08-17-2020, 01:31 PM
[tweet]https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1295456716453294084[/tweet]
LOL at the ACC
[tweet]https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1295456716453294084[/tweet]
I suggest you change your subject. People getting sick isn't a laughing matter.
I'm not sure why the UNC-CH experience is expanded to the conference.
This experience has a good chance to be repeated at other schools. Personally, I hope the schools that hoped to bring people to campus gain from these problems elsewhere, and fewer people get sick unnecessarily as schools adapt to remote classes.
I'm not sure why the UNC-CH experience is expanded to the conference.
This experience has a good chance to be repeated at other schools. Personally, I hope the schools that hoped to bring people to campus gain from these problems elsewhere, and fewer people get sick unnecessarily as schools adapt to remote classes.
I suggest you change your subject. People getting sick isn't a laughing matter.
I'm not sure why the UNC-CH experience is expanded to the conference.
This experience has a good chance to be repeated at other schools. Personally, I hope the schools that hoped to bring people to campus gain from these problems elsewhere, and fewer people get sick unnecessarily as schools adapt to remote classes.
I'm not sure why the UNC-CH experience is expanded to the conference.
This experience has a good chance to be repeated at other schools. Personally, I hope the schools that hoped to bring people to campus gain from these problems elsewhere, and fewer people get sick unnecessarily as schools adapt to remote classes.
08-17-2020, 02:01 PM
(08-17-2020, 01:45 PM)M T Wrote: I suggest you change your subject. People getting sick isn't a laughing matter.
I'm not sure why the UNC-CH experience is expanded to the conference.
This experience has a good chance to be repeated at other schools. Personally, I hope the schools that hoped to bring people to campus gain from these problems elsewhere, and fewer people get sick unnecessarily as schools adapt to remote classes.
UNC did not do pre-arrival testing and did not go to single rooms in the dorms.
(08-17-2020, 01:45 PM)M T Wrote: I suggest you change your subject. People getting sick isn't a laughing matter.
I'm not sure why the UNC-CH experience is expanded to the conference.
This experience has a good chance to be repeated at other schools. Personally, I hope the schools that hoped to bring people to campus gain from these problems elsewhere, and fewer people get sick unnecessarily as schools adapt to remote classes.
UNC did not do pre-arrival testing and did not go to single rooms in the dorms.
08-17-2020, 02:03 PM
(08-17-2020, 01:45 PM)M T Wrote: I suggest you change your subject. People getting sick isn't a laughing matter.
I'm not sure why the UNC-CH experience is expanded to the conference.
This experience has a good chance to be repeated at other schools. Personally, I hope the schools that hoped to bring people to campus gain from these problems elsewhere, and fewer people get sick unnecessarily as schools adapt to remote classes.
Lighten up, Francis.
My post is geared to the ACC's medical advisor who said they can play sports and have students on campus.
(08-17-2020, 01:45 PM)M T Wrote: I suggest you change your subject. People getting sick isn't a laughing matter.
I'm not sure why the UNC-CH experience is expanded to the conference.
This experience has a good chance to be repeated at other schools. Personally, I hope the schools that hoped to bring people to campus gain from these problems elsewhere, and fewer people get sick unnecessarily as schools adapt to remote classes.
Lighten up, Francis.
My post is geared to the ACC's medical advisor who said they can play sports and have students on campus.
08-17-2020, 02:40 PM
There is a lingering suspicion among supporters of the President that his opponents are actually cheering for the infection to get worse and for people to get sick and die. Comments such as yours makes me think that unfortunately there may be a basis for their suspicion.
Instead of laughing at the ACC, we should all be hoping that these openings go without incident, which would allow college football to restart (and restart safely), and get us towards some semblance of normality.
The great thing about America is that the states are a "natural laboratory" and we can learn from each other. If things were to go well in North Carolina and the ACC, that would bode well for restarting things in California and the Pac-12.
BC
Instead of laughing at the ACC, we should all be hoping that these openings go without incident, which would allow college football to restart (and restart safely), and get us towards some semblance of normality.
The great thing about America is that the states are a "natural laboratory" and we can learn from each other. If things were to go well in North Carolina and the ACC, that would bode well for restarting things in California and the Pac-12.
