Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2020 8:46:13 GMT -5
To follow-up on the discussion of October 10, Dan Patrick added some meat to the tweet that caused all of this ruckus. As was mentioned above, October 10 is what coaches/ADs are thinking would need to happen in order to qualify for the playoff. Maybe you have some wiggle room to October 17. Who knows. What we had all along are a bunch of non-decision makers grumbling about the decisions of those in a position to actually make decisions and trying to brow beat them into making different decisions. I get it. I really do. We also have a group of decision makers who don't seem to have to be held accountable for their votes and decisions and probably made their decision too quickly. All of that said: As the Pac-12 managed to do, you can readily justify postponing a season during a pandemic pretty easily if they only put forth the effort to adequately explain their decision. And, I agreed with the decision at the time. I am less convinced today. The SEC is going to play come hell or high water. That also seems true of Notre Dame, the ACC and Big 12. If they have not stopped now, they aren't going to unless a swarm of locusts follows the plague. While the B1G and PAC may still look like the smart ones in this, right now they look like the dumb ones for their decision. And, grossly incompetent in their PR related to it. Yeah, I agree for the most part. The one thing I'd add is that a big part of the problem that the Big 10 has is that they seem to have made this decision without getting the "non-decision makers" (i.e. the players and especially the coaches, who likely have more sway on public opinion than the presidents do) on board. The Pac-12 seems to have handled this better because I don't recall seeing a litany of their highest-profile coaches openly pushing back the way I did in the Big 10. I also think that the Pac-12's relative irrelevance in football helped to mute any backlash toward their decision, especially since the Big 10 went first. Thanks both for this discussion. It is interesting, no matter what.
I would say for the Big Ten: it is far more conservative (I'm talking the dreaded "p" word, here) than folks around the country might realize. Granted, I think every state, the rural part is more conservative than the urban parts. But in the Big Ten you've got Ohio, Nebraska, and Indiana that are very conservative, and good chunks of Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania too. And of course all these states love their college football teams ... well not Indiana as much, because it has Notre Dame as the main program, and its two public programs don't win that much.
So that would be some pressure.
I truly mean no offense ... but I don't think it's quite the same situation out west. I think there is much more indifference to college football out there, by good portions of the state population. Maybe Oregon (ahem "Jefferson") is different. Perhaps Utah as well, though BYU isn't in the PAC obviously, so that splits that state's population.
Thoughts?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2020 8:58:40 GMT -5
Word is coming out of Ohio State sports media that the B1G could "re-vote" as early as Friday.
The thing for me that seems suspicious: what has changed so drastically since the original 11-3 vote, that is going to cause 5 or 6 of those "no" votes to switch??
Is the decision to play made by a simple majority or supermajority vote?
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Sept 3, 2020 9:04:25 GMT -5
Word is coming out of Ohio State sports media that the B1G could "re-vote" as early as Friday. This seems to be hearsay, at this point. Trying to sell subscriptions to Bucknuts (a pay service for "inside" info), or get more followers on Twitter. I don't believe it, myself. But, I've certainly been wrong before and will be wrong again in the future. The thing for me that seems suspicious: what has changed so drastically since the original 11-3 vote, that is going to cause 5 or 6 of those "no" votes to switch?? Let's even say that Trump promised to Warren to take care of the entire bill for all testing at the universities this school year. Which would be a significant chunk of change, no doubt. I'm not sure that still does it, but it could be the "excuse" that provides cover to switch a vote, I guess.
The biggest thing that has changed is that the ACC, SEC and Big 12 didn’t follow the Big Ten’s lead like they were expecting.
|
|
|
Post by vbcoltrane on Sept 3, 2020 9:32:07 GMT -5
No, I did not. But, if you are going to make a massive decision that impacts the lives of thousands of people directly, from coaches to players to people who work for athletics departments or whose livelihood depends upon football games, you better damn well give a well-justified reason for it and be able to answer questions when they are posed to you. We all know we are in a pandemic. That is also true for the other conferences and the NFL. Why wouldnt people ask questions and raise hell when the B1G is in the minority among power 5 conferences so far? I read the release sent out which stated exactly why they shut it down, the questions anyone would ask are the same questions that have been asked and answered 50 times a day for nearly 6 months on every station in America. I can see not liking the season being shut down, but not understanding why?? This.
