CSNbbs

Full Version: Tracking the return of JMU sports (NO more discussions of validity of covid pandemic)
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Might be doing Fordham a favor since they are 2-11 on the year
(02-17-2021 11:16 AM)AssyrianDuke Wrote: [ -> ]Might be doing Fordham a favor since they are 2-11 on the year

Fordham's women are 2nd in the a-10 and have hopes at playing in the tourney
(02-17-2021 11:14 AM)Centdukesfan Wrote: [ -> ]fordham is under indefinite suspension of their season, not because of any positives in their program, but because the bronx/ fordham has some community spread. The positive rate is around just over 3%, which is under the NY's threshold for closing.


Fordham is petitioning the university to let them finish the season on the road, thousands of miles from the bronx, but it looks like they may not be able to.

Not sure why this is happening now. The rate of spread was much higher in that area in November/December.
(02-17-2021 11:34 AM)Centdukesfan Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-17-2021 11:16 AM)AssyrianDuke Wrote: [ -> ]Might be doing Fordham a favor since they are 2-11 on the year

Fordham's women are 2nd in the a-10 and have hopes at playing in the tourney

For some reason I thought it was just the men's team cancelling their season. I wonder what the rates are for their opponents' areas? In any case, it is certainly interesting timing to say the least.
(02-17-2021 12:40 PM)jmu98 Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-17-2021 11:14 AM)Centdukesfan Wrote: [ -> ]fordham is under indefinite suspension of their season, not because of any positives in their program, but because the bronx/ fordham has some community spread. The positive rate is around just over 3%, which is under the NY's threshold for closing.


Fordham is petitioning the university to let them finish the season on the road, thousands of miles from the bronx, but it looks like they may not be able to.

Not sure why this is happening now. The rate of spread was much higher in that area in November/December.

stop trying to make sense out of any of this
From the Northam presser today. I thought the number allowed at events was already 250 but I guess it wasn’t. The last part is promising. Maybe in the next 30 days we could see restrictions take on a percentage based approach that would allow for venues to accommodate a reasonable and safe number of spectators at facilities such as JMU athletic events. EDIT 30-days is purely a guess on my part.

Quote: The governor also highlighted that the number of coronavirus cases and hospitalizations are trending down. Because of this, he said they would be increasing the number of people who could attend outdoor sporting events to 250. Northam said they are also considering a percentage-based attendance plan for other outdoor events.
(02-17-2021 10:30 PM)Deez Nuts Wrote: [ -> ]From the Northam presser today. I thought the number allowed at events was already 250 but I guess it wasn’t. The last part is promising. Maybe in the next 30 days we could see restrictions take on a percentage based approach that would allow for venues to accommodate a reasonable and safe number of spectators at facilities such as JMU athletic events. EDIT 30-days is purely a guess on my part.

Quote: The governor also highlighted that the number of coronavirus cases and hospitalizations are trending down. Because of this, he said they would be increasing the number of people who could attend outdoor sporting events to 250. Northam said they are also considering a percentage-based attendance plan for other outdoor events.

It's just science. It is perfectly fine to have say 10-15% at an outdoor venue and there should be no issues. For Bridgeforth having up to 8-10K should not be an issue if done correctly, but that is wishful thinking. I am hopefully making the 5 hour trip down for the Drexel b-ball game and was originally hoping to be able to attend the football game as well but that looks like wishful thinking at this point.
Sure. I think 20% or 5,000 would be sufficient for allowing those who want to go to be able to go. I think our spring draw is somewhere around there. We know what our playoff draw usually is, then consider that it's a pandemic, varying levels of comfort being around others, the volitility in scheduling, I think expecting to draw 5K from week to week is generous... perhaps even extremely generous.

