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: politics & the virus #112351
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: tweets … 3/13 thru 3/16 #112350
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: new CBA voted in … what it means #112349
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: new CBA voted in … what it means #112343
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Adam Schefter@AdamSchefter
    Sources to ESPN: NFL players voted to approve the proposed CBA, giving the NFL 10 more years of labor peace, players an increased share of revenue, former players added benefits, and the league 17-game regular seasons along with an expanded playoff field.

    in reply to: tweets … 3/13 thru 3/16 #112341
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: tweets … 3/13 thru 3/16 #112338
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: politics & the virus #112337
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: politics & the virus #112336
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: Exit poll discrepancy & other voter suppression news #112334
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: tweets … 3/13 thru 3/16 #112333
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: Exit poll discrepancy & other voter suppression news #112332
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Maricopa County cuts some polling places, won’t mail extra ballots for Tuesday’s election

    in reply to: tweets … 3/13 thru 3/16 #112331
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: notes from expert panel on the virus & other expert views #112329
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: Bernies Ads are good #112328
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: sports & the Coronavirus (Rams, NBA, etc) #112327
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    in reply to: tweets … 3/13 thru 3/16 #112323
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

Viewing 30 posts - 21,811 through 21,840 (of 47,659 total)