bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,437
|
Post by bluepenquin on Aug 7, 2020 10:38:15 GMT -5
Here is today's chart from the COVID Tracking Project. It doesn't tell me the same story you are. It shows that after coming down off the peak of the huge spike, we are still at a level of cases double what we had in June. I'm still not sure where your claim came from that the reduction off those peaks had nothing to do with additional quarantine measures imposed as that peak was growing. Depends on the starting point. I was responding to 7/23 (peak) until today that was evidence of the improvements in CA related to Newsom putting back restrictions. The chart above is since April 1. My 'claim' - when looking at restrictions imposed by the various states and the # of COVID cases - it doesn't correlate. I do think actual behavior by people has a big impact. But when looking just at Governor's restrictions - I don't see any correlation. At least not since ~ May (in other words, this isn't a claim related to the original lockdowns that took place in March that probably had a big impact on slowing cases).
|
|
|
Post by tommyboy on Aug 7, 2020 11:00:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Aug 7, 2020 11:17:18 GMT -5
Here is today's chart from the COVID Tracking Project. It doesn't tell me the same story you are. It shows that after coming down off the peak of the huge spike, we are still at a level of cases double what we had in June. I'm still not sure where your claim came from that the reduction off those peaks had nothing to do with additional quarantine measures imposed as that peak was growing. Depends on the starting point. I was responding to 7/23 (peak) until today that was evidence of the improvements in CA related to Newsom putting back restrictions. The chart above is since April 1. My 'claim' - when looking at restrictions imposed by the various states and the # of COVID cases - it doesn't correlate. I do think actual behavior by people has a big impact. But when looking just at Governor's restrictions - I don't see any correlation. At least not since ~ May (in other words, this isn't a claim related to the original lockdowns that took place in March that probably had a big impact on slowing cases). I know you were talking about 7/23 until today. You are happy with a 15% dip off the high after a 325% increase (rough numbers from eyeballing the chart)? Seriously? You know stats better than to say anything of the sort. I'm not sure how you can look at this chart and not see the correlation. Lockdowns started mid-March and we see a peak around April 1 and then a dip to a low in early to mid June. That is exactly what I would expect to see. Then we started to open up at the bottom and you see the spike start a few weeks later. During the spike there were new lockdowns imposed and now you see us coming off the peak. Every reaction is several weeks delayed from the action, which is exactly as expected. How are you viewing that any differently? You do understand that it is like steering a cruise ship, not a sports car? You can't turn on a dime, each measure takes weeks to take effect.
|
|
|
Post by northwoods on Aug 7, 2020 11:36:03 GMT -5
Looking at this I’m surprised how constant the positivity rate is over time. Now most anyone healthy or not, can walk in and get a test. Back in April & May however, you had to be sick and have some connection to a known positive or a returning traveler to even be given a test... I would have thought the positivity rate would have been much higher early on.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,437
|
Post by bluepenquin on Aug 7, 2020 11:53:52 GMT -5
Depends on the starting point. I was responding to 7/23 (peak) until today that was evidence of the improvements in CA related to Newsom putting back restrictions. The chart above is since April 1. My 'claim' - when looking at restrictions imposed by the various states and the # of COVID cases - it doesn't correlate. I do think actual behavior by people has a big impact. But when looking just at Governor's restrictions - I don't see any correlation. At least not since ~ May (in other words, this isn't a claim related to the original lockdowns that took place in March that probably had a big impact on slowing cases). I know you were talking about 7/23 until today. You are happy with a 15% dip off the high after a 325% increase (rough numbers from eyeballing the chart)? Seriously? You know stats better than to say anything of the sort. I'm not sure how you can look at this chart and not see the correlation. Lockdowns started mid-March and we see a peak around April 1 and then a dip to a low in early to mid June. That is exactly what I would expect to see. Then we started to open up at the bottom and you see the spike start a few weeks later. During the spike there were new lockdowns imposed and now you see us coming off the peak. Every reaction is several weeks delayed from the action, which is exactly as expected. How are you viewing that any differently? You do understand that it is like steering a cruise ship, not a sports car? You can't turn on a dime, each measure takes weeks to take effect. The cases reported in March/April are vastly underreported compared to June/July due to the huge increase in testing. Looking at deaths - we can tell that things were much worse early on. So comparing a chart only looking at cases isn't telling the whole story. % positive (7 day average): 4/15 - 19.9% 5/15 - 7.0% 6/15 - 4.5% 7/15 - 8.7% 8/6 - 7.7% Opening back up occurred at different times. Georgia opened things back up in the middle of April - and we didn't see a corresponding increase in cases until 2 months later (while testing more than doubled).
