There will be no college football [playoff] this season - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: Emergency (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-11.html)
+--- Forum: Covid-19 (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-12.html)
+--- Thread: There will be no college football [playoff] this season (/thread-20374.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: Emergency (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-11.html)
+--- Forum: Covid-19 (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-12.html)
+--- Thread: There will be no college football [playoff] this season (/thread-20374.html)
RE: lex24 - CardinalSagehen - 08-28-2020
(08-28-2020, 09:44 AM)Farm93 Wrote: If in March I was given a choice between
Group 1 - South Korea, Japan, New Zealand, Australia, Germany and Norway
Group 2 - Brazil, Mexico and Russia
I would have picked Group 1 for sure, and would have never imagined we would actually be less successful than the countries in that Group 2 list.
Your analysis is reductive. That hypothetical choice is harder than you make it sound.
First, where would North Korea fall in your hypothetical groups? I'd have probably gone along with them. They have such a strong leader who trusts his instincts and is unfairly attacked by the media. That would sort of break the tie for me between Groups 1 and 2.
Second, your analysis hyper-focuses on masks and lockdowns, completely overlooking another important policy X-factor - Hydroxychloroquine.
Lastly, define "successful". The stock market hit an all-time high this week, so all is well, right?!
RE: lex24 - BostonCard - 08-28-2020
(08-28-2020, 09:44 AM)Farm93 Wrote: I love Mexico and Brazil, but .....
If in March I was given a choice between
Group 1 - South Korea, Japan, New Zealand, Australia, Germany and Norway
Group 2 - Brazil, Mexico and Russia
I would have picked Group 1 for sure, and would have never imagined we would actually be less successful than the countries in that Group 2 list.
In both football (soccer) and COVID-19, Group 2 would be considered the "group of death". I mean, Germany is tough in Group A, but the rest of the teams are pushovers. Brazil is brutal, but to also have to face Mexico and Russia, not to mention a resurgent US... that group is brutal!
BC
RE: lex24 - chrisk - 08-28-2020
(08-28-2020, 09:44 AM)Farm93 Wrote:(08-27-2020, 11:38 AM)lex24 Wrote:They actually have done that around the world. The supply delivery was the Wuhan method during their lockdown. In Italy citizens were only allowed to leave their homes for supplies, and many needed permits to take those trips. When New Zealand had their blip in new cases a few weeks ago they returned to a lockdown.(08-27-2020, 11:25 AM)82 Card Wrote:(08-27-2020, 10:54 AM)lex24 Wrote: Too cavalier? Seriously. What should we do - lock everyone inside and have food and water dropped off at their door? Never in history has there been this type of resonse - shutdowns etc- to a pandemic. I’m not arguing of its effectiveness or lack thereof. But the response to this has hardly been “cavalier”.
Never is a long time but I only went back to 1918. Scroll down to the part about St. Louis in https://history.com/news/spanish-flu-pandemic-response-cities.
I meant world wide and nationally.
So those that are enjoying sustained normal-ish lives worked diligently to crush the curve and keep cases down. Italy was in pretty bad shape when they took on their national effort, so it is never too late to make that commitment to get to normal-ish faster.
The USA is quickly approaching 6 full months with strained hospitals and an economy added by trillions of new or easy dollars. In retrospect 90 days doing the right thing would have been cheaper if we had started that in Feb, Mar, Apr or May at this point. Not hard at all to imagine that by November we will have the numbers to show it would have been better to get serious in August.
SiP would do the trick, the USA won't be doing that obviously.
Mandatory mask policies in all states coupled with group size restrictions, no restaurants and no bars for 90 days might be enough too.
We definitely won't see that any time soon given the organizers of the superspreader show on the South Lawn are in charge.
So the USA is destined to stay in the ride the wave group. Brazil, Mexico and the USA. Woo hooo!
I love Mexico and Brazil, but .....
If in March I was given a choice between
Group 1 - South Korea, Japan, New Zealand, Australia, Germany and Norway
Group 2 - Brazil, Mexico and Russia
I would have picked Group 1 for sure, and would have never imagined we would actually be less successful than the countries in that Group 2 list.
