[81alum]

Preview:

Same as the 1st game, except we can expect to have Anna Wilson back and our team is now fully cognizant of the threat of Jayda Curry.  Will be interesting to see the chess match and whether either/both coaches change approaches.  In these past back-to-back contests there sometimes have been major differences in the games.

[81alum]

Preview:

Same as the 1st game, except we can expect to have Anna Wilson back and our team is now fully cognizant of the threat of Jayda Curry.  Will be interesting to see the chess match and whether either/both coaches change approaches.  In these past back-to-back contests there sometimes have been major differences in the games.

[steinerwj]

Preview:

Same as the 1st game, except we can expect to have Anna Wilson back and our team is now fully cognizant of the threat of Jayda Curry.  Will be interesting to see the chess match and whether either/both coaches change approaches.  In these past back-to-back contests there sometimes have been major differences in the games.

Game Postponed per Gostanford.com. Covid in the Cal program

[steinerwj]

Preview:

Same as the 1st game, except we can expect to have Anna Wilson back and our team is now fully cognizant of the threat of Jayda Curry.  Will be interesting to see the chess match and whether either/both coaches change approaches.  In these past back-to-back contests there sometimes have been major differences in the games.

Game Postponed per Gostanford.com. Covid in the Cal program

[82lsju]

[82lsju]

[WBB fan]

Covid in the Cal program makes me worry about Stanford. Players out there on the court, Cal and Stanford, all playing hard and breathing intensely -- and certainly on each other. No social distancing in basketball.  So far Stanford has managed to avoid having to cancel or postpone a game because of Covid in their own program, but will that continue?  And next weekend, if they can play, is a brobdingnagian one, Arizona and ASU

[WBB fan]

Covid in the Cal program makes me worry about Stanford. Players out there on the court, Cal and Stanford, all playing hard and breathing intensely -- and certainly on each other. No social distancing in basketball.  So far Stanford has managed to avoid having to cancel or postpone a game because of Covid in their own program, but will that continue?  And next weekend, if they can play, is a brobdingnagian one, Arizona and ASU

[BobK]

Make Oregon state come down

[BobK]

Make Oregon state come down

[WBB fan]

Make Oregon state come down

Totally agree. Otherwise, it's two games against them in Corvallis, if they manage to stay healthy enough, or maybe only one, the postponed one not ever played.

[WBB fan]

Make Oregon state come down

Totally agree. Otherwise, it's two games against them in Corvallis, if they manage to stay healthy enough, or maybe only one, the postponed one not ever played.

[teejers1]

Covid in the Cal program makes me worry about Stanford. Players out there on the court, Cal and Stanford, all playing hard and breathing intensely -- and certainly on each other. No social distancing in basketball.  So far Stanford has managed to avoid having to cancel or postpone a game because of Covid in their own program, but will that continue?  And next weekend, if they can play, is a of immense proportions one, Arizona and ASU

Stanford will be fine because there were no fans in the stands at Maples to endanger the players, remember?

More seriously, it would take a pretty significant outbreak to derail the games because Stanford was missing 5 due to Covid and still played at WSU, right?  One benefit of h.uge Covid rosters is the ability to deal with an outbreak.  Of course, Stanford's depth is exceptional.  And that makes me wonder if certain coaches who might be missing key player(s) on a roster less deep than Stanford's might try and postpone a game even if they have the requisite minimum of scholarship players available.  Has anyone read about checks on trying to prevent that from happening, or is it all "Honor Code" amongst the coaches.  I'm also wondering if the minimum available is what's required to play, but that coaches are still empowered to "opt out" even if they have the minimum available.  Does anyone know?

Personally, I think there should be Covid forfeits to encourage players and staff to be smart.  Will there still be inevitable outbreaks, even with programs that are careful/smart?  Yes, but I still like that incentive.  And maybe that will happen as regular season's end approaches and there isn't enough time for all the makeup games.

