CSNbbs

(05-18-2020 11:57 AM)Ragpicker Wrote: [ -> ]What happens if NASCAR held an event without fans, and without the huge economic impact on the local community, and virtually nobody noticed?

What happens if the the PGA holds an event in Florida with four of the biggest names in golf, without any fans or impact to the local economy, and virtually nobody noticed?

Who actually watched? Who won? IMHO - who cares?

Without fans stimulating the local economies, these events only stimulated the TV ad revenue. Wonder why so many ads and TV commentators say "Stay Home - Stay Safe"

(05-18-2020 11:47 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.biocentury.com/article/305211

There are about 8-10 vaccine candidates in pre-clinical trials right now, each with differing results and different therapeutic approaches. The optomistic time line, as it's been reiterated by Fauci and other scientists working on vaccines, is to have Phase 3 clinical trials conducted by the end of the year. Meaning that a best case scenario would put the widespread implementation and development of a vaccine at the end of Football season/Early 2021.

An interesting caveat to all of this is that if one vaccine is successful, we don't know how practical it would be to develop and distribute. For instance, the Moderna vaccines use genetically modified mRNA strands as vectors for delivery. What if this technology is unique to their R&D, and other Biotech corporations don't have the resources in place to produce it on a global scale? What happens then?

Conversely, what happens if multiple vaccines are successful, but to different extents? How do you decide on a delivery paradigm?


Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

DPA gets used.

Always knew Doss was a big proponent of state-controlled manufacturing

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

(05-18-2020 11:57 AM)Ragpicker Wrote: [ -> ]What happens if NASCAR held an event without fans, and without the huge economic impact on the local community, and virtually nobody noticed?

What happens if the the PGA holds an event in Florida with four of the biggest names in golf, without any fans or impact to the local economy, and virtually nobody noticed?

Who actually watched? Who won? IMHO - who cares?

Without fans stimulating the local economies, these events only stimulated the TV ad revenue. Wonder why so many ads and TV commentators say "Stay Home - Stay Safe"

The television contract payouts to conference members are essential for collegiate athletic departments.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

(05-18-2020 01:35 PM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-18-2020 11:57 AM)Ragpicker Wrote: [ -> ]What happens if NASCAR held an event without fans, and without the huge economic impact on the local community, and virtually nobody noticed?

What happens if the the PGA holds an event in Florida with four of the biggest names in golf, without any fans or impact to the local economy, and virtually nobody noticed?

Who actually watched? Who won? IMHO - who cares?

Without fans stimulating the local economies, these events only stimulated the TV ad revenue. Wonder why so many ads and TV commentators say "Stay Home - Stay Safe"

The television contract payouts to conference members are essential for collegiate athletic departments.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Surprising news.

But my point was that the early returns - around the world - is that sports with no fans is not very interesting.

So will the Bama faithful stay away from Tuscaloosa on game day?

NASCAR and PGA aren't the barometer for interest...

Shoutout to Cincinnati as well...

(05-18-2020 03:43 PM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]NASCAR and PGA aren't the barometer for interest...

Shoutout to Cincinnati as well...

You didn't answer my question...

So will the Bama faithful stay away from Tuscaloosa on game day?

(05-17-2020 09:17 AM)eroc Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 08:54 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 08:35 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]Do you think athletics will be grouped together for the reboot, such that if Lacrosse were to resume play, football would have to follow suit?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Depends on if you are talking about rebooting with or without fans...

No fan issue with Lacrosse.
(What fans they have can enter the facility and watch and maintain distance.)

Huge fan issue with football.
(Even if UC cut attendance in half and only sold 20,000 tickets to space people inside Nippert — there is no way to get fans in and out of Nippert and maintain distance. Bathrooms, concession lines and congregating on concourses are all problematic.)

if you are trying to hold any event at all with COVID you have to think as streamlined as possible. Players, Coaching staff, essential game day staff, including TV operations only. There is so much more coordination involved with other institutions to hold a season to begin with that i can't fathom trying to incorporate planning that tries to include fan participation.

(05-18-2020 05:06 PM)Ragpicker Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-18-2020 03:43 PM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]NASCAR and PGA aren't the barometer for interest...

Shoutout to Cincinnati as well...

You didn't answer my question...

So will the Bama faithful stay away from Tuscaloosa on game day?