BC
There is a lingering suspicion among supporters of the President that his opponents are actually cheering for the infection to get worse and for people to get sick and die. Comments such as yours makes me think that unfortunately there may be a basis for their suspicion.
Instead of laughing at the ACC, we should all be hoping that these openings go without incident, which would allow college football to restart (and restart safely), and get us towards some semblance of normality.
The great thing about America is that the states are a "natural laboratory" and we can learn from each other. If things were to go well in North Carolina and the ACC, that would bode well for restarting things in California and the Pac-12.
BC
Instead of laughing at the ACC, we should all be hoping that these openings go without incident, which would allow college football to restart (and restart safely), and get us towards some semblance of normality.
The great thing about America is that the states are a "natural laboratory" and we can learn from each other. If things were to go well in North Carolina and the ACC, that would bode well for restarting things in California and the Pac-12.
BC
08-17-2020, 02:55 PM
I really hope the Big12 and other football experiments work because that'll mean my worries about the spread and damage of the virus are for some reason unwarranted. That's a good thing. I'm more than willing to eat crow and have more people live and we actually get to watch some football, regardless of the backlash against Pac12 closing. My worse case scenario is that they'll push through spiking infection, not worry about limited deaths, and simply not tally any downstream issues like college town deaths. I'm thinking that's unlikely. Organizations have pulled back when forced to.
I really hope the Big12 and other football experiments work because that'll mean my worries about the spread and damage of the virus are for some reason unwarranted. That's a good thing. I'm more than willing to eat crow and have more people live and we actually get to watch some football, regardless of the backlash against Pac12 closing. My worse case scenario is that they'll push through spiking infection, not worry about limited deaths, and simply not tally any downstream issues like college town deaths. I'm thinking that's unlikely. Organizations have pulled back when forced to.
08-17-2020, 03:15 PM
BTW, here is some more data:
https://carolinatogether.unc.edu/dashboard/
Sadly, they are getting about 10% positive tests, and have only tested 2600 people. There are probably several times as many people infected with COVID-19.
BC
https://carolinatogether.unc.edu/dashboard/
Sadly, they are getting about 10% positive tests, and have only tested 2600 people. There are probably several times as many people infected with COVID-19.
BC
BTW, here is some more data:
https://carolinatogether.unc.edu/dashboard/
Sadly, they are getting about 10% positive tests, and have only tested 2600 people. There are probably several times as many people infected with COVID-19.
BC
https://carolinatogether.unc.edu/dashboard/
Sadly, they are getting about 10% positive tests, and have only tested 2600 people. There are probably several times as many people infected with COVID-19.
BC
08-17-2020, 03:47 PM
There is PLENTY of evidence to show large inside gatherings aren't safe. That's not me or anyone else wishing anything. It's just the facts. North Carolina's test positivity rate is 6%, which is more than the medical experts say is acceptable to have schools open. And it has the 9th most reported infections in the country.
I'm not wishing ill on anyone. Just throwing shade at those who ignore experts at their own peril.
I'm not wishing ill on anyone. Just throwing shade at those who ignore experts at their own peril.
There is PLENTY of evidence to show large inside gatherings aren't safe. That's not me or anyone else wishing anything. It's just the facts. North Carolina's test positivity rate is 6%, which is more than the medical experts say is acceptable to have schools open. And it has the 9th most reported infections in the country.
I'm not wishing ill on anyone. Just throwing shade at those who ignore experts at their own peril.
I'm not wishing ill on anyone. Just throwing shade at those who ignore experts at their own peril.
08-17-2020, 05:22 PM
(08-17-2020, 03:47 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: There is PLENTY of evidence to show large inside gatherings aren't safe. That's not me or anyone else wishing anything. It's just the facts. North Carolina's test positivity rate is 6%, which is more than the medical experts say is acceptable to have schools open. And it has the 9th most reported infections in the country.
I'm not wishing ill on anyone. Just throwing shade at those who ignore experts at their own peril.
I understand, but it's better "shade" to just be sad, disappointed, etc, than a LOL since nothing about virus spread is humorous.
(08-17-2020, 03:47 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: There is PLENTY of evidence to show large inside gatherings aren't safe. That's not me or anyone else wishing anything. It's just the facts. North Carolina's test positivity rate is 6%, which is more than the medical experts say is acceptable to have schools open. And it has the 9th most reported infections in the country.
I'm not wishing ill on anyone. Just throwing shade at those who ignore experts at their own peril.