I get wanting to play, being frustrated, being angry, saddened, etc. But, the whole deer-in-the-headlights, mystified, "why is this happening?" I just do not get. I have feeling people want what they want. And if they want to play, no amount of justification for why the season was postponed will do any good. Especially when they're looking at three other major conferences pushing forward.
Problem for the B1G is that it's doing this out of precaution and people usually don't feel like anything is "real" unless it's right at their doorstep. Short of massive outbreaks in B1G states before football season, or massive football-related outbreaks once a season starts, the conference can't "prove" this is necessary - and they shouldn't want to.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2020 9:49:26 GMT -5
The thing for me that seems suspicious: what has changed so drastically since the original 11-3 vote, that is going to cause 5 or 6 of those "no" votes to switch??
Is the decision to play made by a simple majority or supermajority vote? I thought I read where it had to be 60%, but I don't know that for certain.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2020 9:50:48 GMT -5
This seems to be hearsay, at this point. Trying to sell subscriptions to Bucknuts (a pay service for "inside" info), or get more followers on Twitter. I don't believe it, myself. But, I've certainly been wrong before and will be wrong again in the future. The thing for me that seems suspicious: what has changed so drastically since the original 11-3 vote, that is going to cause 5 or 6 of those "no" votes to switch?? Let's even say that Trump promised to Warren to take care of the entire bill for all testing at the universities this school year. Which would be a significant chunk of change, no doubt. I'm not sure that still does it, but it could be the "excuse" that provides cover to switch a vote, I guess.
The biggest thing that has changed is that the ACC, SEC and Big 12 didn’t follow the Big Ten’s lead like they were expecting. I doubt you know for certain that the vote was held with such stipulations or assumptions.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Sept 3, 2020 10:19:45 GMT -5
I read the release sent out which stated exactly why they shut it down, the questions anyone would ask are the same questions that have been asked and answered 50 times a day for nearly 6 months on every station in America. I can see not liking the season being shut down, but not understanding why?? This.
I get wanting to play, being frustrated, being angry, saddened, etc. But, the whole deer-in-the-headlights, mystified, "why is this happening?" I just do not get. I have feeling people want what they want. And if they want to play, no amount of justification for why the season was postponed will do any good. Especially when they're looking at three other major conferences pushing forward.
Problem for the B1G is that it's doing this out of precaution and people usually don't feel like anything is "real" unless it's right at their doorstep. Short of massive outbreaks in B1G states before football season, or massive football-related outbreaks once a season starts, the conference can't "prove" this is necessary - and they shouldn't want to.
I think the question of ‘why are college sports being cancelled when both high school and professional sports are resuming’ is valid.
|
|
|
Post by arclight on Sept 3, 2020 10:57:51 GMT -5
This.
I get wanting to play, being frustrated, being angry, saddened, etc. But, the whole deer-in-the-headlights, mystified, "why is this happening?" I just do not get. I have feeling people want what they want. And if they want to play, no amount of justification for why the season was postponed will do any good. Especially when they're looking at three other major conferences pushing forward.
Problem for the B1G is that it's doing this out of precaution and people usually don't feel like anything is "real" unless it's right at their doorstep. Short of massive outbreaks in B1G states before football season, or massive football-related outbreaks once a season starts, the conference can't "prove" this is necessary - and they shouldn't want to.