I would expect that if they didn’t let them in the stadium the fans would crowd the bars and pack in tailgates as near to the stadium as they could get.

Humans are social animals. And humans are resourceful and WILL find a way, overbearing governments be damned.

No matter what the Bama faithful do, there will not be 100,000 of them sitting shoulder to shoulder if the games are played without fans.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

(05-18-2020 01:26 PM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]Always knew Doss was a big proponent of state-controlled manufacturing

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

As usual you as showing your stupidity! The DPA should only be used to save lives and defend our country.

I once had a Navy Vice Admiral tell me if I could not improve a 90 day delivery of a very big complex detonator loader he could use the DPA to take over and run our factory. I told him great we would love someone to improve the deliveries of our sub contractors. That was the last I heard from that Vice Admiral.

Agreed. I'm glad we finally see eye to eye on how dangerous the Coronavirus is.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

(05-18-2020 05:16 PM)namrag Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 09:17 AM)eroc Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 08:54 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 08:35 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]Do you think athletics will be grouped together for the reboot, such that if Lacrosse were to resume play, football would have to follow suit?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Depends on if you are talking about rebooting with or without fans...

No fan issue with Lacrosse.
(What fans they have can enter the facility and watch and maintain distance.)

Huge fan issue with football.
(Even if UC cut attendance in half and only sold 20,000 tickets to space people inside Nippert — there is no way to get fans in and out of Nippert and maintain distance. Bathrooms, concession lines and congregating on concourses are all problematic.)

if you are trying to hold any event at all with COVID you have to think as streamlined as possible. Players, Coaching staff, essential game day staff, including TV operations only. There is so much more coordination involved with other institutions to hold a season to begin with that i can't fathom trying to incorporate planning that tries to include fan participation.

(05-18-2020 05:06 PM)Ragpicker Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-18-2020 03:43 PM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]NASCAR and PGA aren't the barometer for interest...

Shoutout to Cincinnati as well...

You didn't answer my question...

So will the Bama faithful stay away from Tuscaloosa on game day?

I would expect that if they didn’t let them in the stadium the fans would crowd the bars and pack in tailgates as near to the stadium as they could get.

Humans are social animals. And humans are resourceful and WILL find a way, overbearing governments be damned.

I can't speak for Bama fans, but I know if they don't allow fans in the stadium, I'll still set up shop in the parking lot off short vine and will tailgate with 20 of my closest friends/family with a TV to watch the game (assume parking lot owners still allow tailgating.) I'll probably upgrade my TV to something larger than 32".

Clifton and Tuscaloosa are very different but I'm sure the bars around here will still be packed.

(05-18-2020 06:31 PM)dubcat14 Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-18-2020 05:16 PM)namrag Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 09:17 AM)eroc Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 08:54 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 08:35 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]Do you think athletics will be grouped together for the reboot, such that if Lacrosse were to resume play, football would have to follow suit?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Depends on if you are talking about rebooting with or without fans...

No fan issue with Lacrosse.
(What fans they have can enter the facility and watch and maintain distance.)

Huge fan issue with football.
(Even if UC cut attendance in half and only sold 20,000 tickets to space people inside Nippert — there is no way to get fans in and out of Nippert and maintain distance. Bathrooms, concession lines and congregating on concourses are all problematic.)

if you are trying to hold any event at all with COVID you have to think as streamlined as possible. Players, Coaching staff, essential game day staff, including TV operations only. There is so much more coordination involved with other institutions to hold a season to begin with that i can't fathom trying to incorporate planning that tries to include fan participation.

(05-18-2020 05:06 PM)Ragpicker Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-18-2020 03:43 PM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]NASCAR and PGA aren't the barometer for interest...

Shoutout to Cincinnati as well...

You didn't answer my question...

So will the Bama faithful stay away from Tuscaloosa on game day?

I would expect that if they didn’t let them in the stadium the fans would crowd the bars and pack in tailgates as near to the stadium as they could get.

Humans are social animals. And humans are resourceful and WILL find a way, overbearing governments be damned.

I can't speak for Bama fans, but I know if they don't allow fans in the stadium, I'll still set up shop in the parking lot off short vine and will tailgate with 20 of my closest friends/family with a TV to watch the game (assume parking lot owners still allow tailgating.) I'll probably upgrade my TV to something larger than 32".

Clifton and Tuscaloosa are very different but I'm sure the bars around here will still be packed.