I understand, but it's better "shade" to just be sad, disappointed, etc, than a LOL since nothing about virus spread is humorous.
08-17-2020, 05:23 PM
From the UNC dashboard, they only allocated isolation (for the already infected) room for 85 on-campus students, and quarantined (for the exposed, but not positive(yet)) room for 73 on-campus students. They show only 11 on-campus students in isolation, and 69 in quarantine.
Over the previous 2 weeks, 23 students tested positive. Maybe that's where the 11 in isolation came from. 69 in quarantine for 11 in isolation might be a little high unless, of course, the students actually go to classes. Maybe those 11 were athletes. (This is UNC.)
"Can you tell me who you sat next to for an hour in your 14 classes this week?" "Why do you think I'd know????"
BUT, what are they going to do about the 130 that tested positive this week??? (I don't know how many are on-campus students.) And all their classmates?
Colleges may try to claim some legal protection from suits about the students getting infected. I can't imagine they have any legal protection from claims about a school's failure to provide in-person classes when that's what the students were told they'd get when they paid their money.
Over the previous 2 weeks, 23 students tested positive. Maybe that's where the 11 in isolation came from. 69 in quarantine for 11 in isolation might be a little high unless, of course, the students actually go to classes. Maybe those 11 were athletes. (This is UNC.)
"Can you tell me who you sat next to for an hour in your 14 classes this week?" "Why do you think I'd know????"
BUT, what are they going to do about the 130 that tested positive this week??? (I don't know how many are on-campus students.) And all their classmates?
Colleges may try to claim some legal protection from suits about the students getting infected. I can't imagine they have any legal protection from claims about a school's failure to provide in-person classes when that's what the students were told they'd get when they paid their money.
From the UNC dashboard, they only allocated isolation (for the already infected) room for 85 on-campus students, and quarantined (for the exposed, but not positive(yet)) room for 73 on-campus students. They show only 11 on-campus students in isolation, and 69 in quarantine.
Over the previous 2 weeks, 23 students tested positive. Maybe that's where the 11 in isolation came from. 69 in quarantine for 11 in isolation might be a little high unless, of course, the students actually go to classes. Maybe those 11 were athletes. (This is UNC.)
"Can you tell me who you sat next to for an hour in your 14 classes this week?" "Why do you think I'd know????"
BUT, what are they going to do about the 130 that tested positive this week??? (I don't know how many are on-campus students.) And all their classmates?
Colleges may try to claim some legal protection from suits about the students getting infected. I can't imagine they have any legal protection from claims about a school's failure to provide in-person classes when that's what the students were told they'd get when they paid their money.
Over the previous 2 weeks, 23 students tested positive. Maybe that's where the 11 in isolation came from. 69 in quarantine for 11 in isolation might be a little high unless, of course, the students actually go to classes. Maybe those 11 were athletes. (This is UNC.)
"Can you tell me who you sat next to for an hour in your 14 classes this week?" "Why do you think I'd know????"
BUT, what are they going to do about the 130 that tested positive this week??? (I don't know how many are on-campus students.) And all their classmates?
Colleges may try to claim some legal protection from suits about the students getting infected. I can't imagine they have any legal protection from claims about a school's failure to provide in-person classes when that's what the students were told they'd get when they paid their money.
08-17-2020, 06:14 PM
(08-17-2020, 05:49 PM)chrisk Wrote: It was crazy to allow students to move into dorms eithot negative test results. They also have a problem with on-campus students mingling with off-campus students.
For those unfamiliar with that area there are a number of "ACC" campuses in the same general area. It is reasonable to assume Duke, NC State and Wake Forest will all share similar rates of COVID at the start of their terms. Potentially they will do a better job of moving into dorms, social distancing in classes, and isolating students that test positive once on campus, but I doubt it.
The ACC will have a very tough time fielding football teams if a few of the campuses are going through this level of virus spread.
I would love to hear what the football coaches are telling the players.
Don't go to class. Don't visit non-football team friends. Don't go to parties. Don't drive around town. Don't interact with TAs or professors.
If they are able to follow those don'ts they just might be able to host a game or two before they travel and get exposed to hundreds of COVID positive people on their journey.
The SEC schools have so little to protect beyond football, but I thought the ACC schools were better (smarter) than this.