|
|
|
Post by wmiv1895 on Aug 7, 2020 11:56:44 GMT -5
NCAA has now implemented mandated testing. In a way, they are making a decision on fall sports and that is there won’t be many if any at all due to testing cost. The NCAA is also implementing a “strict liability” statement which in a sense says you as a school have to cover covid related issues with your athletes for life if they caught it while they were an athlete.
The NCAA is dealing with concussion lawsuits and they don’t want to deal with covid lawsuits in the future due to long term effects.
I don’t see fall sports playing except at the very large school level. Just reporting what I’ve read.
Also, I talked to a school in D1 with football and all the other traditional sports and their testing costs will be around $40,000 a week during football season.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Aug 7, 2020 12:00:07 GMT -5
NCAA has now implemented mandated testing. In a way, they are making a decision on fall sports and that is there won’t be many if any at all due to testing cost. The NCAA is also implementing a “strict liability” statement which in a sense says you as a school have to cover covid related issues with your athletes for life if they caught it while they were an athlete. The NCAA is dealing with concussion lawsuits and they don’t want to deal with covid lawsuits in the future due to long term effects. I don’t see fall sports playing except at the very large school level. Just reporting what I’ve read. Also, I talked to a school in D1 with football and all the other traditional sports and their testing costs will be around $40,000 a week during football season. Is there any reason to think these massive financial hurdles won't also make a spring season impossible (assuming the team isn't fully vaccinated)?
|
|
|
Post by Riviera Minestrone on Aug 7, 2020 12:04:51 GMT -5
NCAA has now implemented mandated testing. In a way, they are making a decision on fall sports and that is there won’t be many if any at all due to testing cost. The NCAA is also implementing a “strict liability” statement which in a sense says you as a school have to cover covid related issues with your athletes for life if they caught it while they were an athlete. The NCAA is dealing with concussion lawsuits and they don’t want to deal with covid lawsuits in the future due to long term effects. I don’t see fall sports playing except at the very large school level. Just reporting what I’ve read. Also, I talked to a school in D1 with football and all the other traditional sports and their testing costs will be around $40,000 a week during football season. Is there any reason to think these massive financial hurdles won't also make a spring season impossible (assuming the team isn't fully vaccinated)?Well, there you have it: one of the prima facie reasons that the NCAA keeps punting; hoping for a vaccine-savior down the ol' road. Keep kicking that can further!
|
|
|
Post by jake on Aug 7, 2020 12:05:59 GMT -5
What is the NCAA's criteria for playing D1 Women's VB for 2020 in this atmosphere???
Lets have that established before we start evaluating the Country's infection % state by state.
Is the NCAA concerned about players, under the age of 25, (who first have been tested negative) playing a match against other players?
Is the NCAA implying matches to be conducted non-spectator? Is travel/motel accommodations a bigger concern than playing a match?
Personal Inquiries: 1) Has any D1 WVB player in the USA who has contracted the virus in 2020 died?
2) How many players in the Country who have contracted the virus fully recovered?
3) Is the NCAA and all conferences playing a delaying action,...hoping for a vaccine before spring 2021?