The difference in your viewing at a bar or parking lot with friends versus in Nipppert is UC has zero culpability for the virus spreads.

From the LA Times...

Quote:Some universities will likely be offering a mix of online and in-person courses, which would allow those schools to show that football players aren’t being treated differently than regular students by returning.

After Cal State’s announcement about going virtual in the fall, it became clear there will be a third group of FBS schools that will have to work harder to convince critics that college football players aren’t receiving special treatment or being put at higher risk than the student body.

Fresno State, a Cal State school with a football team that plays in the FBS’ Mountain West Conference, provided a glimpse Tuesday of how presidents may attempt to navigate that scenario.

It responded to the Cal State announcement by tweeting, “Earlier today, @calstate provided guidance on what’s expected to be a largely virtual environment for this fall for all 23 campuses. We will not be closed in the fall as classes will still happen virtually and critical services such as the library, advising, etc. will be open.”

A university statement specifically mentioned that “schools and colleges are prioritizing in-person instruction for courses with academic outcomes that cannot be achieved virtually, such as performance, laboratory, and clinical experiences.”

If a small group of students attends class on campus, the argument could be made that college football players could assemble to work out and practice, too.

“We’re still planning on bringing all of our student-athletes back to campus,” said John David Wicker, the athletic director at San Diego State, which like Fresno State is in the Cal State system. “We feel like we can support them better, having them here.”

In the coming weeks, expect varied interpretations of what “open” means for a campus. Read between the lines, and a trend should begin to form.

From Sankey: “I’ve been clear on a consistent basis that a first step in this process of returning college sports is the return of operations to our campus. Those operations contemplate repopulating our offices, but also understand that it may look different than it did last fall, that it may be an updated approach.”

Bowlsby said that in-person course offerings need not be a requirement for athletic events to be held on campus.

“That may be part of the new normal,” Bowlsby said.

Scott put it this way: “We believe that our campuses will need to be open to students in some form in order for our student-athletes to be competing in sports on campus.”

Earlier this week, Stanford coach David Shaw was asked about Emmert saying regular students have to be on campus for athletes to return.

“I think that’s a great sentiment, but I don’t know if that’s going to rule the day when it’s all said and done,” Shaw said.

“I think the president of the United States is going to have a way. I think every state governor is going to have a way. I think every president, provost and chancellor is going to have a way. There may be a scenario where campuses are partially open. If we can bring back athletes and a section of the student body, that may not be exactly what Mr. Emmert was talking about, but that may be good for a certain university.”

College sports’ power brokers share a will, and these comments, taken together, provide a preview of the way — all the while knowing that COVID-19 could blow up everyone’s plans.

The Pendulum Is Swinging, Stay Tuned

(05-17-2020 08:58 AM)rosewater Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 08:15 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 07:37 AM)rosewater Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 06:54 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-16-2020 10:30 PM)eroc Wrote: [ -> ]This may be the answer:


https://insidehighered.com/news/2020/05/...=IHEbuffer

For our own UC, they have an enrollment of 45,000 plus a staff/faculty of 6,000.

The idea that college campus populations are relatively safe from bad Covid19 outcomes is probably true given the age of the majority of people on a campus but of the campus body some of them are over 60 (faculty and staff), some of the under 60s have compromised health (this includes faculty, staff, students with diabetes, overweight, hypertension, immunodeficient, etc).

Most of the on-campus and surrounding campus student population live in very close quarters — dorms and multifamily — the Covid will spread very easily because of the close quarters and college students aren't known for following rules, social distancing, not going out if you don't feel well, etc.

If 10% of the UC population gets sick with Covid that's 5100 people.
If 1% of that 5100 dies that is 51 people and really bad press if it includes students.
And parents who sent their kids off to college will hold the university responsible.

But it is not one percent in groups under 30 years old. It is more like .015 percent. Seven students would be much more accurate.

For that age group the rate is actually .8% (based on what we know now) so my data while off by .02% is closer to correct than yours of .015% and mine is sourced by a recent news source while your data is pulled from ????

"In the vast majority of younger adults, covid-19 appears to result in mild illness with the risk of more severe consequences rising with every decade of age. According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data, 0.8 percent of U.S. deaths as of Apr. 18 were in people ages 25 to 34; 2 percent among those 35 to 44; and 5.4 percent among those 45 to 54."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/20...-patients/

Of the 5100 infected at a death rate of .8% that is 40. 40 potential wrongful death lawsuits. This does not include those who might sue because they live through covid but their health is permanently altered.

