forums

Ivy League moving football to the Spring

Advertisement
305to954 said:
the protesting is a is a good point.. there’s no level of equipment in football or basketball that will stop mofos infected from breathing heavy, sweating, spitting etc etc And Therefore spreading it. I think the spike is a combination of things, u can point to the protest certainly, opening businesses like gyms, clubs and bars too soon, and the rise in testing..the testing is just shining light on case we didn’t know about for sure. Our leadership right now is deplorable. No clear messaging going on
Click to expand...
But at least sports has the testing. They would have a idea before hand. You’re right about the opening of stuff too. It was probably a bit too early.
 
The Franchise said:
Exactly. I'm getting the feeling that people won't be happy allowing college football until there's an effective vaccine. And, as you have schooled us, there's no guarantee of that happening any time soon.

People are perfectly happy with protests, packed beaches, and political rallies with no masks, but the mere thought of healthy kids playing college football makes them lose whatever limited marbles they have. They must be languishing under the faulty premise that these college kids will go bury themselves in a bunker in isolation if college football is cancelled. They're going to catch it like they are catching it now in records numbers.
Click to expand...

I mean the inherent implication is that somehow they are more likely to be infected because they are engaging in football activities, including playing, than they otherwise would be. But you and I both know, that once they’re freed up, they’re going to be engaging in much more risky behaviors. Because that’s what people that age do.

Part of the recent increase, without getting into the politics of people that are too stubborn to wear masks and things like that, it’s just young people being young people. There’s a huge prevalence of younger age infections. They go to parties in each others houses, they play video games, they drink, they smoke, and they’re not wearing masks or social distancing in the slightest.

But yeah being in controlled regimens and football activities is much riskier. At least this way they have much less time for the other stuff
 
Zbrod95 said:
But at least sports has the testing. They would have a idea before hand. You’re right about the opening of stuff too. It was probably a bit too early.
Click to expand...
But football is tough tho bro..it’s 75 plus players..unless u somehow limit roster size to like 45 for this szn..which I don’t see coming. Then u have the coaching staff, trainers etc..it’s going to be a lot of moving part even with testing..**** the NBA just started getting their players back to facilities and couple teams had to shutdown due to positive test
 
Advertisement
305to954 said:
But football is tough tho bro..it’s 75 plus players..unless u somehow limit roster size to like 45 for this szn..which I don’t see coming. Then u have the coaching staff, trainers etc..it’s going to be a lot of moving part even with testing..**** the NBA just started getting their players back to facilities and couple teams had to shutdown due to positive test
Click to expand...
I think they way to do it is to split it in half. Who are the guys who are going to play on your 2 deep and who aren’t then treat it as 2 separate teams that practice together at a separate time. If injuries happen then you adjust it.
 
The
Zbrod95 said:
I think they way to do it is to split it in half. Who are the guys who are going to play on your 2 deep and who aren’t then treat it as 2 separate teams that practice together at a separate time. If injuries happen then you adjust it.
Click to expand...
I agree. Limiting numbers imo is the only possible way
 
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
I mean the inherent implication is that somehow they are more likely to be infected because they are engaging in football activities, including playing, then they otherwise would be. But you and I both know, that once they’re freed up, they’re going to be engaging in much more risky behaviors. Because that’s what people that age do.

Part of the recent increase, without getting into the politics of people that are too stubborn to wear masks and things like that, it’s just young people being young people. There’s a huge prevalence of younger age infections. They go to parties in each others houses, they play video games, they drink, they smoke, and they’re not wearing masks or social distancing in the slightest.

But yeah being in controlled regimens and football activities is much riskier. At least this way they have much less time for the other stuff
Click to expand...
The world would be much better off with smart people like us running it. I'll shout it from the mountaintops: YOUNG PEOPLE ARE GOING TO CATCH THIS ****. They think they're invincible and don't give a fck. They're not wearing masks. They're not social distancing. They're going to catch it. And a few will die as a result. Football will not affect that.

So why destroy the gigantic economy that surrounds college football for no reason other than panic? I'm not sure people understand that it's not just the universities that will potentially collapse with no college football; it's all the small businesses that rely on college football to sustain themselves.
 
Advertisement
The Franchise said:
The world would be much better off with smart people like us running it. I'll shout it from the mountaintops: YOUNG PEOPLE ARE GOING TO CATCH THIS ****. They think they're invincible and don't give a fck. They're not wearing masks. They're not social distancing. They're going to catch it. And a few will die as a result. Football will not affect that.

So why destroy the gigantic economy that surrounds college football for no reason other than panic? I'm not sure people understand that it's not just the universities that will potentially collapse with no college football; it's all the small businesses that rely on college football to sustain themselves.
Click to expand...
I think most ppl realize this bro. The thing is we can’t choose between one anymore. We were too late to act on this nationally obviously. Living with COVID is just gonna be the new reality for the foreseen future..it’s gonna be interesting to see what happens if a player or coach gets it And god forbid happns to pass away..now u talking about some lawsuits and legal action..I’m sure universities will have these guys sign waivers
 
305to954 said:
I think most ppl realize this bro. The thing is we can’t choose between one anymore. We were too late to act on this nationally obviously. Living with COVID is just gonna be the new reality for the foreseen future..it’s gonna be interesting to see what happens if a player or coach gets it And god forbid happns to pass away..now u talking about some lawsuits and legal action..I’m sure universities will have these guys sign waivers
Click to expand...
People keep spouting the "lawsuits are coming! lawsuits are coming!" rhetoric. They're not. Players and coaches will be given the option of participating or not participating. They'll likely be told they can remain on scholarship if they don't participate. The ones who volunteer to assume the risk of playing will be required to sign waivers. Boom. The end.
 