|
|
|
Post by Riviera Minestrone on Aug 7, 2020 12:18:46 GMT -5
^Mic Drop^
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Aug 7, 2020 12:29:04 GMT -5
I know you were talking about 7/23 until today. You are happy with a 15% dip off the high after a 325% increase (rough numbers from eyeballing the chart)? Seriously? You know stats better than to say anything of the sort. I'm not sure how you can look at this chart and not see the correlation. Lockdowns started mid-March and we see a peak around April 1 and then a dip to a low in early to mid June. That is exactly what I would expect to see. Then we started to open up at the bottom and you see the spike start a few weeks later. During the spike there were new lockdowns imposed and now you see us coming off the peak. Every reaction is several weeks delayed from the action, which is exactly as expected. How are you viewing that any differently? You do understand that it is like steering a cruise ship, not a sports car? You can't turn on a dime, each measure takes weeks to take effect. The cases reported in March/April are vastly underreported compared to June/July due to the huge increase in testing. Looking at deaths - we can tell that things were much worse early on. So comparing a chart only looking at cases isn't telling the whole story. % positive (7 day average): 4/15 - 19.9% 5/15 - 7.0% 6/15 - 4.5% 7/15 - 8.7% 8/6 - 7.7% Opening back up occurred at different times. Georgia opened things back up in the middle of April - and we didn't see a corresponding increase in cases until 2 months later (while testing more than doubled). I agree there is something there and asymptomatic cases were, and probably still are, underreported. The theory blaming the rise solely on increased testing fails when you compare the daily tests chart to the daily cases chart and watch the cases dip as the tests increased through mid June. I think hospitalizations and deaths are better metrics because you eliminate the debate over increased cases through increased testing. Hospitalizations and deaths also both dipped at the same time tests were rising. Deaths have gone down relative to hospitalizations, which is interesting. My WAG is that probably means some mix of the following: 1) We are learning and getting better at treating patients. 2) The patients are now more spread out and are not overwhelming one system (e.g. New York) 3) We are doing a better job isolating the most at risk (the elderly, nursing homes, etc) 4) We have already lost a high percentage of the most at risk people, and they can't die twice.
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Aug 7, 2020 12:55:16 GMT -5
What is the NCAA's criteria for playing D1 Women's VB for 2020 in this atmosphere??? Lets have that established before we start evaluating the Country's infection % state by state. Is the NCAA concerned about players, under the age of 25, (who first have been tested negative) playing a match against other players? Is the NCAA implying matches to be conducted non-spectator? Is travel/motel accommodations a bigger concern than playing a match? Personal Inquiries: 1) Has any D1 WVB player in the USA who has contracted the virus in 2020 died? 2) How many players in the Country who have contracted the virus fully recovered? 3) Is the NCAA and all conferences playing a delaying action,...hoping for a vaccine before spring 2021? Your inquiries are valid, but hardly scratch the surface. Dying is a pretty extreme metric. We change rules at the net to preserve ankles and knees. If the consideration was only death, VB rules might be a lot different and a lot more exciting, in a avery bad way. Knee and ankle injuries don't spread to teammates, coaches, staff, fans and random people at the airport. The consideration is far beyond whether the individual player gets very sick. Is it appropriate to have athletes on campus if no other students are allowed to be on campus? Is it appropriate to compete in an environment where fans are not allowed? Is it appropriate to compete in an environment that requires social distancing (masks, no high fives, no greeting other team, keeping distance from officials, limiting managers and training staff, etc, etc.)? How many WVB athletes have already tested positive? There is no requirement for reporting right now, so teams have no requirement to say anything. Do we only care about WVB, or are all sports valid concerns? We already know about a football player: Rucker said her son has been through “14 days of hell” battling COVID-19 and is still experiencing symptoms. She says blood work is now indicating additional problems and possible heart issues. www.wthr.com/article/sports/local-sports/mother-of-iu-football-player-with-covid-pleads-for-people-to-wear-masks/531-c7b79d30-e627-4b42-ad8c-15f7a518b41f
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2020 13:17:49 GMT -5
