forums

New ACC Thread (and statement on thread derailment)

Advertisement
hotshot said:
Marlins had, what, 17+ positive test results? Why should we believe UM would have any fewer, and likely more?

Bigger question is what will individual schools, and the Conference leadership, do as a result of the inevitable positive tests that are coming?
Click to expand...
positive results should not and would not be a problem with aggressive frequent testing. catch it and isolate.
 
The Franchise said:
That didn't take long. Made it all the way to post 6.

As for Jimmy Lake, I'd like to see him explain how he's going to keep his players from getting COVID while they're away from the team. What's his grand plan? No football means no COVID?
Click to expand...
It's the same as any other industry. If you bring people back to work you are exposing them to risk. If you don't mandate masks in your grocery store then the low-wage staff who need income have to choose between unemployment or undue risk.

You can argue with a CFB team they have the choice of opting out but most won't want to quit on their teammates. CFB programs aren't equipped to provide strict health protocols like the NFL is doing so yes, players who are responsible in their personal life will be exposing themselves to much greater risk of contracting the virus vs. staying home with no football.

We know this isn't the only factor for cancelling the season but you can't dismiss it either.

...

As for my previous post I disagree with it being deleted as all I did was call a spade a spade. I guess this site is cool with people spreading misinformation but you can't call the offenders out on it because...that causes them to do it even more and derail threads? Oh right, there's that COVID board which is totally welcoming to all types of opinions! Makes sense, good job as always mods! Have fun deleting this post, and see ya!
 
Advertisement
Is Jim Boeheim killing a man considered "on topic". Because he did.. kill a man.

Syracuse. Death. Coaches. Has to be allowed right?! Just testing the waters.
 
hotshot said:
Marlins had, what, 17+ positive test results? Why should we believe UM would have any fewer, and likely more?

Bigger question is what will individual schools, and the Conference leadership, do as a result of the inevitable positive tests that are coming?
Click to expand...
In a non-bubble environment, it's a **** of a lot more difficult to control a professional athlete than it is a college athlete. Comparing what happened with the Marlins to CFB is a false analogy.
 
IndayArtHauz said:
NOTE: I’m uncertain what to do about the absurd amount of political posts that overwhelm nearly every single thread. To those of you who are just trying to get the info, I apologize. Its fair to say that not enough is being done.

To those of you who keep derailing the threads, I would ask you to please stop. The back and forth is literally making these threads unreadable. Consider if what you are posting is 1) relevant to the topic of the thread or 2) moves the conversation away from that topic. Those are the criteria by which I evaluate posts.

If they fail to meet those standards I’ll delete them and all replies. I deleted 40 posts from a thread last night, but I won’t do that again, I’ll just boot you from the thread.

Do not reply to the thread derailment portion of this thread. I dont really care what you think, I care what you do.



Starting the ACC topic off with this very relevant post.
Click to expand...

good let them suffer & watch when there is.
 
Advertisement
What happens if this happens to multiple teams up there i.e. BC? Do they just forfeit and the rest keep playing?
 
TheOriginalCane said:
I'm going to ask a simple question, it's not a criticism of you.

Why is this frequently analyzed as "away from the team"? And why isn't there any sort of concern for the rest of the student body?

Let me rephrase. Some schools will have in-person, some will be remote, some are apparently doing a hybrid of both. I'm not sure why, when the discussion of football players comes up, it is characterized as some sort of a choice between (a) football players being kept in a clean room at Johns Hopkins simply because they play a sport, or (b) football players being forced to return to filthy hovels where they have to breath recycled air from an unsanitized oxygen tank.

After all, haven't most football players...been AT HOME...for a good chunk of the past six months NOT contracting Covid-19 (along with all the K-12 kids as well)?

I get the concept that the football players may have better access to medical care while they are on campus, and I can respect that. At the same time, that very idea can be undermined by poor execution (and I'm definitely looking at F$U on this one).