If there was nothing wrong with the world, I think our draw this weekend might be somehwere around 2K.
(02-17-2021 11:16 PM)jmu98 Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-17-2021 10:30 PM)Deez Nuts Wrote: [ -> ]From the Northam presser today. I thought the number allowed at events was already 250 but I guess it wasn’t. The last part is promising. Maybe in the next 30 days we could see restrictions take on a percentage based approach that would allow for venues to accommodate a reasonable and safe number of spectators at facilities such as JMU athletic events. EDIT 30-days is purely a guess on my part.

Quote: The governor also highlighted that the number of coronavirus cases and hospitalizations are trending down. Because of this, he said they would be increasing the number of people who could attend outdoor sporting events to 250. Northam said they are also considering a percentage-based attendance plan for other outdoor events.

It's just science. It is perfectly fine to have say 10-15% at an outdoor venue and there should be no issues. For Bridgeforth having up to 8-10K should not be an issue if done correctly, but that is wishful thinking. I am hopefully making the 5 hour trip down for the Drexel b-ball game and was originally hoping to be able to attend the football game as well but that looks like wishful thinking at this point.
Exactly, esp when you have other states for outdoors 25% or 50%. 10%-15% would be more than ample physical distancing for outdoors. They're allowing 250 in indoor venues a tiny fraction of Bridgeforth's size. Allowing what is essentially 1% capacity outdoors just shows you how absurd VA govt is..
I agree that just capping all outdoor events at 250 people has no basis in science and is a head scratcher. However, I believe the 250 cap decision is driven by the additional effort required to come up with a % or # for each individual venue and the complexities of trying to enforce.

We all know published attendance numbers are a joke and published capacity isn't much better. Neither the numerator, nor the denominator, required to figure out the right percentage is concrete.

Then even if you agreed on the numbers and could calculate that 10% was X number of people, that has no more basis in science than just saying only 250 people. You could have a 100k person stadium with 1 bathroom (you actually probably couldn't but I'm not sure of building codes) in the next town over a 1k person stadium with 10 restrooms. Further, the 100k stadium could have 1 entrance/exit (definitely not per fire code) and the 10k stadium could have 10 entrances. Then we need to consider the event/sport that is taking place. It's easy to believe that half of football game attendees visit a single concession stand, or a restroom, or just have a need to walk and stretch their legs, during the 4 hour game. That number is probably greatly reduced for a shorter sport/event, and thus makes that sport/event more likely to sustain social distancing throughout the course of the event. You also would have to consider the venue layout. A stadium with 1 grandstand is completely different than JMU's configuration and a simple X% cap doesn't distinguish the actual amount of space between people during the event (i.e. every person in a single/tall grandstand has to walk past row 1 but when the people are spread amongst a bowl, only 1/4 of the attendees walk past row 1 on any given side). Just capping it at a fixed percentage of total capacity doesn't make much sense when no two places are alike.

Basically, the % is an added complexity that nobody wants to deal with, and doesn't actually making it any safer/riskier than just putting a # out there.
I'm not too concerned. Would I do things different? Yes. I'd probably allow 25%-35%. Certainly bigger concerns out there for me than what happens over the next 3 months. Not going to loose any sleep at all if things over protective for the next three months.
(02-18-2021 01:11 PM)Dukester Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not too concerned. Would I do things different? Yes. I'd probably allow 25%-35%. Certainly bigger concerns out there for me than what happens over the next 3 months. Not going to loose any sleep at all if things over protective for the next three months.

Think about how much easier the lower cap is for the Duke club / ticket office too. This allows them to just say "we are only allowing family and friends of athletes, coaches and staff" and be done with it. If that cap is raised to 2k, they have to figure out what they think is the best way to roll out tickets, and then put up with a bunch of Karen's threatening to pull their $100 annual donation. Then when only 1.5k of the 2k people show up, Karen is going to be calling back to b!tch some more.
(02-18-2021 01:11 PM)Dukester Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not too concerned. Would I do things different? Yes. I'd probably allow 25%-35%. Certainly bigger concerns out there for me than what happens over the next 3 months. Not going to loose any sleep at all if things over protective for the next three months.

