|
Post by gibbyb1 on Aug 12, 2020 21:29:10 GMT -5
You may be right, but just comparing Lincoln (population approx. 290,000) to State College PA (population approx. 45,000) I'd guess that sports tourism revenues make up a higher percentage of total economic activity in State College than in Lincoln. So I'd think the economic devastation, while significant for both, would be greater for State College.
Could be. Frost doesn't live in State College or Pennsylvania, so that's not his focus. Likely if he was the head coach of the Nittany Lions he'd make a similarly impassioned speech about that.
I get that he’s impassioned, he should be, that wasn’t my point. Yes the pandemic impacted football, but unless you’re Jeff bezos or a hand sanitizer salesman this has impacted millions in ways way more significant. Do his players deserve to play more than a freshman deserves to be going off to college for the first time and can’t? Frost believes that how important playing is to his players is a reason to have the season, it isn’t. I would imagine his passion about playing that you accurately pointed out colors his objectivity not to mention he knows nothing about infectious disease, running a university. He didn’t commit murder or a war crime, his passion for wanting to play led To what I believe were comments that just didn’t look very good.
|
|
|
Post by knapplc on Aug 12, 2020 21:33:39 GMT -5
Could be. Frost doesn't live in State College or Pennsylvania, so that's not his focus. Likely if he was the head coach of the Nittany Lions he'd make a similarly impassioned speech about that.
I get that he’s impassioned, he should be, that wasn’t my point. Yes the pandemic impacted football, but unless you’re Jeff bezos or a hand sanitizer salesman this has impacted millions in ways way more significant. Do his players deserve to play more than a freshman deserves to be going off to college for the first time and can’t? Frost believes that how important playing is to his players is a reason to have the season, it isn’t. I would imagine his passion about playing that you accurately pointed out colors his objectivity not to mention he knows nothing about infectious disease, running a university. He didn’t commit murder or a war crime, his passion for wanting to play led To what I believe were comments that just didn’t look very good.
What?
|
|
|
Post by gogophers on Aug 12, 2020 22:41:03 GMT -5
Yes, I'm bothered. Not by your politics, but by politics creeping back onto the board.
shouldn't have to put you on mute. It's my board, too, and the rules for its use are clearly posted: "no politics on this board." Do you really think embedding a political message in your sign-off isn't making a political statement?
|
|
|
Post by missunderstood on Aug 12, 2020 23:21:09 GMT -5
Yes, I'm bothered. Not by your politics, but by politics creeping back onto the board. shouldn't have to put you on mute. It's my board, too, and the rules for its use are clearly posted: "no politics on this board." Do you really think embedding a political message in your sign-off isn't making a political statement? No, I do not. You are too hyper-sensitve if my choice come November is part of signature. I'm not discussing the reason, or discounting anyone oppose to my choice. It's like the people I see wearing a particular hat, ok, I know where they stand, they don't have to discuss it or tell me... It is what it is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2020 23:39:49 GMT -5
Yes, I'm bothered. Not by your politics, but by politics creeping back onto the board. shouldn't have to put you on mute. It's my board, too, and the rules for its use are clearly posted: "no politics on this board." Do you really think embedding a political message in your sign-off isn't making a political statement? No, I do not. You are too hyper-sensitve if my choice come November is part of signature. I'm not discussing the reason, or discounting anyone oppose to my choice. It's like the people I see wearing a particular hat, ok, I know where they stand, they don't have to discuss it or tell me... It is what it is. Ok Karen
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Aug 13, 2020 0:05:22 GMT -5
I'm confused.
|
|
|
Post by missunderstood on Aug 13, 2020 0:29:41 GMT -5
No, I do not. You are too hyper-sensitve if my choice come November is part of signature. I'm not discussing the reason, or discounting anyone oppose to my choice. It's like the people I see wearing a particular hat, ok, I know where they stand, they don't have to discuss it or tell me... It is what it is. Ok Karen You'r calling me Karen? I was just answer his questions...
|
|
|
Post by gogophers on Aug 13, 2020 1:24:27 GMT -5
So, posting a campaign sign in one's yard, or wearing a MAGA cap, or putting a candidate's bumper sticker on one's car isn't creating a political message in your book, because you are defining "message" to mean "arguing back and forth." Would you think it ok if a member changed his or her name to "BidenisSenile" so that an overt political message was in the name, not the signature? I hope the moderators weigh in on this, because one of us is delusional.
|
|
|
Post by gogophers on Aug 13, 2020 1:32:13 GMT -5
I've said all I intend to say about this. Even talking about why messages are political is itself more politics than I can stand on this board, where the discussion should, in my view, be confined to volleyball-related subjects.