(08-17-2020, 05:49 PM)chrisk Wrote: It was crazy to allow students to move into dorms eithot negative test results. They also have a problem with on-campus students mingling with off-campus students.
For those unfamiliar with that area there are a number of "ACC" campuses in the same general area. It is reasonable to assume Duke, NC State and Wake Forest will all share similar rates of COVID at the start of their terms. Potentially they will do a better job of moving into dorms, social distancing in classes, and isolating students that test positive once on campus, but I doubt it.
The ACC will have a very tough time fielding football teams if a few of the campuses are going through this level of virus spread.
I would love to hear what the football coaches are telling the players.
Don't go to class. Don't visit non-football team friends. Don't go to parties. Don't drive around town. Don't interact with TAs or professors.
If they are able to follow those don'ts they just might be able to host a game or two before they travel and get exposed to hundreds of COVID positive people on their journey.
The SEC schools have so little to protect beyond football, but I thought the ACC schools were better (smarter) than this.
08-17-2020, 06:47 PM
(08-17-2020, 06:14 PM)Farm93 Wrote:(08-17-2020, 05:49 PM)chrisk Wrote: It was crazy to allow students to move into dorms eithot negative test results. They also have a problem with on-campus students mingling with off-campus students.
For those unfamiliar with that area there are a number of "ACC" campuses in the same general area. It is reasonable to assume Duke, NC State and Wake Forest will all share similar rates of COVID at the start of their terms. Potentially they will do a better job of moving into dorms, social distancing in classes, and isolating students that test positive once on campus, but I doubt it.
The ACC will have a very tough time fielding football teams if a few of the campuses are going through this level of virus spread.
I would love to hear what the football coaches are telling the players.
Don't go to class. Don't visit non-football team friends. Don't go to parties. Don't drive around town. Don't interact with TAs or professors.
If they are able to follow those don'ts they just might be able to host a game or two before they travel and get exposed to hundreds of COVID positive people on their journey.
The SEC schools have so little to protect beyond football, but I thought the ACC schools were better (smarter) than this.
Either here (or on the other fan board), I raised the question of what about playing football - with players on campus - while rest of student body takes classes remotely. Many viewed that as a non-starter for optics reason; however, from a health and safety standpoint, I believe that students on campus provides far greater risk than footballers on campus. And it's not really close . . . is it?
In other words, if schools need the TV $$ from football that badly, then they can do remote learning unless/until it is deemed "safe enough" for students to return to campus. I'm waiting to see if any colleges will bite the bullet and just do that (and thereby admit that football players ARE different from regular student body).
(08-17-2020, 06:14 PM)Farm93 Wrote:(08-17-2020, 05:49 PM)chrisk Wrote: It was crazy to allow students to move into dorms eithot negative test results. They also have a problem with on-campus students mingling with off-campus students.
For those unfamiliar with that area there are a number of "ACC" campuses in the same general area. It is reasonable to assume Duke, NC State and Wake Forest will all share similar rates of COVID at the start of their terms. Potentially they will do a better job of moving into dorms, social distancing in classes, and isolating students that test positive once on campus, but I doubt it.
The ACC will have a very tough time fielding football teams if a few of the campuses are going through this level of virus spread.
I would love to hear what the football coaches are telling the players.
Don't go to class. Don't visit non-football team friends. Don't go to parties. Don't drive around town. Don't interact with TAs or professors.
If they are able to follow those don'ts they just might be able to host a game or two before they travel and get exposed to hundreds of COVID positive people on their journey.
The SEC schools have so little to protect beyond football, but I thought the ACC schools were better (smarter) than this.
Either here (or on the other fan board), I raised the question of what about playing football - with players on campus - while rest of student body takes classes remotely. Many viewed that as a non-starter for optics reason; however, from a health and safety standpoint, I believe that students on campus provides far greater risk than footballers on campus. And it's not really close . . . is it?
In other words, if schools need the TV $$ from football that badly, then they can do remote learning unless/until it is deemed "safe enough" for students to return to campus. I'm waiting to see if any colleges will bite the bullet and just do that (and thereby admit that football players ARE different from regular student body).
08-17-2020, 07:24 PM
UNC athletes do have a carve out to stay on campus along with international students and those without highspeed internet access at home, while the rest got sent home.