[teejers1]

Covid in the Cal program makes me worry about Stanford. Players out there on the court, Cal and Stanford, all playing hard and breathing intensely -- and certainly on each other. No social distancing in basketball.  So far Stanford has managed to avoid having to cancel or postpone a game because of Covid in their own program, but will that continue?  And next weekend, if they can play, is a of immense proportions one, Arizona and ASU

Stanford will be fine because there were no fans in the stands at Maples to endanger the players, remember?

More seriously, it would take a pretty significant outbreak to derail the games because Stanford was missing 5 due to Covid and still played at WSU, right?  One benefit of h.uge Covid rosters is the ability to deal with an outbreak.  Of course, Stanford's depth is exceptional.  And that makes me wonder if certain coaches who might be missing key player(s) on a roster less deep than Stanford's might try and postpone a game even if they have the requisite minimum of scholarship players available.  Has anyone read about checks on trying to prevent that from happening, or is it all "Honor Code" amongst the coaches.  I'm also wondering if the minimum available is what's required to play, but that coaches are still empowered to "opt out" even if they have the minimum available.  Does anyone know?

Personally, I think there should be Covid forfeits to encourage players and staff to be smart.  Will there still be inevitable outbreaks, even with programs that are careful/smart?  Yes, but I still like that incentive.  And maybe that will happen as regular season's end approaches and there isn't enough time for all the makeup games.

[M T]

The PAC-12 announced their rules for COVID in December.   If you have 7 scholarship players and 1 countable coach available, you're expected to play.  Less than that, and you can choose to play.

In theory, Stanford could have to play a game with Kiki as the player with the most experience on the court (92 min for the season).  Alyssa, Agnes, Jana, Jordan, Elena, Brooke, Kiki. (I guess Alyssa would be the truly experienced player, even though she has only 47 minutes on the court this season.) 

I previously thought about how you want to partition your players (meals, rooms, carpools) to avoid losing a component of your team (for instance, all posts) due to close contact rules if one got sick.   On second thought, a team may prefer to call everyone a close contact.  If your star player gets Covid, then of course every one of the team was a close contact, so you don't have to play without her.  But, if it is a bench player, then maybe no, she wasn't a close contact at meals, in cars, or at night.

So,  if coaches get to influence who is considered a close contact, then they can somewhat manipulate whether they play a game or not.

I believe Stanford has been more diligent about the coaches wearing masks than most teams I've seen.  And I expect players & coaches are all vaccinated & boosted.  There's still a lot of close contact among team mates.  I saw one of our team again give an opponent a hug after Friday's game.

Still, basketball is an in-your-face contact sport.  If I were any team that Stanford might play on Sunday, two days after playing a team that subsequently is on COVID protocol, I'd think hard about the value of playing a team that might just be getting infectious.

I think there is enough pressure/immaturity that players (and maybe some coaches) might, uh, overlook a possible COVID infection. The pressure of a forfeit should not be one more thing encouraging the sick into exposing the healthy.

[M T]

The PAC-12 announced their rules for COVID in December.   If you have 7 scholarship players and 1 countable coach available, you're expected to play.  Less than that, and you can choose to play.

In theory, Stanford could have to play a game with Kiki as the player with the most experience on the court (92 min for the season).  Alyssa, Agnes, Jana, Jordan, Elena, Brooke, Kiki. (I guess Alyssa would be the truly experienced player, even though she has only 47 minutes on the court this season.) 

I previously thought about how you want to partition your players (meals, rooms, carpools) to avoid losing a component of your team (for instance, all posts) due to close contact rules if one got sick.   On second thought, a team may prefer to call everyone a close contact.  If your star player gets Covid, then of course every one of the team was a close contact, so you don't have to play without her.  But, if it is a bench player, then maybe no, she wasn't a close contact at meals, in cars, or at night.

So,  if coaches get to influence who is considered a close contact, then they can somewhat manipulate whether they play a game or not.