Even if you are ok with 40 students dying from Covid, what about the people who get infected from asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic students bringing the Coronavirus home to their families or visit businesses around campus?

In choosing to bring people together en masse, the virus spread has to be considered beyond the initial infected to those they contact with.

College students will still go home and will go out and about Clifton even if they don't feel well, have a cough, or runny nose because they are college kids — so the proliferation of Covid beyond the borders of campus will take the number of deaths associated with the UC campus higher.

Read your link and it does not say that .8 percent of people under 30 die from Covid. They use a band between 25 to 34 to get to that number. "According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data, 0.8 percent of U.S. deaths as of Apr. 18 were in people ages 25 to 34." Since you want a link, I think this view is more accurate based on my experience and knowledge. "By those numbers, COVID-19 almost begins to look like a different disease from one age group to another. For those under the age of 45, COVID-19 has a case fatality rate of about 0.1 percent — roughly the all-ages fatality rate of the seasonal flu (though, as a novel virus, it is considerably more infectious)." https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/05/...forts.html

Did a little more research and nation wide there have been 59 deaths out of 7452 tested from Covid with ages between 15-24. https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-CO.../9bhg-hcku This gets you to your .8 percent. I guess the disconnect is the belief in the number. I am of the belief that far more people have had the virus in this age group. I think the British study I listed above is correct because a far greater percentage of people were tested.

Maybe I'm missing something in my brief fact check, but I think all of you are failing in terms of research and analysis:

- OP just uses numbers with zero sourcing or regard to demographics.

- Another post quotes "According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data, 0.8 percent of U.S. deaths as of Apr. 18 were in people ages 25 to 34;" Sorry but those words don't mean that .8% of those between 25-34 who get COVID die. Those words imply that .8% of the US deaths from COVID happened to those between 25-34. Conversely, that means that 99.2% of those who die from COVID are NOT 25-34. And 25-34 isn't exactly representative of college-age as already noted.

- The last post uses a more logical albeit imperfect age range of 15-24 but then seems to accept the .8% analysis because he finds the numbers 59 and 742 next to each other and 59 is about 8% (which is 10X different from .8%!) of 742. But the math isn't even the biggest mistake because those numbers don't reflect what he thinks they do. 59 is the # of COVID 19 deaths in that 15-24 age group, but 742 isn't the number of cases, it's the number of deaths (presumably from anything but at a minimum it's not from COVID 19 - we already know that's 59). So what those numbers tell us is 59 out of 742 deaths in that age group came from COVID 19. It also tells us that pneumonia counted for almost triple COVID 19 deaths with 157 deaths, with another (?) 21 coming from what sounds like a combination of the two. Meanwhile, influenza killed 42 in that age group which is over 70% as much as COVID 19.

I'm not trying to convince anybody of anything besides being very careful with who you listen to and what constitutes a fact.

I heard a comment on television this morning that the University of South Carolina will be open for classes at the beginning of fall semester but will switch over to virtual classes only prior to December 1 when (they believe) a spike will occur again.

My concern with this is we're beginning to see a patchwork quilt of scheduling emerging as academic leaders at different institutions attempt to use predictive statistics that have proven somewhat unreliable in many cases during the emergence of the pandemic. This plan would certainly seem disruptive to both its college football and basketball programs. Will the SEC weigh in as a conference? More money riding on its TV contract than any other.

(05-18-2020 03:43 PM)Cataclysmo Wrote: [ -> ]NASCAR and PGA aren't the barometer for interest...

Shoutout to Cincinnati as well...

I'm not sure what Ragpicker is referring to, but people definitely noticed the NASCAR race.

(05-18-2020 08:57 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 08:58 AM)rosewater Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 08:15 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 07:37 AM)rosewater Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-17-2020 06:54 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote: [ -> ]For our own UC, they have an enrollment of 45,000 plus a staff/faculty of 6,000.

The idea that college campus populations are relatively safe from bad Covid19 outcomes is probably true given the age of the majority of people on a campus but of the campus body some of them are over 60 (faculty and staff), some of the under 60s have compromised health (this includes faculty, staff, students with diabetes, overweight, hypertension, immunodeficient, etc).