The Franchise said:
People keep spouting the "lawsuits are coming! lawsuits are coming!" rhetoric. They're not. Players and coaches will be given the option of participating or not participating. They'll likely be told they can remain on scholarship if they don't participate. The ones who volunteer to assume the risk of playing will be required to sign waivers. Boom. The end.
Click to expand...
ya I agree to a certain extent.
 
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
What is so magical about the spring? If this is an issue in the fall, it can be an issue in the spring...just like this spring was.

People acting like if football gets canceled in the fall, everything will be back to normal in spring enough to make people comfortable enough to go forward.,

If people can’t wrap their heads around fall football, how likely is the problem to be resolved enough for them to be comfortable in the spring?

Nah, if we aren’t having it in the fall, it seems more than likely we won’t have it in the spring either.
Click to expand...

they have a pretty solid timeline now expecting a vaccine by end of year or early 2021. So this magical vaccine that half the world won’t even take, will allow people to be comfortable living their lives again......basically
 
Advertisement
Zbrod95 said:
I’ve been kind of quiet on this stuff even though I’m a former health professional but I’m gonna say something now. There’s a lot of overreaction going on. There’s spikes in cases because there were riots and protests across the country. What did they think was going happen? It has nothing to do with random spikes. Moving dates and canceling football isn’t going to help this situation. There’s plenty of ways to safely do this. Players can wear visors and face masks like they do when they’re in a extremely cold environment. Baseball and basketball ball could do the same thing with facemasks and replace visors with eye protection. The best way to fight this is sanitation and social distancing when possible but there’s no need to social distance if they person across from you doesn’t have which going by the testing requirements that would have to be implemented, should be the case.
Click to expand...

Can you cite this? Everything I have seen has said the opposite, that they have been unable to link the protests to spikes. Maybe I just didnt see those articles, but I have seen several that said the opposite, particularly where you see spikes where there weren't protests and haven't seen spikes in places were there were protests.

From June 30th article in Time Magazine:

"But public health officials have spotted at least one bright spot amid all the discouraging data: the nationwide Black Lives Matter protests, which began after George Floyd’s death at the hands of Minneapolis police in May, so far do not seem to have been dreaded “superspreader” events, as some feared they might. Several cities that saw major protests, including New York, Chicago, and Philadelphia, have not experienced a new surge in cases in the days and weeks following. And in cities and states that specifically set out to test protestors, like Massachusetts, Seattle, and Minnesota, the results have shown that demonstrators were not considerably more likely to test positive compared to the general population."

It does go on to say:

"We may yet see a protest-related spike in coronavirus cases. Many of the demonstrators were young, and thus likely to develop only mild symptoms from COVID-19, if any at all. But even asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic people can carry the virus to older, more vulnerable people in their homes or communities. If that’s happening, it would take more time to show up in the data."

And maybe that will be the case, but everything I have seen has said that at least so far, there isn't any evidence that the protests lead to any spikes.

Now maybe this suggest that fans at games would be fine if they were outside and masked (as this article suggests may be the reason there hasnt been a spike tied to the protests)....
 
Advertisement
Shogungts said:
Can you cite this? Everything I have seen has said the opposite, that they have been unable to link the protests to spikes. Maybe I just didnt see those articles, but I have seen several that said the opposite, particularly where you see spikes where there weren't protests and haven't seen spikes in places were there were protests.

From June 30th article in Time Magazine:

"But public health officials have spotted at least one bright spot amid all the discouraging data: the nationwide Black Lives Matter protests, which began after George Floyd’s death at the hands of Minneapolis police in May, so far do not seem to have been dreaded “superspreader” events, as some feared they might. Several cities that saw major protests, including New York, Chicago, and Philadelphia, have not experienced a new surge in cases in the days and weeks following. And in cities and states that specifically set out to test protestors, like Massachusetts, Seattle, and Minnesota, the results have shown that demonstrators were not considerably more likely to test positive compared to the general population."

It does go on to say:

"We may yet see a protest-related spike in coronavirus cases. Many of the demonstrators were young, and thus likely to develop only mild symptoms from COVID-19, if any at all. But even asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic people can carry the virus to older, more vulnerable people in their homes or communities. If that’s happening, it would take more time to show up in the data."

And maybe that will be the case, but everything I have seen has said that at least so far, there isn't any evidence that the protests lead to any spikes.

Now maybe this suggest that fans at games would be fine if they were outside and masked (as this article suggests may be the reason there hasnt been a spike tied to the protests)....
Click to expand...
If you need some sort of citation of how a large gathering resulted in to the spreading of a disease then I don’t know what to tell you.
 
Zbrod95 said:
If you need some sort of citation of how a large gathering resulted in to the spreading of a disease then I don’t know what to tell you.
Click to expand...

I just posted an article from a reputable news source that states there isn't a link so far and the theories for why that may be (the protests were outside and the majority of the participants wearing masks). Additionally there were not spikes in places with large protests and were spikes where there were no protests. So yes, I think it is a fair request.

And again, it's not saying definitely that it won't lead to more, but that at least so far it does not appear to have.
 
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
What is so magical about the spring? If this is an issue in the fall, it can be an issue in the spring...just like this spring was.

People acting like if football gets canceled in the fall, everything will be back to normal in spring enough to make people comfortable enough to go forward.,

If people can’t wrap their heads around fall football, how likely is the problem to be resolved enough for them to be comfortable in the spring?

Nah, if we aren’t having it in the fall, it seems more than likely we won’t have it in the spring either.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. Our sentient life form is psychologically driven to kick cans down the road.

History is chock-full-o-goodness of societies', and dare I say my life, your life, every other poster's life, facing issue(s) where an immediate/near term decision must/should be made--but put off. For some even to significant detriment or even destruction.

To a very large degree, we are hardwired for the behavior.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Back
Top