What is the NCAA's criteria for playing D1 Women's VB for 2020 in this atmosphere??? Lets have that established before we start evaluating the Country's infection % state by state. Is the NCAA concerned about players, under the age of 25, (who first have been tested negative) playing a match against other players? Is the NCAA implying matches to be conducted non-spectator? Is travel/motel accommodations a bigger concern than playing a match? Personal Inquiries: 1) Has any D1 WVB player in the USA who has contracted the virus in 2020 died? 2) How many players in the Country who have contracted the virus fully recovered? 3) Is the NCAA and all conferences playing a delaying action,...hoping for a vaccine before spring 2021? Your inquiries are valid, but hardly scratch the surface. Dying is a pretty extreme metric. We change rules at the net to preserve ankles and knees. If the consideration was only death, VB rules might be a lot different and a lot more exciting, in a avery bad way. Knee and ankle injuries don't spread to teammates, coaches, staff, fans and random people at the airport. The consideration is far beyond whether the individual player gets very sick. Is it appropriate to have athletes on campus if no other students are allowed to be on campus? Is it appropriate to compete in an environment where fans are not allowed? Is it appropriate to compete in an environment that requires social distancing (masks, no high fives, no greeting other team, keeping distance from officials, limiting managers and training staff, etc, etc.)? How many WVB athletes have already tested positive? There is no requirement for reporting right now, so teams have no requirement to say anything. Do we only care about WVB, or are all sports valid concerns? We already know about a football player: Rucker said her son has been through “14 days of hell” battling COVID-19 and is still experiencing symptoms. She says blood work is now indicating additional problems and possible heart issues. www.wthr.com/article/sports/local-sports/mother-of-iu-football-player-with-covid-pleads-for-people-to-wear-masks/531-c7b79d30-e627-4b42-ad8c-15f7a518b41fYour questions, my answers: 1. Is it appropriate to have athletes on campus if no other students are allowed to be on campus? Yes. I don't have any problem with this at all. Especially considering athletes have been on campus and training for a few months now anyway. 2. Is it appropriate to compete in an environment where fans are not allowed? Sure, why not? Many sports/volleyball programs do this anyway even when the option for fans to attend exists. MLB, NBA and NHL are all currently playing in front of empty arenas. I am not the least bit bothered by it. The games are still enjoyable. It is about managing risk. If all players, coaches and officials are tested and are the only ones in the arena, the risk is minimal. Don't you think? You manage the environment, you manage the risk. 3. Is it appropriate to compete in an environment that requires social distancing (masks, no high fives, no greeting other team, keeping distance from officials, limiting managers and training staff, etc, etc.)?
Tricky one. I would normally lean toward no on this one. But, piggybacking off of#2, if they're tested and everyone comes up negative, then all of these social distancing things become a bit of overkill. But, better safe than sorry in case of false negatives. 4. How many WVB athletes have already tested positive? There is no requirement for reporting right now, so teams have no requirement to say anything. No idea. Can't answer. Maybe I shouldn't, but I trust athletics departments, coaches, etc. to be on top of this and do the right thing for their players. If that means canceling, that is what it means. They are prepared to cancel. They just don't want to have to. 5. Do we only care about WVB, or are all sports valid concerns?All sports, obviously. WVB more than others. But, football aside, if WVB can be played but water polo can't? I am OK with that, too. I still thought those sports that are not weather dependent should be pushed to spring. Focus all your efforts on making football go. Play soccer in the fall and any other outdoor fall sports. Then try to see if you can make spring work for others.
|
|
|
Post by baytree on Aug 7, 2020 13:20:12 GMT -5
I know you were talking about 7/23 until today. You are happy with a 15% dip off the high after a 325% increase (rough numbers from eyeballing the chart)? Seriously? You know stats better than to say anything of the sort. I'm not sure how you can look at this chart and not see the correlation. Lockdowns started mid-March and we see a peak around April 1 and then a dip to a low in early to mid June. That is exactly what I would expect to see. Then we started to open up at the bottom and you see the spike start a few weeks later. During the spike there were new lockdowns imposed and now you see us coming off the peak. Every reaction is several weeks delayed from the action, which is exactly as expected. How are you viewing that any differently? You do understand that it is like steering a cruise ship, not a sports car? You can't turn on a dime, each measure takes weeks to take effect. The cases reported in March/April are vastly underreported compared to June/July due to the huge increase in testing. Looking at deaths - we can tell that things were much worse early on. So comparing a chart only looking at cases isn't telling the whole story. % positive (7 day average): 4/15 - 19.9% 5/15 - 7.0% 6/15 - 4.5% 7/15 - 8.7% 8/6 - 7.7% Opening back up occurred at different times. Georgia opened things back up in the middle of April - and we didn't see a corresponding increase in cases until 2 months later (while testing more than doubled). If that's for Georgia, have the pre-June % positives been corrected? Georgia wasn't counting it properly until June.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2020 13:22:46 GMT -5
Interesting someone mentioned water polo. I was talking to a BW coach who mentioned that more than 50% of the schools that sponsor water polo have already cancelled (I don't follow water polo and had no idea they'd passed that limit), so I'm interested to see how quickly the NCAA reacts to that.
Will the cancellation encompass the entire academic year or will they leave the opportunity for spring competition? Sad for the sport of water polo, but certainly a test case for WVB.
|
|