I still think CFB is feasible but it would require testing and protocols like the pros have. Not sure its ethical to push for that when many parts of the country still have delayed and limited testing, even if it makes clear business sense as the cost of those tests are miniscule compared to the money being lost.
Would University of Texas or University of Florida hospital systems really use up hundreds of tests weekly and run them within 24 hours to keep football somewhat safe? Would Stanford? I bet a lot of doctors and patients waiting on tests in those hospitals would have problems with that (well, maybe not in SEC country).
I still think CFB is feasible but it would require testing and protocols like the pros have. Not sure its ethical to push for that when many parts of the country still have delayed and limited testing, even if it makes clear business sense as the cost of those tests are miniscule compared to the money being lost.
Would University of Texas or University of Florida hospital systems really use up hundreds of tests weekly and run them within 24 hours to keep football somewhat safe? Would Stanford? I bet a lot of doctors and patients waiting on tests in those hospitals would have problems with that (well, maybe not in SEC country).
UNC athletes do have a carve out to stay on campus along with international students and those without highspeed internet access at home, while the rest got sent home.
I still think CFB is feasible but it would require testing and protocols like the pros have. Not sure its ethical to push for that when many parts of the country still have delayed and limited testing, even if it makes clear business sense as the cost of those tests are miniscule compared to the money being lost.
Would University of Texas or University of Florida hospital systems really use up hundreds of tests weekly and run them within 24 hours to keep football somewhat safe? Would Stanford? I bet a lot of doctors and patients waiting on tests in those hospitals would have problems with that (well, maybe not in SEC country).
I still think CFB is feasible but it would require testing and protocols like the pros have. Not sure its ethical to push for that when many parts of the country still have delayed and limited testing, even if it makes clear business sense as the cost of those tests are miniscule compared to the money being lost.
Would University of Texas or University of Florida hospital systems really use up hundreds of tests weekly and run them within 24 hours to keep football somewhat safe? Would Stanford? I bet a lot of doctors and patients waiting on tests in those hospitals would have problems with that (well, maybe not in SEC country).
(08-17-2020, 02:40 PM)BostonCard Wrote: There is a lingering suspicion among supporters of the President that his opponents are actually cheering for the infection to get worse and for people to get sick and die. Comments such as yours makes me think that unfortunately there may be a basis for their suspicion.There is no use in hoping. It isn't going to work. Let's hope none of the older professors die because of this.
Instead of laughing at the ACC, we should all be hoping that these openings go without incident, which would allow college football to restart (and restart safely), and get us towards some semblance of normality.
The great thing about America is that the states are a "natural laboratory" and we can learn from each other. If things were to go well in North Carolina and the ACC, that would bode well for restarting things in California and the Pac-12.
BC
(08-17-2020, 07:24 PM)dabigv13 Wrote: UNC athletes do have a carve out to stay on campus along with international students and those without highspeed internet access at home, while the rest got sent home.
I still think CFB is feasible but it would require testing and protocols like the pros have. Not sure its ethical to push for that when many parts of the country still have delayed and limited testing, even if it makes clear business sense as the cost of those tests are miniscule compared to the money being lost.
Would University of Texas or University of Florida hospital systems really use up hundreds of tests weekly and run them within 24 hours to keep football somewhat safe? Would Stanford? I bet a lot of doctors and patients waiting on tests in those hospitals would have problems with that (well, maybe not in SEC country).
I think you've got to test twice a week to do it right. That's a lot of testing and a lot of money.
(08-17-2020, 02:40 PM)BostonCard Wrote: There is a lingering suspicion among supporters of the President that his opponents are actually cheering for the infection to get worse and for people to get sick and die. Comments such as yours makes me think that unfortunately there may be a basis for their suspicion.There is no use in hoping. It isn't going to work. Let's hope none of the older professors die because of this.
Instead of laughing at the ACC, we should all be hoping that these openings go without incident, which would allow college football to restart (and restart safely), and get us towards some semblance of normality.
The great thing about America is that the states are a "natural laboratory" and we can learn from each other. If things were to go well in North Carolina and the ACC, that would bode well for restarting things in California and the Pac-12.
BC
(08-17-2020, 07:24 PM)dabigv13 Wrote: UNC athletes do have a carve out to stay on campus along with international students and those without highspeed internet access at home, while the rest got sent home.