If the next few weeks, the US is poised to surpass first Sweden and then Italy, UK, and Spain in the deaths/million table.
Brazil is likely to pass the US today. Otherwise, there would only be 4-5 small countries ahead of the US in a month.
RE: lex24 - Farm93 - 08-28-2020
(08-28-2020, 03:28 PM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:The market is doing great. The easy money is doing great things, as long as China keeps investing in the USA the easy money will stay cheap enough. While Russia can influence the election with Facebook and Twitter, President Xi can do far more to destabilize the USA by declaring China will divest its USA holdings.(08-28-2020, 09:44 AM)Farm93 Wrote: If in March I was given a choice between
Group 1 - South Korea, Japan, New Zealand, Australia, Germany and Norway
Group 2 - Brazil, Mexico and Russia
I would have picked Group 1 for sure, and would have never imagined we would actually be less successful than the countries in that Group 2 list.
Your analysis is reductive. That hypothetical choice is harder than you make it sound.
First, where would North Korea fall in your hypothetical groups? I'd have probably gone along with them. They have such a strong leader who trusts his instincts and is unfairly attacked by the media. That would sort of break the tie for me between Groups 1 and 2.
Second, your analysis hyper-focuses on masks and lockdowns, completely overlooking another important policy X-factor - Hydroxychloroquine.
Lastly, define "successful". The stock market hit an all-time high this week, so all is well, right?!
North Korea would be in the incomplete information. We can call all of them Group 3.
I would happily spend a few months in any of the listed Group 1 countries and really would worry about spending time in any of the Group 2 countries.
Tonight I saw ESPN was broadcasting a HS football game from Alabama. And in the stands there were thousands of members of the community screaming support for the kids. Generally the fans in the stands and the coaches on the sidelines were mask-free. I would definitely take any city in any of my Group 1 countries for the next 4-6 months over Tuscaloosa.
Then I saw that the University of Alabama is living in denial. 1000 cases with ~500 in just three days!!! I would still take Tuscaloosa over Pyongyang but in a few days I might believe the cities in my Group 2 list will have fewer COVID issues than the neighborhoods around the University of Alabama.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2020/08/28/covid-cases-university-of-alabama/5662754002/
For those living in Bama please do your best to stay safe. Wear masks and avoid unnecessary large group meetings.
RE: There will be no college football this season - BostonCard - 08-28-2020
In terms of Group 1, please add *checks notes* Mongolia?!? Zero deaths despite a long border with China.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/techreview/status/1299416673947209735?s=21[/tweet]
As Mike McFaul tweeted today, with better leadership we could have been as good as Mongolia.
BC
RE: lex24 - 82 Card - 08-28-2020
(08-28-2020, 04:04 PM)chrisk Wrote: If the next few weeks, the US is poised to surpass first Sweden and then Italy, UK, and Spain in the deaths/million table.
Brazil is likely to pass the US today. Otherwise, there would only be 4-5 small countries ahead of the US in a month.
According to worldometer.info, Brazil passed up US today. They have US at 561 and Barazil at 562. At the current pace, US passing Sweden will take another week; passing Italy will take 2 weeks.
RE: lex24 - teejers1 - 08-28-2020
(08-28-2020, 09:00 PM)Farm93 Wrote:(08-28-2020, 03:28 PM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:The market is doing great. The easy money is doing great things, as long as China keeps investing in the USA the easy money will stay cheap enough. While Russia can influence the election with Facebook and Twitter, President Xi can do far more to destabilize the USA by declaring China will divest its USA holdings.(08-28-2020, 09:44 AM)Farm93 Wrote: If in March I was given a choice between
Group 1 - South Korea, Japan, New Zealand, Australia, Germany and Norway
Group 2 - Brazil, Mexico and Russia
I would have picked Group 1 for sure, and would have never imagined we would actually be less successful than the countries in that Group 2 list.
Your analysis is reductive. That hypothetical choice is harder than you make it sound.
First, where would North Korea fall in your hypothetical groups? I'd have probably gone along with them. They have such a strong leader who trusts his instincts and is unfairly attacked by the media. That would sort of break the tie for me between Groups 1 and 2.
Second, your analysis hyper-focuses on masks and lockdowns, completely overlooking another important policy X-factor - Hydroxychloroquine.