I believe Stanford has been more diligent about the coaches wearing masks than most teams I've seen.  And I expect players & coaches are all vaccinated & boosted.  There's still a lot of close contact among team mates.  I saw one of our team again give an opponent a hug after Friday's game.

Still, basketball is an in-your-face contact sport.  If I were any team that Stanford might play on Sunday, two days after playing a team that subsequently is on COVID protocol, I'd think hard about the value of playing a team that might just be getting infectious.

I think there is enough pressure/immaturity that players (and maybe some coaches) might, uh, overlook a possible COVID infection. The pressure of a forfeit should not be one more thing encouraging the sick into exposing the healthy.

[Lorcan]

For those clamoring for Oregon State to come down tomorrow, they are not a possibility as they are playing Washington in Seattle tomorrow. The only team available to come to Stanford in the Pac-12 would be Oregon. So, we’re either looking at another non-conference match or Oregon.  In this instance, it’s unlikely anything is going to happen due to travel logistics.

[Lorcan]

For those clamoring for Oregon State to come down tomorrow, they are not a possibility as they are playing Washington in Seattle tomorrow. The only team available to come to Stanford in the Pac-12 would be Oregon. So, we’re either looking at another non-conference match or Oregon.  In this instance, it’s unlikely anything is going to happen due to travel logistics.

[BobK]

Actually I was think Oregon state on Tuesday. Or Wednesday. Why not. They are supposed to be making up games. So do it

[BobK]

Actually I was think Oregon state on Tuesday. Or Wednesday. Why not. They are supposed to be making up games. So do it

[Card10Fan]

Long Beach State was the backup option if Gonzaga didn't work out. Maybe something is in the works with them? I have zero confidence Oregon State will even attempt or agree to the makeup game at Maples. They wouldn't last year so why would this year be different. Which IMO is absolutely ridiculous for a program of that caliber. Suck it up and go out and play. You gotta play the best to be the best. So prove me wrong Oregon State and come to Maples!

[Card10Fan]

Long Beach State was the backup option if Gonzaga didn't work out. Maybe something is in the works with them? I have zero confidence Oregon State will even attempt or agree to the makeup game at Maples. They wouldn't last year so why would this year be different. Which IMO is absolutely ridiculous for a program of that caliber. Suck it up and go out and play. You gotta play the best to be the best. So prove me wrong Oregon State and come to Maples!

[WBB fan]

As far as I'm concerned, re OSU, for them to make it up, it's come to Maples!

[WBB fan]

As far as I'm concerned, re OSU, for them to make it up, it's come to Maples!

[M T]

Each Stanford game that is cancelled rather than played, takes away a possible win for Tara, allowing Geno to have a better chance of catching her.  I hope the PAC-12 takes that into account when determining when/if the Washington, OSU, and Cal games will be replayed.   (UConn has had 4 easily winnable games postponed.)

And, of course, I hope that Stanford players avoid getting COVID.

[M T]

Each Stanford game that is cancelled rather than played, takes away a possible win for Tara, allowing Geno to have a better chance of catching her.  I hope the PAC-12 takes that into account when determining when/if the Washington, OSU, and Cal games will be replayed.   (UConn has had 4 easily winnable games postponed.)

And, of course, I hope that Stanford players avoid getting COVID.

[81alum]

Here is a possible worry.  Tomorrow, Monday, Stanford starts all classes back in person.  Our team may have been in a bubble since December during the thick of Omicron, but that will now end, I presume.  (Not sure what the team has done about living arrangements this year as compared with last.)  We have had one brush with Covid already, most other teams have had more serious issues, let's hope we can keep healthy for the most important part of the season, even while returning to classes.

[81alum]

Here is a possible worry.  Tomorrow, Monday, Stanford starts all classes back in person.  Our team may have been in a bubble since December during the thick of Omicron, but that will now end, I presume.  (Not sure what the team has done about living arrangements this year as compared with last.)  We have had one brush with Covid already, most other teams have had more serious issues, let's hope we can keep healthy for the most important part of the season, even while returning to classes.