I’m not losing any sleep either and the fall is a much nicer time to attend games than at the moment.

It would be nice if they can lift these caps in time for some playoff games, assuming we host one or more. Also, I would think JMU would be happy to work thru logistics and take any ticket revenue they can get. I don’t see this as the state doing JMU any favors.
Distinction I learned today for VA. HS sports are recreational where as college athletics are sports & entertainment venues. The increase yesterday was for recreational sports to match entertainment venues. The current executive order expires at the end of this month (Feb); Northam stated he expected to offer annoucements hopefully next week regarding entertainment venues.
(02-18-2021 03:35 PM)JMURocks Wrote: [ -> ]It would be nice if they can lift these caps in time for some playoff games, assuming we host one or more.

I'm hopeful by late April, things will have improved enough where this is a possibility. The trend should keep going in the right direction and be significantly better by April 1st. Take a look (scroll down for the graph and 7-day moving average)... https://www.vdh.virginia.gov/coronavirus...nia-cases/


Not a major change but important to know for those who plan to watch. Go Dukes!
Yes heard about this the other day as I got a call from Duke Club as I will be at the game.
(02-18-2021 03:39 PM)Deez Nuts Wrote: [ -> ]Distinction I learned today for VA. HS sports are recreational where as college athletics are sports & entertainment venues. The increase yesterday was for recreational sports to match entertainment venues. The current executive order expires at the end of this month (Feb); Northam stated he expected to offer annoucements hopefully next week regarding entertainment venues.

NJ just raised indoor entertainment today to 10% of capacity for venues greater than 5000 seats and 15% for outdoor venues. So the Bank could hold up to 850 and Bridgeforth could hold 2500 under these rules. Let's hope Virginia makes same decision this week as per capita cases are pretty much the same in the 2 states.
(02-18-2021 01:40 PM)DoubleDogDare Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-18-2021 01:11 PM)Dukester Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not too concerned. Would I do things different? Yes. I'd probably allow 25%-35%. Certainly bigger concerns out there for me than what happens over the next 3 months. Not going to loose any sleep at all if things over protective for the next three months.

Think about how much easier the lower cap is for the Duke club / ticket office too. This allows them to just say "we are only allowing family and friends of athletes, coaches and staff" and be done with it. If that cap is raised to 2k, they have to figure out what they think is the best way to roll out tickets, and then put up with a bunch of Karen's threatening to pull their $100 annual donation. Then when only 1.5k of the 2k people show up, Karen is going to be calling back to b!tch some more.
You must be reading the JMU Nation FB page haha.

One dude getting mad because he thinks that big donors are going to be able to get into the games when others can't. Isn't that how it is supposed to work?
(02-22-2021 02:39 PM)JMaddy Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-18-2021 01:40 PM)DoubleDogDare Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-18-2021 01:11 PM)Dukester Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not too concerned. Would I do things different? Yes. I'd probably allow 25%-35%. Certainly bigger concerns out there for me than what happens over the next 3 months. Not going to loose any sleep at all if things over protective for the next three months.

Think about how much easier the lower cap is for the Duke club / ticket office too. This allows them to just say "we are only allowing family and friends of athletes, coaches and staff" and be done with it. If that cap is raised to 2k, they have to figure out what they think is the best way to roll out tickets, and then put up with a bunch of Karen's threatening to pull their $100 annual donation. Then when only 1.5k of the 2k people show up, Karen is going to be calling back to b!tch some more.
You must be reading the JMU Nation FB page haha.

One dude getting mad because he thinks that big donors are going to be able to get into the games when others can't. Isn't that how it is supposed to work?

Excellent and accurate analogy on the Karen factor. We definitely have them (even on this board). The "I'll take my bat 'n ball and go home" mentality is real, regardless of gender.
Reference URL's