[Snorlax94]

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 wouldn’t say I’m fixated with the $EC, but I think their course is unwise and unlikely to end well.

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.

[Snorlax94]

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 wouldn’t say I’m fixated with the $EC, but I think their course is unwise and unlikely to end well.

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.