Lastly, define "successful". The stock market hit an all-time high this week, so all is well, right?!
North Korea would be in the incomplete information. We can call all of them Group 3.
I would happily spend a few months in any of the listed Group 1 countries and really would worry about spending time in any of the Group 2 countries.
Tonight I saw ESPN was broadcasting a HS football game from Alabama. And in the stands there were thousands of members of the community screaming support for the kids. Generally the fans in the stands and the coaches on the sidelines were mask-free. I would definitely take any city in any of my Group 1 countries for the next 4-6 months over Tuscaloosa.
Then I saw that the University of Alabama is living in denial. 1000 cases with ~500 in just three days!!! I would still take Tuscaloosa over Pyongyang but in a few days I might believe the cities in my Group 2 list will have fewer COVID issues than the neighborhoods around the University of Alabama.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2020/08/28/covid-cases-university-of-alabama/5662754002/
For those living in Bama please do your best to stay safe. Wear masks and avoid unnecessary large group meetings.
I just channel-surfed on that HS game for about a minute. The stands shot I saw looked like majority of folks (easily) were wearing masks. I believe you on the sidelines. BTW, it's not shocking to me that big schools get big numbers early. ND did, but the number of new cases have dropped dramatically. Just gotta hope that no one gets seriously sick. Per a work colleague, that is true (so far) at ND, though I don't see how his info can cover folks outside university - i.e., staff members who might go home to somewhere in South Bend.
RE: lex24 - Farm93 - 08-29-2020
(08-28-2020, 09:44 PM)teejers1 Wrote: I just channel-surfed on that HS game for about a minute. The stands shot I saw looked like majority of folks (easily) were wearing masks. I believe you on the sidelines. BTW, it's not shocking to me that big schools get big numbers early. ND did, but the number of new cases have dropped dramatically. Just gotta hope that no one gets seriously sick. Per a work colleague, that is true (so far) at ND, though I don't see how his info can cover folks outside university - i.e., staff members who might go home to somewhere in South Bend.
Perhaps it varied by school or even section of fans.
The HS head coach I saw had a mask on his chin. Offering a great example for the rest of his staff, players and fans.
Like many HS football coaches he seemed to have many risk factors for COVID. Then add in working closely with a full set of mask-free players, mask-free assistants and parents and HS football coaching in Alabama appears to be a very risky occupation.
At some level I understand his mask dilemma though. A lot of HS teams just rely on the coach screaming the play to a player about to run on the field. The mask only slows that key communication process down, so it is easier to pull the mask down. It is Alabama in August, so after a while the mask becomes a nasty & sweaty.
Some of those families might be on TV next month with the same interview themes that are all too familiar.
"We thought it was over"
"I didn't think getting COVID19 would be this bad"
"No one around us was sick, so we thought we'd be OK"
"We didn't think the health officials would let us (play/attend/cheer) if it was not safe"
RE: lex24 - teejers1 - 08-29-2020
(08-29-2020, 09:13 AM)Farm93 Wrote: Some of those families might be on TV next month with the same interview themes that are all too familiar.
"We thought it was over"
"I didn't think getting COVID19 would be this bad"
"No one around us was sick, so we thought we'd be OK"
"We didn't think the health officials would let us (play/attend/cheer) if it was not safe"
On this we agree completely: if any of the attendees come down with Covid 19, they will definitely be on our TV sets . . .
RE: lex24 - BostonCard - 08-29-2020
(08-29-2020, 09:13 AM)Farm93 Wrote: "We didn't think the health officials would let us (play/attend/cheer) if it was not safe"
I think we underestimate how much of this happens. A lot of people aren’t looking at this pandemic trying to figure out how many angels can dance on the head of a pin the way we do, and take the advice of officials at face value, and believe that if things are opening up, it’s categorically “safe”.
BC
RE: lex24 - Farm93 - 08-29-2020
(08-29-2020, 11:53 AM)teejers1 Wrote:(08-29-2020, 09:13 AM)Farm93 Wrote: Some of those families might be on TV next month with the same interview themes that are all too familiar.