[M T]

Here is a possible worry.  Tomorrow, Monday, Stanford starts all classes back in person.  Our team may have been in a bubble since December during the thick of Omicron, but that will now end, I presume.  (Not sure what the team has done about living arrangements this year as compared with last.)  We have had one brush with Covid already, most other teams have had more serious issues, let's hope we can keep healthy for the most important part of the season, even while returning to classes.

The measurement of COVID in Stanford wastewater peaked on January 2, got to a relative low on January 15, but has climbed significantly since then (Jan 20 is latest measurement).  See "CODIGA" at the SCAN project.

[M T]

Here is a possible worry.  Tomorrow, Monday, Stanford starts all classes back in person.  Our team may have been in a bubble since December during the thick of Omicron, but that will now end, I presume.  (Not sure what the team has done about living arrangements this year as compared with last.)  We have had one brush with Covid already, most other teams have had more serious issues, let's hope we can keep healthy for the most important part of the season, even while returning to classes.

The measurement of COVID in Stanford wastewater peaked on January 2, got to a relative low on January 15, but has climbed significantly since then (Jan 20 is latest measurement).  See "CODIGA" at the SCAN project.

[chimera]

I am troubled, as I'm sure others are, about the timing of the Cal COVID pause.  So Cal exits their COVID pause of a week or two and I assume test negative before the Friday game.  All of them were negative or was one player out with a positive?  I thought the announcers said someone was not at the game for them, but I can't recall for sure.  I wish I knew when and how they tested.  I hope not in the morning for an evening game.  

Anyway, how could enough of their players test positive a day later to cause them to cancel?  Seems unlikely unless they had multiple players positive on Friday that did not show on those tests.  If we end up in a COVID pause it will be totally cal's fault if so.  I just can't think how this could happen unless someone on their team was positive on Friday.  I mean they just exited their previous protocols, they had not traveled or played anyone else.  Best case scenario is they are fudging things to avoid us, which also seems unlikely.

Anyone else have any other ideas?

[chimera]

I am troubled, as I'm sure others are, about the timing of the Cal COVID pause.  So Cal exits their COVID pause of a week or two and I assume test negative before the Friday game.  All of them were negative or was one player out with a positive?  I thought the announcers said someone was not at the game for them, but I can't recall for sure.  I wish I knew when and how they tested.  I hope not in the morning for an evening game.  

Anyway, how could enough of their players test positive a day later to cause them to cancel?  Seems unlikely unless they had multiple players positive on Friday that did not show on those tests.  If we end up in a COVID pause it will be totally cal's fault if so.  I just can't think how this could happen unless someone on their team was positive on Friday.  I mean they just exited their previous protocols, they had not traveled or played anyone else.  Best case scenario is they are fudging things to avoid us, which also seems unlikely.

Anyone else have any other ideas?

[martyup]

I have an idea.  Cal just lost to Stanford by 23 points, putting them 0-3 in the Pac-12.  Do you really think they were itching to play us again in 2 days so they could move to 0-4?  They played the Covid card to earn a free pass on today's game.  Why not?  There seems to be no accountability or consequences for teams that play this card.

[martyup]

I have an idea.  Cal just lost to Stanford by 23 points, putting them 0-3 in the Pac-12.  Do you really think they were itching to play us again in 2 days so they could move to 0-4?  They played the Covid card to earn a free pass on today's game.  Why not?  There seems to be no accountability or consequences for teams that play this card.

[crackpot]

Something just doesn't add up (but math ain't my forte, so what do I know).

Roster of 15. Couple weeks ago, say 9 are experiencing symptoms (which seems high) and they have to cancel the games against the mountain schools. All (or nearly all) are available and ready to play against Stanford. The next morning, 6 plus 3 of the previously positive are experiencing symptoms and all test positive?

[crackpot]

Something just doesn't add up (but math ain't my forte, so what do I know).

