We now know we can manage testing and infections (LSU aside) and we now know the primary concerns with infection (including asymptomatic) in athletes (myocarditis and lung issues). Schools are looking at a much better testing regime and the ability to screen athletes for the known issues, including EKG's and other tests.
The mistake was "canceling" the season vs. just postponing it in July/Aug.
Of course, the air quality out west is probably a greater threat to players than the virus at this point.
According to the linked Oregonian report
I was going off of this retweet by si.com:
async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8">>The Pac-12 medical advisory board delivered to its CEOs today a different recommendation - safe enough to play - than it did six weeks ago when the league halted play, sources tell @SINow.
— Ross Dellenger (@RossDellenger) September 18, 2020
No vote from CEOs today, as was expected, but one should come over the next few days.
"nobody followed us and we're going to lose a shit-ton of $$$$."
I have a very cynical opinion about this, much of it formed from talking to people and coaches somewhat close to the situation and here's what it looks like from that vantage point--this was a political hot potato and certain states didn't want to go against their governors. I think that we won't know how truly serious this really is until and unless it's too late, and it's a damn clown show. It has been even worse at the high school level.
Zero leadership. No ability to stand up for what's right. Too much of a hurry to make a decision.
It has blown through a lot of teams and general student bodies but - I must stress that I do not know statistics and data on this - the disease seems not to have hit too hard. So maybe there is observational experience that is the basis here.
It was a reasonable call to halt play. Not sure an al; clear is warranted but I would listen to explanations
before anyone posts further, this will help you understand:
https://youtu.be/8UvFhIFzaac
but adjust to say that it was reasonable to "pause" (replace halt) play.
There would have been almost no issues with moving things back to mid to late October. Canceling things caused problems. If you pause and things don't get better, then cancel.
Was stupid for the relevant age group. I know applying statistics is controversial.
And they're just now figuring out that there's zero reason not to play, particularly given the money involved.
Play.
At the start of the virus, you were touting your ability to manage risk independently and make reasonable choices based on your own preferences. Several months later, you're proclaiming strict adherence to public health officials and admonishing anyone who dares to suggest that we might get back to a normal version of life for the young and low-risk individuals.
You'd probably slather catsup on your sweetbreads if Dr. Fauci told you it might help lower your risk of COVID.
that was certainly a possibility, as is the possibility that it isn't really safe but if everyone else is doing it and we stand to lose a lot of money, oh well, too bad for the athletes.
Nothing has changed in the Big-10 since they made their decision except for the successful launch of the ACC + Notre Dame last weekend.
...there are three areas of the country that care more about college football than anything else: the south, Texas, and the Midwest.
The South and Texas are playing, the Midwest is not (except for ND). The majority of the states / constituents within the Midwest states want college football to be played (right, wrong, or otherwise).
I absolutely believe that ND playing (it was the highest rated game in a week of bad options) sticks in the craw of UM, OSU, Iowa, Nebraska, etc. Half of those schools were wanting to play anyway, consequences be damned.
Not to mention a showcase.
Nobody watched.
Tune in tomorrow to our game on the O Network. Or is it the Spice Channel? I know you will. Because nothing else is going on in your life.
Most viewers of any college football game of the (diluted) weekend. No doubt more a result of pent up demand for college football than quality of play or the matchup itself. But:
"It was the most-viewed Notre Dame afternoon home opener since the Irish last welcomed Penn State to South Bend way back in 2006. It’s also the most-viewed Notre Dame home contest since the Fighting Irish battled Michigan in primetime to kickoff the 2018 season."
Texas and Michigan (and those were both prime time). So the afternoon opener list of teams is:
Temple twice,
Rice,
Nevada twice,
Purdue twice,
San Diego State,
New MExico,
South Florida.
By any measure, that's a very good number. It was the most-viewed game of the weekend. Yes, there were far fewer options than normal, and yes, the pent up demand was a massive contributor too, but that would apply to all games. To say "nobody watched" is undeniably inaccurate.
For context, ND-USC last year on NBC had 3.1m viewers, in prime time. Most ND NBC games are between 1.5m-2.5m viewers.
average 6 million. With nothing else going on, there were fewer viewers of the only real game on at the time than there were for a normal game when eyeballs are divided 3 or 4 ways.
Using the 'tallest midget' of comparison with the SD State line up is Pinkel worthy
If it's that "nobody watched" the Notre Dame-Duke game, you are objectively wrong. The audience was obviously unusually large, for any ND game on NBC.
If your point is something else, you might be right, I have no idea.
gladly picked it up.
Virus is a discriminating one, being a serious health threat to older folks like myself and to those with notable existing health conditions and really a minor threat to younger age groups.
The rate of hospitalizations on college campuses (0.0%), in particular, is relevant to the decision whether to play.
Given your affinity for sharing stories of partying and frivolity from your college days, it’s a good thing that you went to ND when you did. I can only imagine you on campus today: wearing a mask at all hours of the day, living in fear, probably snitching on other students.
The hospitalization rate of teens and young adults was well understood by early summer.
The science is not static.