"We thought it was over"
"I didn't think getting COVID19 would be this bad"
"No one around us was sick, so we thought we'd be OK"
"We didn't think the health officials would let us (play/attend/cheer) if it was not safe"
On this we agree completely: if any of the attendees come down with Covid 19, they will definitely be on our TV sets . . .
"If any"....nah, not all. Just some.
Also in many cases the family members come on TV after their loved one has passed away, so we definitely don't see all of those that get COVID19 on TV.
FWIW - you know its bad when your school has a COVID dashboard.
https://uasystem.edu/covid-19-dashboard/
For now the recent burst of cases has not expanded to their faculty, so that's helpful. If I was a faculty member at Bama I would definitely start buying surgical grade PPE to wear to my lectures ASAP, and I would tape off the first few rows in the lecture hall too.
RE: There will be no college football this season - 82 Card - 08-29-2020
There is college football this year. ESPN is showing it live. Austin Peay State v. Central Arkansas. The assistant coaches appear to be properly masked. Head coach is wearing mask on chin. Most of the fans are maskless but do appear to be spread out. The refs are masked. A few of the players on the sideline have masks on. The quality of play looks like mediocre high school game. Maybe the Fleetwood Mac concert isn't so bad after all.
RE: There will be no college football this season - Farm93 - 08-30-2020
Now Auburn has joined the outbreak party. 9 players tested positive and 7 others were designated as high risk.
I guess once the conference decided to go for it, then nothing will get in their way.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/29775675/auburn-tigers-16-players-coronavirus-related-issues
I just wonder if the conference privately determined how bad it would need to get before they would automatically stop the games.
I hope the players recover, but can't help but wonder how quickly things will spiral out of control when players and coaches travel since most agree that travel will be one of the more problematic aspects of trying to play games.
RE: There will be no college football this season - Goose - 08-30-2020
(08-30-2020, 07:37 PM)Farm93 Wrote: I just wonder if the conference privately determined how bad it would need to get before they would automatically stop the games.I doubt it, because 1) there are too many possible scenarios that could require shutdown and 2) it would leak, and that would tie their hands. I also think there is a lot of wishful thinking going on and to actually look at what might happen would really put a damper on that.
RE: There will be no college football this season - teejers1 - 08-30-2020
(08-30-2020, 08:44 PM)Goose Wrote:(08-30-2020, 07:37 PM)Farm93 Wrote: I just wonder if the conference privately determined how bad it would need to get before they would automatically stop the games.I doubt it, because 1) there are too many possible scenarios that could require shutdown and 2) it would leak, and that would tie their hands. I also think there is a lot of wishful thinking going on and to actually look at what might happen would really put a damper on that.
This is what I'm wondering: why are people here so fixated on what the SEC (and/or B12 and/or ACC) will do if/when a certain number of players test positive? I mean, they will either play the game with fewer players available; take a forfeit for the game; and if things stay "unplayable" for a number of weeks, they may pack it in. In all instances, why is that our particular concern?
I could see some schools getting through the season relatively unscathed (see Clemson, as most of team already had Covid); some schools losing a game or 3 due to the virus; and some schools packing it in for the season after a game or two. Hell, all the schools might pack it in . . . who knows? But in all instances, it will be their choice and I'll just be a semi-interested observer (emphasis on "semi," as what they do or don't do has very little impact on daily life here in CA).
If I were making the odds, I'd say it more likely that no games are played (and certainly no league season is completed) than it is that the Big 10 plays football at all in 2020. (Maybe they already nixed that uprising, but a few days ago I heard some talking heads say that the Big 10 is definitely playing before January 2021. Doubtful.).
RE: There will be no college football this season - Snorlax94 - 08-31-2020
(08-30-2020, 11:35 PM)teejers1 Wrote:I wouldn’t say I’m fixated with the $EC, but I think their course is unwise and unlikely to end well.(08-30-2020, 08:44 PM)Goose Wrote:(08-30-2020, 07:37 PM)Farm93 Wrote: I just wonder if the conference privately determined how bad it would need to get before they would automatically stop the games.I doubt it, because 1) there are too many possible scenarios that could require shutdown and 2) it would leak, and that would tie their hands. I also think there is a lot of wishful thinking going on and to actually look at what might happen would really put a damper on that.