Most of the on-campus and surrounding campus student population live in very close quarters — dorms and multifamily — the Covid will spread very easily because of the close quarters and college students aren't known for following rules, social distancing, not going out if you don't feel well, etc.

If 10% of the UC population gets sick with Covid that's 5100 people.
If 1% of that 5100 dies that is 51 people and really bad press if it includes students.
And parents who sent their kids off to college will hold the university responsible.

But it is not one percent in groups under 30 years old. It is more like .015 percent. Seven students would be much more accurate.

For that age group the rate is actually .8% (based on what we know now) so my data while off by .02% is closer to correct than yours of .015% and mine is sourced by a recent news source while your data is pulled from ????

"In the vast majority of younger adults, covid-19 appears to result in mild illness with the risk of more severe consequences rising with every decade of age. According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data, 0.8 percent of U.S. deaths as of Apr. 18 were in people ages 25 to 34; 2 percent among those 35 to 44; and 5.4 percent among those 45 to 54."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/20...-patients/

Of the 5100 infected at a death rate of .8% that is 40. 40 potential wrongful death lawsuits. This does not include those who might sue because they live through covid but their health is permanently altered.

Even if you are ok with 40 students dying from Covid, what about the people who get infected from asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic students bringing the Coronavirus home to their families or visit businesses around campus?

In choosing to bring people together en masse, the virus spread has to be considered beyond the initial infected to those they contact with.

College students will still go home and will go out and about Clifton even if they don't feel well, have a cough, or runny nose because they are college kids — so the proliferation of Covid beyond the borders of campus will take the number of deaths associated with the UC campus higher.

Read your link and it does not say that .8 percent of people under 30 die from Covid. They use a band between 25 to 34 to get to that number. "According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data, 0.8 percent of U.S. deaths as of Apr. 18 were in people ages 25 to 34." Since you want a link, I think this view is more accurate based on my experience and knowledge. "By those numbers, COVID-19 almost begins to look like a different disease from one age group to another. For those under the age of 45, COVID-19 has a case fatality rate of about 0.1 percent — roughly the all-ages fatality rate of the seasonal flu (though, as a novel virus, it is considerably more infectious)." https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/05/...forts.html

Did a little more research and nation wide there have been 59 deaths out of 7452 tested from Covid with ages between 15-24. https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-CO.../9bhg-hcku This gets you to your .8 percent. I guess the disconnect is the belief in the number. I am of the belief that far more people have had the virus in this age group. I think the British study I listed above is correct because a far greater percentage of people were tested.

Maybe I'm missing something in my brief fact check, but I think all of you are failing in terms of research and analysis:

- OP just uses numbers with zero sourcing or regard to demographics.

- Another post quotes "According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data, 0.8 percent of U.S. deaths as of Apr. 18 were in people ages 25 to 34;" Sorry but those words don't mean that .8% of those between 25-34 who get COVID die. Those words imply that .8% of the US deaths from COVID happened to those between 25-34. And 25-34 isn't exactly representative of college-age as already noted.

- The last post uses a more logical albeit imperfect age range of 15-24 but then seems to accept the .8% analysis because he finds the numbers 59 and 742 next to each other and 59 is about .8% of 742. But again that's not what the table is showing. 59 is the # of COVID deaths in that 15-24 age group, but 742 isn't the number of cases, it's the number of deaths (presumably from anything but at a minimum it's not from COVID - we already know that's 59). So what those numbers tell us is 59 out of 742 deaths in that age group came from COVID. It also tells us that pneumonia counted for almost triple COVID 19 deaths with 157 deaths, with another (?) 21 coming from what sounds like a combination of the two. Meanwhile, influenza killed 42 in that age group which is over 70% as much as COVID 19.

I'm not trying to convince anybody of anything besides being very careful with who you listen to and what constitutes a fact.

Thanks for breaking that down. The post in question failed Statistics 101.

I saw the same thing that you did, and thought about correcting the record a few times, but ultimately felt “what’s the point?”. People have dug in on their sides and don’t want to hear anything contradicting their opinions.

Notre Dame will be open this fall.

Question to ponder: if Ohio Governor Dewine elects not to let football go forward in the state this fall could UC conceivably play at Higher Ground this fall?

It would be hilarious if UC was playing football and OSU was not.

The folks in Columbus could not let that happen.