My opinion would be for them to be in a structured environment with healthcare, testing, monitoring, etc. Of course that is not what our masters in politics and media tell us to think, so I am probably wrong. If everyone is tested going in and reactions with people outside of the football program are limited, then I don't see how we can have an outbreak. Tell the players if they want to play they have to follow the strict COVID guidelines. Have the players take classes online during the season. Separate from the student body as much as possible. It is very likely the majority of players could get COVID and not even realize it as they are generally healthy. Check their vitamin D levels and anyone that is deficient give them supplements. Anyone that tells you cancelling the season is for the players is naive.
FOOTBALL Power 5 Moving Toward Cancellation
- Thread starter Tyler Pellom
- Start date
I did answer. I said neither. And my apologies if I sounded as though I was being difficult. I just don’t see that as the only two options.
And you did make an implication. I can’t say exactly what your implication was but you definitely implied that student athletes apparently won’t be able to eat or have access to healthcare off campus. So why don’t you tell me why you wrote it that way and I won’t have to make an assumption.
If one of your options had been to be on campus and in the structured environment and NOT play a fall season then that definitely would have been the choice I would have picked. The problem is that person to person transmission is so easy it only takes one kid to do something he’s not supposed to, gets infected and brings it to the locker room and then it will spread like wildfire. It will take just one player to invite his girlfriend over to his room or go out to a restaurant or a bar. It’s not different than the one kid who breaks curfew except the consequences, in this instance, if it happens here and one of them catches the virus it will practically be impossible to prevent that team from being shutdown.
I’ve drawn the analogy to MLB. Look what’s happened to the Cardinals and the Marlins before that. And you’re talking about an entourage that for baseball 1/2 to 1/3 of that of a football program. Where those guys spend time in their clubhouses with a 25 man roster that most teams have a clubhouse bigger than our entire locker room that seats nearly 100. I just don’t know how teams can successfully do this with football.
"And you did make an implication. I can’t say exactly what your implication was..."- MT01
Good point. Good post.
Might as well close down and cancel everything. What's the point? End of times...
How is being on campus and not playing safer than being on campus and playing?
If you took a moment to actually read I already explained that. Assuming online classes, the most probable place of transmission for the football team is going to occur in the locker room, airplane, bus, etc and probably even on the field.
Because they won't be hanging out with each other anywhere else without football? Either way the risk to the players is very low even if they were to get COVID. We don't know the long-term effects of it, but we should not shut everything down until we do either. People act like a vaccine is the answer, but what percentage of the population do not get the flu vaccine? We are dealing with adults here. Explain to them the risks and let them make a decision. If the players and coaches want to take that risk then fine. The ones that don't should have their scholarships/contracts honored this year and start back up next year.
But again that risk isn’t just to them. You just implied they would still hang out with other people off the field. Right now that’s the problem with our society. Most other countries are not doing that. But not here.
Right now I can predict with 100% certainty what’s going to happen when one player does the wrong thing and then they all converge into a cramped locker room. I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever. So, there’s the first step in continuing community wide transmission. Aside from the risk to the players they will then pass it on to others - some of those in high risk categories where it’s far more deadly. And lastly no I don’t believe the players understand the risks to themselves because there is a lot we don’t know about the long term implications. But what we are starting to see is disturbing early indicator. And if this didn’t spread so easily then maybe it would be worth the risk, but it does spread very easily, is deadly, and has unknown ramifications. It’s isn’t just “their” call to make.
Right now I can predict with 100% certainty what’s going to happen when one player does the wrong thing and then they all converge into a cramped locker room. I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever. So, there’s the first step in continuing community wide transmission. Aside from the risk to the players they will then pass it on to others - some of those in high risk categories where it’s far more deadly. And lastly no I don’t believe the players understand the risks to themselves because there is a lot we don’t know about the long term implications. But what we are starting to see is disturbing early indicator. And if this didn’t spread so easily then maybe it would be worth the risk, but it does spread very easily, is deadly, and has unknown ramifications. It’s isn’t just “their” call to make.
This debate is a perfect example of poor public health messaging.
The initial lockdowns were to flattened the curve to prevent health system overload.
Now what’s the goal? Is it to stop spread? Is it to slow spread? Is it to continue preventing health care overload? What are the specific metrics for going back to a normal? What infection rate would be ok? Is this the expected new normal? Are we expecting this until a vaccine? What if the vaccines are not effective or safe?
We need a clear message or metric for safety measures that can be clearly explained. The lack of this, for a lot of people, makes the asks seem unreasonable given the current statistics. Just saying we have to limit it because it spreads easily and kills, based on the numbers, is convincing for a lot of people. This isn’t directed at one person, I have asked bosses this and can’t get a direct answer. Until we can give an answer to, we need to suspend football until the numbers are X, then people will push back.
The initial lockdowns were to flattened the curve to prevent health system overload.
Now what’s the goal? Is it to stop spread? Is it to slow spread? Is it to continue preventing health care overload? What are the specific metrics for going back to a normal? What infection rate would be ok? Is this the expected new normal? Are we expecting this until a vaccine? What if the vaccines are not effective or safe?
We need a clear message or metric for safety measures that can be clearly explained. The lack of this, for a lot of people, makes the asks seem unreasonable given the current statistics. Just saying we have to limit it because it spreads easily and kills, based on the numbers, is convincing for a lot of people. This isn’t directed at one person, I have asked bosses this and can’t get a direct answer. Until we can give an answer to, we need to suspend football until the numbers are X, then people will push back.
This is a fair point. As a CDC alum, I readily admit that they completely blew it out of the gate. They screwed up (by basing initial assessments on China's lies), they failed to prioritize testing, and then totally botched the first traunch of testing kits. A lot of mistakes there which is what forced Fauci to have to sort of be the top expert, because CDC basically went AWOL on all the things you just mentioned. It doesn't help that we have a President that has made misleading statements about most anything to do with this and touted false treatments. I'm not an anti-Trumper, because even thought I despise his lack of Presidentialness and overt and consistent fabrications I support most of the policies. But he's helped screw this up too with all those things you just mentioned. Lack of clear leadership and guidance to the American people - you're right - probably one of the biggest issues we have in slowing the spread.
So, yeah reducing spread and flattening the curve has been the primary goal. But this doesn't happen uniformly in all places at the same time because there is no national strategy. So, while NY got better because they did what they needed to slow the spread, Florida blew up because they were like F it open everything back up and to hell with your precautions. And you see where that got Fla.
We have to at least get to a vaccine (preferred) or - in lieu of that - treatments similar to oseltamavir (i.e. tamiflu) for influenza at a minimum. Because if some states can't slow the spread in the middle summer then this fall and winter is going to be awful. Keep in mind flu season was almost over when this kicked up here. We haven't yet had to go through pre-vaccine COVID and the flu season at the same time. Vaccine is the key. Hopefully it works. My biggest concern about that is it requires more than one. Ideally, it starts rolling off the line in Nov/Dec and we can get a lot of people vaccinated before winter. Hope y'all will get it once it arrives.
I really couldn't care less what you think of me. If you only can understand name calling, stop being a child.