This is what I'm wondering: why are people here so fixated on what the SEC (and/or B12 and/or ACC) will do if/when a certain number of players test positive? I mean, they will either play the game with fewer players available; take a forfeit for the game; and if things stay "unplayable" for a number of weeks, they may pack it in. In all instances, why is that our particular concern?
I could see some schools getting through the season relatively unscathed (see Clemson, as most of team already had Covid); some schools losing a game or 3 due to the virus; and some schools packing it in for the season after a game or two. Hell, all the schools might pack it in . . . who knows? But in all instances, it will be their choice and I'll just be a semi-interested observer (emphasis on "semi," as what they do or don't do has very little impact on daily life here in CA).
If I were making the odds, I'd say it more likely that no games are played (and certainly no league season is completed) than it is that the Big 10 plays football at all in 2020. (Maybe they already nixed that uprising, but a few days ago I heard some talking heads say that the Big 10 is definitely playing before January 2021. Doubtful.).
I draw attention to their actions because I think they are prioritizing revenues over the safety of their communities, and the well-being of their student athletes, staff, and students.
Based on the lack of preparation and unrealistic expectations (that students could pack into campuses and not drink and not crowd), the current problems were entirely predictable. So why are they doing it? Money. And it’s not a “fixation” to draw attention to people in power who harm others by prioritizing money.
Most students may largely recover, but the predictable breakouts in college towns could harm many residents of college towns, older professors and staff, and possibly some student athletes.
RE: There will be no college football this season - Farm93 - 08-31-2020
(08-31-2020, 12:17 AM)Snorlax94 Wrote:I am curious because most of the conference administrator types for the Greedy 3 conferences said they would continue to evaluate the situation as they got closer to the season. The implication at the time was a wait and see type deal, but let's keep trying to play. Fair enough. However, in August the situation has been pretty dismal. How bad does it need to get exactly?(08-30-2020, 11:35 PM)teejers1 Wrote:I wouldn’t say I’m fixated with the $EC, but I think their course is unwise and unlikely to end well.(08-30-2020, 08:44 PM)Goose Wrote:(08-30-2020, 07:37 PM)Farm93 Wrote: I just wonder if the conference privately determined how bad it would need to get before they would automatically stop the games.I doubt it, because 1) there are too many possible scenarios that could require shutdown and 2) it would leak, and that would tie their hands. I also think there is a lot of wishful thinking going on and to actually look at what might happen would really put a damper on that.
This is what I'm wondering: why are people here so fixated on what the SEC (and/or B12 and/or ACC) will do if/when a certain number of players test positive? I mean, they will either play the game with fewer players available; take a forfeit for the game; and if things stay "unplayable" for a number of weeks, they may pack it in. In all instances, why is that our particular concern?
I could see some schools getting through the season relatively unscathed (see Clemson, as most of team already had Covid); some schools losing a game or 3 due to the virus; and some schools packing it in for the season after a game or two. Hell, all the schools might pack it in . . . who knows? But in all instances, it will be their choice and I'll just be a semi-interested observer (emphasis on "semi," as what they do or don't do has very little impact on daily life here in CA).
If I were making the odds, I'd say it more likely that no games are played (and certainly no league season is completed) than it is that the Big 10 plays football at all in 2020. (Maybe they already nixed that uprising, but a few days ago I heard some talking heads say that the Big 10 is definitely playing before January 2021. Doubtful.).
I draw attention to their actions because I think they are prioritizing revenues over the safety of their communities, and the well-being of their student athletes, staff, and students.
Based on the lack of preparation and unrealistic expectations (that students could pack into campuses and not drink and not crowd), the current problems were entirely predictable. So why are they doing it? Money. And it’s not a “fixation” to draw attention to people in power who harm others by prioritizing money.
Most students may largely recover, but the predictable breakouts in college towns could harm many residents of college towns, older professors and staff, and possibly some student athletes.
Bama, Clemson, Texas Tech and many others have had more than 20% of their athletes test positive.
Bama, UNC, ND and many others have struggled to keep COVID outbreaks down on their campuses.
Greedy 3 - The canary in the coal mine has perished.
Ultimately I hope these schools have excellent liability coverage because I suspect there could be verdicts that dwarf the TV revenue they will secure. Perhaps that sounds alarmists, but the BigTen representatives actually mentioned liability concerns as a factor in their decision.
And to before we go there with student risk of adverse COVID results, I don't think the schools in the BigTen were only worried about player health. I am pretty confident their liability concerns included potential health challenges with coaches, staff and faculty too.
Guess we will all see, but highlighting the SEC's decision to play football during COVID outbreaks in their region feels mighty appropriate for a COVID area in a community board dedicated to college athletics.
RE: There will be no college football this season - DocSavage87 - 08-31-2020
(08-30-2020, 11:35 PM)teejers1 Wrote: I could see some schools getting through the season relatively unscathed (see Clemson, as most of team already had Covid); some schools losing a game or 3 due to the virus; and some schools packing it in for the season after a game or two.
If some of the early studies showing cardiac abnormalities on MRI pan out (e.g., 15% myocarditis among recovered athletes), I don't see how any team remains unscathed. I can see how publicity of any issues to be stifled due to PR. Are those teams with large-scale infection doing more significant diagnostics, or are they not bothering along the lines of see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil? It's possible that a team might not get a significant illness or obvious post-infection morbidity and AFAIK the NCAA is not mandating any kind of minimal testing regimen so all teams are on the same page.
RE: There will be no college football this season - Mick - 08-31-2020
Campuses are getting crushed. 2,000 separate institutions of higher learning are trying to open
https://www.axios.com/colleges-parties-reopening-coronavirus-c23b7f87-343c-41aa-99dd-168801e4c089.html
Purdue, Syracuse, Notre Dame, Alabama, Auburn, UNC Chapel Hill, Northeastern, among those having problems. A Stanford prof thinks it's the fault of the university hierarchies, not the students:
"It’s irresponsible and the outcome is predictable, and blaming the students is just misplaced," says Joshua Salomon, a professor of medicine at Stanford. "A lot of these school reopening plans that bring students back without testing are like turning on a faucet and sternly telling the water not to flow."
RE: There will be no college football this season - teejers1 - 08-31-2020
(08-31-2020, 11:14 AM)Mick Wrote: Campuses are getting crushed. 2,000 separate institutions of higher learning are trying to open
https://www.axios.com/colleges-parties-reopening-coronavirus-c23b7f87-343c-41aa-99dd-168801e4c089.html
Purdue, Syracuse, Notre Dame, Alabama, Auburn, UNC Chapel Hill, Northeastern, among those having problems. A Stanford prof thinks it's the fault of the university hierarchies, not the students:
"It’s irresponsible and the outcome is predictable, and blaming the students is just misplaced," says Joshua Salomon, a professor of medicine at Stanford. "A lot of these school reopening plans that bring students back without testing are like turning on a faucet and sternly telling the water not to flow."
What does that mean: "campuses are getting crushed?" Same with "having problems." That there are a lot of positive cases? Yes. Predictable? Yes. Dangerous/deadly? Entirely unclear (and my bet is no).
Someone rhetorically said "you know it's bad when a school has its own dashboard. . . " I disagree entirely. I think sharing accurate and complete data is a good thing. And speaking of that, here is ND's board. It looks to me like they are trending in the right direction.
https://here.nd.edu/our-approach/dashboard/
And to the extent any of those kids were, you know, sick, I'd bet good money those big numbers from August 17, 18, and 19 are largely (if not entirely) recovered.
I hope ND guts it out and at the end of the semester looks back and says: "it was tough, but we managed to get through it. We had some missteps here and there and the students had to acclimate behavior, but at the end of the day we think we provided a better college experience with kids on campus and no one died or even needed intensive care at local health providers." No clue if that can be accomplished, but if it can, then I'd consider that impressive (and a good thing).
P.S. I agree with Farm93 and Snorlax that my use of the word "fixated" was imprudent. This is a Covid board and the developments around the country are of interest, so my apologies for that. But I will say that I believe many here are watching developments at universities with almost a hope that things go bad, because the tone of the "observational" posts is condescending (thematically along the lines of "I can't believe these idiots are even trying this"). I will never embrace that outlook.