|
|
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) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 12,904
|
Post by bluepenquin on Aug 13, 2020 7:30:49 GMT -5
The original comment was that we are trying to protect mom/dad/grandma - and putting people on a football field and away from their family for 4 months doesn't sound riskier for their family back home? You reframed my point to make it seem much more trivial than I intended. Colleges are widely recognized as important vectors of disease because of shared space, resources, crowding and intermixing. That is why they are first to close, and why reopening has been such a huge kettle of fish. Simply having teams in sports that require a certain interaction that would be discouraged everywhere else on campus is risky. That problem is exacerbated exponentially in football because of the sheer numbers of players and potential contacts, and the nature of those contacts. In a situation where you move outside of controlled practice situations to real uncontrolled game situations with other teams from other institutions and communities it gets worse. Given current community infection rates, I'd guess the chances of at least one student athlete in a program getting infected during the season under that situation is almost surely 100%. No one is suggesting bubbling college football - I'm not sure how you could do it - and the testing isn't frequent enough to catch presymptomatic infections on time. If community policies are not geared to stop spread you lose control of who gets infected that means community spread: friends - family - friends - associates. (This is putting aside the issue of liability - which is a different dimension of the problem.) What people seem to be arguing is that sports provides more of a structured environment that should limit spread relative to what happens in a community. But I think that would only apply to sports with much smaller rosters and with different activities and if they were not on campus. Football is really the only sport under consideration here - it's driving everything due to economics. It is true that campuses and programs are trying to enforce stricter protocols than they would see outside of football, but the activities of football are worse than activities in the community in terms of spread - so you have to depend on barriers with the community in which spread is rampant. Again, you are not working in bubbles on campuses, campuses are not bubbled from communities, and the nature of football increases exposure rates and potential spread. It's already happened on several campuses. Officially, one of every 2000 people in the US has now died of COVID. The real number is almost certainly greater. And it is much worse if you consider African Americans alone. Football does have some advantages: 1) It is played outdoors instead of indoors. 2) The schedule is one game a week - where testing right before playing and then at some point earlier in the week should greatly reduce the number of players playing on Saturday that are infectious. VB seems to be going down a similar road - with back to back matches only played on weekends in an effort to save money, but also to better control the spread of the virus. 3) If contracting COVID - the heart and lung diagnostics and care will be much greater for college football players than most people. If the number of college football players that end up being positive is something similar whether they play or don't play - the care given if they play will be an advantage.
|
|
|
Post by nothingbutcorn on Aug 13, 2020 7:57:36 GMT -5
Yes, I'm bothered. Not by your politics, but by politics creeping back onto the board. shouldn't have to put you on mute. It's my board, too, and the rules for its use are clearly posted: "no politics on this board." Do you really think embedding a political message in your sign-off isn't making a political statement? No, I do not. You are too hyper-sensitve if my choice come November is part of signature. I'm not discussing the reason, or discounting anyone oppose to my choice. It's like the people I see wearing a particular hat, ok, I know where they stand, they don't have to discuss it or tell me... It is what it is. Please remove your political view. It is offensive to me and has no place on this volleyball board!
|
|
|
Post by gibbyb1 on Aug 13, 2020 8:32:51 GMT -5
You reframed my point to make it seem much more trivial than I intended. Colleges are widely recognized as important vectors of disease because of shared space, resources, crowding and intermixing. That is why they are first to close, and why reopening has been such a huge kettle of fish. Simply having teams in sports that require a certain interaction that would be discouraged everywhere else on campus is risky. That problem is exacerbated exponentially in football because of the sheer numbers of players and potential contacts, and the nature of those contacts. In a situation where you move outside of controlled practice situations to real uncontrolled game situations with other teams from other institutions and communities it gets worse. Given current community infection rates, I'd guess the chances of at least one student athlete in a program getting infected during the season under that situation is almost surely 100%. No one is suggesting bubbling college football - I'm not sure how you could do it - and the testing isn't frequent enough to catch presymptomatic infections on time. If community policies are not geared to stop spread you lose control of who gets infected that means community spread: friends - family - friends - associates. (This is putting aside the issue of liability - which is a different dimension of the problem.) What people seem to be arguing is that sports provides more of a structured environment that should limit spread relative to what happens in a community. But I think that would only apply to sports with much smaller rosters and with different activities and if they were not on campus. Football is really the only sport under consideration here - it's driving everything due to economics. It is true that campuses and programs are trying to enforce stricter protocols than they would see outside of football, but the activities of football are worse than activities in the community in terms of spread - so you have to depend on barriers with the community in which spread is rampant. Again, you are not working in bubbles on campuses, campuses are not bubbled from communities, and the nature of football increases exposure rates and potential spread. It's already happened on several campuses. Officially, one of every 2000 people in the US has now died of COVID. The real number is almost certainly greater. And it is much worse if you consider African Americans alone. Football does have some advantages: 1) It is played outdoors instead of indoors. 2) The schedule is one game a week - where testing right before playing and then at some point earlier in the week should greatly reduce the number of players playing on Saturday that are infectious. VB seems to be going down a similar road - with back to back matches only played on weekends in an effort to save money, but also to better control the spread of the virus. 3) If contracting COVID - the heart and lung diagnostics and care will be much greater for college football players than most people. If the number of college football players that end up being positive is something similar whether they play or don't play - the care given if they play will be an advantage. None of those “advantages” comes remotely close to the enormous disadvantage that is that line of scrimmage and a huge pile of heavy breathing humans at the end of every play.
|
|
|
Post by missunderstood on Aug 13, 2020 8:39:45 GMT -5
No, I do not. You are too hyper-sensitve if my choice come November is part of signature. I'm not discussing the reason, or discounting anyone oppose to my choice. It's like the people I see wearing a particular hat, ok, I know where they stand, they don't have to discuss it or tell me... It is what it is. Please remove your political view. It is offensive to me and has no place on this volleyball board! WHAT POLITICAL VIEW??!?
|
|
|
Post by knapplc on Aug 13, 2020 9:16:23 GMT -5
I decided to put my political views in my signature, too.
|
|
|
Post by rjaege on Aug 13, 2020 9:18:29 GMT -5
Please remove your political view. It is offensive to me and has no place on this volleyball board! WHAT POLITICAL VIEW??!? Bad enuf we have an election year wo sports, so just political ads non-stop. Now over bearing political zealots on sports forums with no sports to discuss. ARGH!#@#
|
|