I still think CFB is feasible but it would require testing and protocols like the pros have. Not sure its ethical to push for that when many parts of the country still have delayed and limited testing, even if it makes clear business sense as the cost of those tests are miniscule compared to the money being lost.
Would University of Texas or University of Florida hospital systems really use up hundreds of tests weekly and run them within 24 hours to keep football somewhat safe? Would Stanford? I bet a lot of doctors and patients waiting on tests in those hospitals would have problems with that (well, maybe not in SEC country).
I think you've got to test twice a week to do it right. That's a lot of testing and a lot of money.
08-17-2020, 08:50 PM
(08-17-2020, 05:22 PM)DocSavage87 Wrote:(08-17-2020, 03:47 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: There is PLENTY of evidence to show large inside gatherings aren't safe. That's not me or anyone else wishing anything. It's just the facts. North Carolina's test positivity rate is 6%, which is more than the medical experts say is acceptable to have schools open. And it has the 9th most reported infections in the country.
I'm not wishing ill on anyone. Just throwing shade at those who ignore experts at their own peril.
I understand, but it's better "shade" to just be sad, disappointed, etc, than a LOL since nothing about virus spread is humorous.
This approach was demonstrated tonight by Michelle Obama. Epic shade almost in tears.
(08-17-2020, 05:22 PM)DocSavage87 Wrote:(08-17-2020, 03:47 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: There is PLENTY of evidence to show large inside gatherings aren't safe. That's not me or anyone else wishing anything. It's just the facts. North Carolina's test positivity rate is 6%, which is more than the medical experts say is acceptable to have schools open. And it has the 9th most reported infections in the country.
I'm not wishing ill on anyone. Just throwing shade at those who ignore experts at their own peril.
I understand, but it's better "shade" to just be sad, disappointed, etc, than a LOL since nothing about virus spread is humorous.
This approach was demonstrated tonight by Michelle Obama. Epic shade almost in tears.
08-18-2020, 06:55 AM
(This post was last modified: 08-18-2020, 06:56 AM by DocSavage87.)
UNC student paper editorial about the university's handling of the reopening:
http://dailytarheel.com/article/2020/08/...-edit-0816
Of course there were parties without masks.
http://dailytarheel.com/article/2020/08/...-edit-0816
Of course there were parties without masks.
(This post was last modified: 08-18-2020, 06:56 AM by DocSavage87.)
UNC student paper editorial about the university's handling of the reopening:
http://dailytarheel.com/article/2020/08/...-edit-0816
Of course there were parties without masks.
http://dailytarheel.com/article/2020/08/...-edit-0816
Of course there were parties without masks.
08-18-2020, 11:18 AM
(08-18-2020, 06:55 AM)DocSavage87 Wrote: UNC student paper editorial about the university's handling of the reopening:Most schools have ~50-80% of freshmen on campus and it is common for very few non-freshmen to live on campus. In those situations the campus policies will only cover a small fraction of the daily activities of the students.
http://dailytarheel.com/article/2020/08/...-edit-0816
Of course there were parties without masks.
I feel like UNC pulled a fast one on these kids and parents. UNC likely had a robust rate of enrollment given that students believed they would stay on campus for the year. If UNC was a bit more honest about the situation I suspect more students would have requested gap years or a term or two out of school. Those students with off campus housing (or their parents) are likely on the hook for 9 or 12 month leases.
I guess since UNC started school on campus they can now justify student-athletes participating in ACC sports. That's rather convenient IMHO.
(08-18-2020, 06:55 AM)DocSavage87 Wrote: UNC student paper editorial about the university's handling of the reopening:Most schools have ~50-80% of freshmen on campus and it is common for very few non-freshmen to live on campus. In those situations the campus policies will only cover a small fraction of the daily activities of the students.
http://dailytarheel.com/article/2020/08/...-edit-0816
Of course there were parties without masks.
I feel like UNC pulled a fast one on these kids and parents. UNC likely had a robust rate of enrollment given that students believed they would stay on campus for the year. If UNC was a bit more honest about the situation I suspect more students would have requested gap years or a term or two out of school. Those students with off campus housing (or their parents) are likely on the hook for 9 or 12 month leases.
I guess since UNC started school on campus they can now justify student-athletes participating in ACC sports. That's rather convenient IMHO.
08-18-2020, 02:22 PM
Another "ACC" school closed campus.