Anyhow, that's just my thought process on the whole "we're better off playing football, from a Covid-19 standpoint" argument that is being made. Maybe it will prove to be true, maybe it will prove to be false, but I don't understand why some people seem to think that 85 kids per university are FAR BETTER OFF playing football rather than just attending classes however classes are offered.

If you pay the tuition and fees...you still have healthcare coverage. You still live wherever you were going to live (on-campus, off-campus, at-home). The football players are still getting their tuition/financial aid packages.

I'm sure someone's going to turn this into politics, so "it is what it is".
Click to expand...
Football activities take up an enormous number of hours per week of these kids' time. Take away all those hours and what are the kids going to do to fill the time? Probably activities that put them at greater risk of getting the virus.
 
HighSeas said:
It's the same as any other industry. If you bring people back to work you are exposing them to risk. If you don't mandate masks in your grocery store then the low-wage staff who need income have to choose between unemployment or undue risk.

You can argue with a CFB team they have the choice of opting out but most won't want to quit on their teammates. CFB programs aren't equipped to provide strict health protocols like the NFL is doing so yes, players who are responsible in their personal life will be exposing themselves to much greater risk of contracting the virus vs. staying home with no football.

We know this isn't the only factor for cancelling the season but you can't dismiss it either.

...

As for my previous post I disagree with it being deleted as all I did was call a spade a spade. I guess this site is cool with people spreading misinformation but you can't call the offenders out on it because...that causes them to do it even more and derail threads? Oh right, there's that COVID board which is totally welcoming to all types of opinions! Makes sense, good job as always mods! Have fun deleting this post, and see ya!
Click to expand...
I totally agree with you but if they’re getting their COVID information from this football board than they’re a lost cause anyway and correcting them is a waste of time. My new method of dealing with them is posting a funny GIF calling them an idiot and moving on lol
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
I'm going to ask a simple question, it's not a criticism of you.

Why is this frequently analyzed as "away from the team"? And why isn't there any sort of concern for the rest of the student body?

Let me rephrase. Some schools will have in-person, some will be remote, some are apparently doing a hybrid of both. I'm not sure why, when the discussion of football players comes up, it is characterized as some sort of a choice between (a) football players being kept in a clean room at Johns Hopkins simply because they play a sport, or (b) football players being forced to return to filthy hovels where they have to breath recycled air from an unsanitized oxygen tank.

After all, haven't most football players...been AT HOME...for a good chunk of the past six months NOT contracting Covid-19 (along with all the K-12 kids as well)?

I get the concept that the football players may have better access to medical care while they are on campus, and I can respect that. At the same time, that very idea can be undermined by poor execution (and I'm definitely looking at F$U on this one).

Anyhow, that's just my thought process on the whole "we're better off playing football, from a Covid-19 standpoint" argument that is being made. Maybe it will prove to be true, maybe it will prove to be false, but I don't understand why some people seem to think that 85 kids per university are FAR BETTER OFF playing football rather than just attending classes however classes are offered.

If you pay the tuition and fees...you still have healthcare coverage. You still live wherever you were going to live (on-campus, off-campus, at-home). The football players are still getting their tuition/financial aid packages.

I'm sure someone's going to turn this into politics, so "it is what it is".
Click to expand...
I think where your idea falls apart a bit is thinking college kids will be at home if they're not playing football. I think they'll be out and about like college kids typically are, and they won't have their teammates or the peer pressure of ruining a season by spreading the bug to teammates.

Manny has done a great job of keeping the kids focused because they have a goal of playing football. He's seemingly managed to convince them, while striving toward that goal, to stay out of potentially COVID-risky situations. I don't see that happening if the season is canceled. And I don't trust kids to act responsibly without any team or peer or football pressure to keep them in line.

There were some positive cases when the kids came back to the team from their free time, and there haven't been any cases in the last 3 rounds of tests according to Frenk. So that supports the idea that the team environment is safer from the standpoint of avoiding the bug.
 
IndayArtHauz said:
NOTE: I’m uncertain what to do about the absurd amount of political posts that overwhelm nearly every single thread. To those of you who are just trying to get the info, I apologize. Its fair to say that not enough is being done.

To those of you who keep derailing the threads, I would ask you to please stop. The back and forth is literally making these threads unreadable. Consider if what you are posting is 1) relevant to the topic of the thread or 2) moves the conversation away from that topic. Those are the criteria by which I evaluate posts.

If they fail to meet those standards I’ll delete them and all replies. I deleted 40 posts from a thread last night, but I won’t do that again, I’ll just boot you from the thread.

Do not reply to the thread derailment portion of this thread. I dont really care what you think, I care what you do.



Starting the ACC topic off with this very relevant post.
Click to expand...

How about just starting a board on politics so posters can spray their testostorone all over one board?
 
HighSeas said:
It's the same as any other industry. If you bring people back to work you are exposing them to risk. If you don't mandate masks in your grocery store then the low-wage staff who need income have to choose between unemployment or undue risk.

You can argue with a CFB team they have the choice of opting out but most won't want to quit on their teammates. CFB programs aren't equipped to provide strict health protocols like the NFL is doing so yes, players who are responsible in their personal life will be exposing themselves to much greater risk of contracting the virus vs. staying home with no football.

We know this isn't the only factor for cancelling the season but you can't dismiss it either.

...

As for my previous post I disagree with it being deleted as all I did was call a spade a spade. I guess this site is cool with people spreading misinformation but you can't call the offenders out on it because...that causes them to do it even more and derail threads? Oh right, there's that COVID board which is totally welcoming to all types of opinions! Makes sense, good job as always mods! Have fun deleting this post, and see ya!
Click to expand...
You are exactly wrong. Outside of creating a bubble like the NBA did, universities are far more well equipped to provide strict health protocols. College sports programs have more greater control over the daily lives of their athletes than any professional sports program in the US. Many of these universities also have world class medical facilities right on campus. Beyond that, how responsible is the average college student in America? Not responsible at all. The average college football players is probably less responsible than the average college student. Every hour spent away from football activities is probably an hour spent doing something more high risk than playing football.
 
Advertisement
itsacanething said:
the real question is does the virus cause harm to otherwise healthy 18-22 year olds at a statistically significant rate? the big 10 and the pac 12 are floating some anecdotal evidence of an enlarged heart condition. is that a legitimate risk? seems to me that it is not a statistically significant risk.

if some are uncomfortable with the level of risk they can opt out. others should be allowed to play in my opinion.
Click to expand...
That's not going to be determined within the time frame required to make a play/don't play decision. If anything, a school like UM, that's been on top of this, would have a more valid concern about the protocols others are using than SU.

Since Frenk's been involved in the discussions on a conference level, if other school's are concerned, I would think they'd have an open dialog about what precautions are needed. It's in our interest to ensure we can go forward safely.
 
HighSeas said:
It's the same as any other industry. If you bring people back to work you are exposing them to risk. If you don't mandate masks in your grocery store then the low-wage staff who need income have to choose between unemployment or undue risk.

You can argue with a CFB team they have the choice of opting out but most won't want to quit on their teammates. CFB programs aren't equipped to provide strict health protocols like the NFL is doing so yes, players who are responsible in their personal life will be exposing themselves to much greater risk of contracting the virus vs. staying home with no football.

We know this isn't the only factor for cancelling the season but you can't dismiss it either.

...

As for my previous post I disagree with it being deleted as all I did was call a spade a spade. I guess this site is cool with people spreading misinformation but you can't call the offenders out on it because...that causes them to do it even more and derail threads? Oh right, there's that COVID board which is totally welcoming to all types of opinions! Makes sense, good job as always mods! Have fun deleting this post, and see ya!
Click to expand...
I understand you think what you are doing is significant and meaningful. It is not. You are the only one derailing the thread.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top