Roster of 15. Couple weeks ago, say 9 are experiencing symptoms (which seems high) and they have to cancel the games against the mountain schools. All (or nearly all) are available and ready to play against Stanford. The next morning, 6 plus 3 of the previously positive are experiencing symptoms and all test positive?

[M T]

  I mean they just exited their previous protocols, they had not traveled or played anyone else.  Best case scenario is they are fudging things to avoid us, which also seems unlikely.

Anyone else have any other ideas?

Sure... Maybe their bus driver or S&C coach or asst. coach came down with COVID from a child that had gone back to school after Christmas, or from whatever.  Possibly, a number of the players had the necessary complete vaccinations but have now gotten outside the time limit (5 or 6 months on mRNA vaccines) on those, and thus are required to quarantine if considered a close contact.   Note that "close contact" hasn't been updated since the CDC defined it in the early days of COVID.  (I don't think the CDC acknowledged spreading by aerosol in those days.)

On the other hand, it could also be that the players are fully vaccinated (incl. boosters) and actually did get Omicron.  It is that infectious.

Looking at data from 25 state and local health departments, the CDC researchers found that among those who were boosted, there were 149 cases per 100,000 people on average each week [in December]. For those who had only two doses, it was 255 cases per 100,000 people.

(CNN citing study published 1/21/22)  I think we all recognize, Omicron peaked in January (Santa Clara County is averaging 4.6x for all daily cases (vax+unvax) in January compared to December).  I believe these numbers are for PCR-positive cases.  I would expect actual cases are quite a bit more.

I don't believe that Charmin Smith would avoid a game against Tara unless required to.   Besides all the good things for her team (esp. that 2nd quarter they had), she knows victories for Tara are extra important right now, as well as the game for the Stanford players. We should be above accusing Cal of this unless there is good evidence.

Oh, I got it!  We taunted the woofing gods because we all just assumed there would be a second game.  Shame on us.

[M T]

  I mean they just exited their previous protocols, they had not traveled or played anyone else.  Best case scenario is they are fudging things to avoid us, which also seems unlikely.

Anyone else have any other ideas?

Sure... Maybe their bus driver or S&C coach or asst. coach came down with COVID from a child that had gone back to school after Christmas, or from whatever.  Possibly, a number of the players had the necessary complete vaccinations but have now gotten outside the time limit (5 or 6 months on mRNA vaccines) on those, and thus are required to quarantine if considered a close contact.   Note that "close contact" hasn't been updated since the CDC defined it in the early days of COVID.  (I don't think the CDC acknowledged spreading by aerosol in those days.)

On the other hand, it could also be that the players are fully vaccinated (incl. boosters) and actually did get Omicron.  It is that infectious.

Looking at data from 25 state and local health departments, the CDC researchers found that among those who were boosted, there were 149 cases per 100,000 people on average each week [in December]. For those who had only two doses, it was 255 cases per 100,000 people.

(CNN citing study published 1/21/22)  I think we all recognize, Omicron peaked in January (Santa Clara County is averaging 4.6x for all daily cases (vax+unvax) in January compared to December).  I believe these numbers are for PCR-positive cases.  I would expect actual cases are quite a bit more.

I don't believe that Charmin Smith would avoid a game against Tara unless required to.   Besides all the good things for her team (esp. that 2nd quarter they had), she knows victories for Tara are extra important right now, as well as the game for the Stanford players. We should be above accusing Cal of this unless there is good evidence.

Oh, I got it!  We taunted the woofing gods because we all just assumed there would be a second game.  Shame on us.

[BobK]

Cal has 14 scholarship players. 3 were out I believe all injured. One played after being out lasted 2 minutes Friday then Had to quit. That’s 10. Anyone can get the virus

[BobK]

Cal has 14 scholarship players. 3 were out I believe all injured. One played after being out lasted 2 minutes Friday then Had to quit. That’s 10. Anyone can get the virus