This time it was Notre Dame. Their number of cases apparently tripled overnight and now they have ~150 cases.
I really hope the presidents in the ACC will ask if ignoring COVID's potential is the best decision. But here too with students out of the way Notre Dame might be able to keep playing football for at least a week or two. So that might be a good thing for ACC TV revenue.
Hopefully those impacted will recover quickly, but at some point a professor, coach or student will die if each university only decides to close after they have reached the level of 100+ documented cases. Really wish we had a national approach to COVID, but I know that's not happening in 2020.
This time it was Notre Dame. Their number of cases apparently tripled overnight and now they have ~150 cases.
I really hope the presidents in the ACC will ask if ignoring COVID's potential is the best decision. But here too with students out of the way Notre Dame might be able to keep playing football for at least a week or two. So that might be a good thing for ACC TV revenue.
Hopefully those impacted will recover quickly, but at some point a professor, coach or student will die if each university only decides to close after they have reached the level of 100+ documented cases. Really wish we had a national approach to COVID, but I know that's not happening in 2020.
Another "ACC" school closed campus.
This time it was Notre Dame. Their number of cases apparently tripled overnight and now they have ~150 cases.
I really hope the presidents in the ACC will ask if ignoring COVID's potential is the best decision. But here too with students out of the way Notre Dame might be able to keep playing football for at least a week or two. So that might be a good thing for ACC TV revenue.
Hopefully those impacted will recover quickly, but at some point a professor, coach or student will die if each university only decides to close after they have reached the level of 100+ documented cases. Really wish we had a national approach to COVID, but I know that's not happening in 2020.
This time it was Notre Dame. Their number of cases apparently tripled overnight and now they have ~150 cases.
I really hope the presidents in the ACC will ask if ignoring COVID's potential is the best decision. But here too with students out of the way Notre Dame might be able to keep playing football for at least a week or two. So that might be a good thing for ACC TV revenue.
Hopefully those impacted will recover quickly, but at some point a professor, coach or student will die if each university only decides to close after they have reached the level of 100+ documented cases. Really wish we had a national approach to COVID, but I know that's not happening in 2020.
Inside Higher Ed on the UNC reversal
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020...nstruction
vedeo message from ND President to students starts at about 20:00 in this Youtube link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vtKUv7xKGg
They had considered sending students home now but are going online and tightening interaction rules and reevaluate in 2 weeks
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020...nstruction
(08-18-2020, 02:22 PM)Farm93 Wrote: Another "ACC" school closed campus.
This time it was Notre Dame. Their number of cases apparently tripled overnight and now they have ~150 cases.
I really hope the presidents in the ACC will ask if ignoring COVID's potential is the best decision. But here too with students out of the way Notre Dame might be able to keep playing football for at least a week or two. So that might be a good thing for ACC TV revenue.
Hopefully those impacted will recover quickly, but at some point a professor, coach or student will die if each university only decides to close after they have reached the level of 100+ documented cases. Really wish we had a national approach to COVID, but I know that's not happening in 2020.
vedeo message from ND President to students starts at about 20:00 in this Youtube link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vtKUv7xKGg
They had considered sending students home now but are going online and tightening interaction rules and reevaluate in 2 weeks
Inside Higher Ed on the UNC reversal
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020...nstruction
vedeo message from ND President to students starts at about 20:00 in this Youtube link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vtKUv7xKGg
They had considered sending students home now but are going online and tightening interaction rules and reevaluate in 2 weeks
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020...nstruction
(08-18-2020, 02:22 PM)Farm93 Wrote: Another "ACC" school closed campus.
This time it was Notre Dame. Their number of cases apparently tripled overnight and now they have ~150 cases.
I really hope the presidents in the ACC will ask if ignoring COVID's potential is the best decision. But here too with students out of the way Notre Dame might be able to keep playing football for at least a week or two. So that might be a good thing for ACC TV revenue.
Hopefully those impacted will recover quickly, but at some point a professor, coach or student will die if each university only decides to close after they have reached the level of 100+ documented cases. Really wish we had a national approach to COVID, but I know that's not happening in 2020.
vedeo message from ND President to students starts at about 20:00 in this Youtube link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vtKUv7xKGg
They had considered sending students home now but are going online and tightening interaction rules and reevaluate in 2 weeks
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »