(08-05-2020, 07:36 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: It's seems safe to say that the first decision marker for schools to play sports is: Do we have the resources to implement the safety protocols required, including testing capacity. I don't think UConn has the resources, especially with so many of their games being cancelled and being an Independent now.
The next decision marker is going to be trickier: Do we continue when we have positive tests?
As mentioned in previous threads, the Korean Baseball Organization has been allowed to play by South Korean CDC, but if one player tests positive, the whole league shuts down for two weeks. Are the conferences going to have anything like this in place? They can't be thinking "we'll do what MLB does" and continue playing if one and even two teams have outbreaks, can they? I mean the MLB players are being paid, and aren't going to a campus like some college athletes might.
Just saw story about Colorado State not taking virus seriously and now 60/82 Idaho players don't want to play.
WHERE IN THE HELL IS NCAA LEADERSHIP ON THIS?!?!?!?! If it can't do anything to manage or organize this staggeringly important situation, why does it exist, and how can anyone justify its existence?
The pandemic has now exposed the NCAA for what many of us have recognized for years. And coupled with the rise of the college football industrial complex, we now see that "NCAA leadership" is an oxymoron. A self-cancelling phrase if there ever was one. The organization may not quite be on the same corruption level as, say, the International Olympic Committee, but it's every bit as ineffectual. Their self-congratulating TV commercials win the PG&E award for Most Fraudulent Messaging.
Life is too short to waste on crap football.