I think the question of ‘why are college sports being cancelled when both high school and professional sports are resuming’ is valid. That's fairly easy to understand. High school kids live at home with a parent or two around. Makes it a pretty hard right now to engage in extracurricular activities. Pro Athletes are living in a bubble, controlled housing, food, visitation rights etc. College young adults, first time being away from home...parties, alcohol and raging hormones. Usually a period of anti adult supervision syndrome.
|
|
|
Post by gibbyb1 on Sept 3, 2020 11:00:03 GMT -5
The decision to play isn’t Warrens, it’s the University Presidents. I’m sure the Big Ten wants to play.
|
|
|
Post by knapplc on Sept 3, 2020 11:03:34 GMT -5
Equally valid would be the flip-side of that question - if some colleges aren't playing, why would it be safe for other colleges or high schools to play? Someone is on the wrong side of the "is this safe" question. It's not necessarily the Big Ten.
|
|
|
Post by gibbyb1 on Sept 3, 2020 11:09:04 GMT -5
Equally valid would be the flip-side of that question - if some colleges aren't playing, why would it be safe for other colleges or high schools to play? Someone is on the wrong side of the "is this safe" question. It's not necessarily the Big Ten. It isn’t the big ten
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Sept 3, 2020 11:14:59 GMT -5
I think the question of ‘why are college sports being cancelled when both high school and professional sports are resuming’ is valid. That's fairly easy to understand. High school kids live at home with a parent or two around. Makes it a pretty hard right now to engage in extracurricular activities. Pro Athletes are living in a bubble, controlled housing, food, visitation rights etc. College young adults, first time being away from home...parties, alcohol and raging hormones. Usually a period of anti adult supervision syndrome. Ok, so how to you say the above but allow students on campus and allow teams to practice. Setting the line at intercollegiate competition seems like a very arbitrary line. Athletes would've had multiple COVID tests in the week leading up to the games. What is the evidence that there is any sort of significant risk in competitive athletics? Also, only the NBA and NHL are in bubbles. MLB, MLS, all European soccer, and soon the NFL are not in bubbles.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2020 11:37:34 GMT -5
That's fairly easy to understand. High school kids live at home with a parent or two around. Makes it a pretty hard right now to engage in extracurricular activities. Pro Athletes are living in a bubble, controlled housing, food, visitation rights etc. College young adults, first time being away from home...parties, alcohol and raging hormones. Usually a period of anti adult supervision syndrome. Ok, so how to you say the above but allow students on campus and allow teams to practice. Setting the line at intercollegiate competition seems like a very arbitrary line. Athletes would've had multiple COVID tests in the week leading up to the games. What is the evidence that there is any sort of significant risk in competitive athletics? Also, only the NBA and NHL are in bubbles. MLB, MLS, all European soccer, and soon the NFL are not in bubbles. That line doesn’t seem arbitrary to me, if you consider that disallowing competitions prevents cross-contamination between teams. The thing to always keep in mind here is: the world isn’t binary. Taking some measure, which doesn’t reduce the problems by 100%, but does reduce them by even a small amount, is still a valid measure. We can’t have all or nothing logic, on this. That isn’t valid.
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Sept 3, 2020 12:35:26 GMT -5
This paper reports that PSU's director of Athletic Medicine claimed at a meeting on Monday evening that 30-40% of student athletes infected with COVID (whether symptomatic or not) displayed evidence of myocarditis on MRI scans. He's uncertain how this will play out over the long term, but it's worrying and is likely to influence athlete performance at a minimum. www.centredaily.com/sports/college/penn-state-university/psu-football/article245448050.htmlThat seems like a really high number, but I'm not up on this issue. It may be that no one thinks to do MRIs on anyone other than athletes. It is known that the gene for the external cellular receptor (ACE2) that Coronavirus uses to get into cells is highly expressed in cardiac tissue - more so than in lung tissue.
|
|
|
Post by HappyVolley on Sept 3, 2020 12:37:58 GMT -5
Is the decision to play made by a simple majority or supermajority vote? I thought I read where it had to be 60%, but I don't know that for certain. It is 60%. .6 * 14 = 8.4 8 would be < .6, so the threshold would be 9.
|
|