NU has postponed all winter sports until December 18th after some positive tests.

No hoops Thursday. No hockey Friday.

This f’ing sucks. I was so ready for Thursday.

Was holding off on posting for a while because I was worried this would happen. Vaccine can't come soon enough. I'm sure this was a tough decision for the university.

Oh great.

How did someone decide on a twenty-four day shutdown and why would teams that didn't have any of any of their players test positive (like men's basketball) be prohibited from practicing?

(11-24-2020 07:25 PM)NUGUY Wrote:  How did someone decide on a twenty-four day shutdown and why would teams that didn't have any of any of their players test positive (like men's basketball) be prohibited from practicing?

From the NU hockey blog...

“Also, contrary to what some people might tell you on twitter, a school with a 5 team covid outbreak and close contacts on three additional teams stopping sports for *a couple of weeks* is in fact a perfectly rational response.

We'll be fine. They're missing all of six games and had a bye in January ready to be filled anyway. Exactly 2 games have happened so far and there are at least 4 HEA teams that I know of that aren't prepared to start yet. Not like we're falling behind.“

I have to agree with them. I’m upset I can’t see games, but an outbreak with 18 to 20 somethings isn’t to be taken lightly.

I totally get shutting down teams where players have tested positive. What I don't get is shutting down teams from playing AND PRACTICING when no players on those teams have tested positive.

This seems silly on a lot of levels. No positive cases and shutting down doesn't make sense. 24 days goes against even the strictest guidelines. It's going to put the kids at a competitive disadvantage when they do start after spotting teams a 1 month head start. And this virus will be just as rampant on Dec 18 as it is today. What's going to happen in January when we are in conference play? Will there be a 24 day shutdown if there are cases in any programs?

Or are they just saying they don't care about any of the facts and good luck once conference play rolls around, which would be completely hypocritical.

(11-25-2020 04:33 PM)NUFan35 Wrote:  This seems silly on a lot of levels. No positive cases and shutting down doesn't make sense. 24 days goes against even the strictest guidelines. It's going to put the kids at a competitive disadvantage when they do start after spotting teams a 1 month head start. And this virus will be just as rampant on Dec 18 as it is today. What's going to happen in January when we are in conference play? Will there be a 24 day shutdown if there are cases in any programs?

Or are they just saying they don't care about any of the facts and good luck once conference play rolls around, which would be completely hypocritical.

Couldn't agree more. Basketball teams that return all or most of their players wouldn't be hurt by a policy like this but that is not our situation this year. Every day they can practice is precious as is every pre-conference game they can play. So, are going to keep the team in a cacoon until December 18th and THEN run the risk of exposure?

PS.....if this is Konya's decision then he is setting up the basketball team (and coach) to fail.

I think we might be looking at this the wrong way. This might not be a temporary thing. With all the schools thus far shutting down winter sports, this might just be the beginning for us. As fans we see it one way, but there are many perspectives here. There's not much upside from an administration perspective having winter sports. No ticket income. The possibility that we look bad with athletics COVID outbreaks. The possibility athletes spread COVID to our on campus student population that has had one of the lowest rates of infection in the nation thus far. If anything we'd be aligning with schools we want to be associated with (the Ivies and such) by cancelling winter sports.

It would be crushing to the athletes of course. It would likely set our programs back a bit. I think NU wants to keep sports active for the winter, but in my opinion this is giving the administration time to decide whether or not to pull the plug before they get started. There's also the question about whether it's fair to have student athletes traveling and interacting with people during a pandemic when we are not paying them. I think this whole pandemic situation this year furthers the argument to why student athletes should be paid, but that's another conversation.

STL, I would be more receptive to your argument if we were dealing with Ebola instead of a flu that is less deadly than the seasonal flu that we face every winter. Someone on my Twitter feed posts weekly Massachusetts death numbers and I haven't seen ANY on the zero to twenty-one age bracket. Instead, most in that bracket, when they test positive are either asymptomatic or have sniffles for a few days.

I don't mean to trivialize Covid but I think it's a mistake to not just take reasonable precautions to minimize unwanted consequences. My guess is that when we look back at how Athletics handled it it will look like we overreacted.

There is a school of thought that "we would be better off putting our athletes behind it now rather than every couple of weeks during the season." I'm only half kidding when I say, "let's get all our winter student athletes together in Matthews Arena and have an all day triple elimination Twister tournament."

PS. I don't want to emulate the Ivies.

Yeah I hear you on the Ivies thing, but there's a huge alumni base that probably would love that and also don't really care about sports.

In terms of the flu comparisons, that is completely dependent on the strain of flu, but on average COVID is much more deadly than the average strain of flu, even for young people (1038 COVID deaths in the 18-29 age group since February vs 103 for the flu). NU does not want any piece of that. All it takes is one student or coach to tragically die and it's a PR disaster. NU surely will be trying to mitigate that.

That said, I'm sure they want to avoid overreacting too. It's a PR battle for a school that is not a "sports school"

On the "Ivy thing" I was't referring to sports. In many ways the Ivies are MORE supportive if their sport teams. NU has come a long way from when I was there. A lot of the changes have been great. Some haven't been. The more we look like them in terms of elitism and intolerance the less I like us...but that is a subject for another board.

Here are the stats I got from the Natonal Center for Health Statistics through 11/25 for the 15-24 age group.... (It's too bad that they don't have a demo that better reflects college aged kids) All deaths solely involving Covid...428. All deaths involving Covid, influenza or pneumonia....897. Note that this doesn't say that there were another 469 Covid deaths. It says that of the extra 469 health related deaths Covid was one of the factors..

I agree that it would be tragic if we lost a student or teacher to Covid but I think it's important to take reasonable precautions and look at what is happening rather than what is the worst that could happen....and it COULD happen. It's happening everywheree..

For the Ivies I was talking about the "elitism" aspect but wasn't clear. There are lots of people who would want to get to that level but it's certainly a turn off for me too. Agree with you there.

When running any organization you always need to consider worst case scenarios. Life insurance companies can't ignore the chances of a plague or major terrorist attack or something that would increase claims in a 1 in 200 year type event. At the same time they aren't going to hold enough capital to pay the 100% of claims for that kind of event, they are just going to look for ways to mitigate it. NU is in the same position. It's not just safety they have to think about but also reputation and brand promotion.

I want to be clear, I'm not commenting about whether any of this is a good idea, I'm just being pessimistic and prepping for a worst case scenario announcement for winter sports from NU because I believe they must be considering it.

Straying from the main topic at hand but it's strange to say that the 428 COVID related deaths were not "COVID deaths" but just deaths in which COVID was a factor. You could say that about every other disease too. Death is the sudden loss of brain function with many factors that contribute to it (be it illness, accident, whatever).

Straying from the main topic at hand but it's strange to say that the 428 COVID related deaths were not "COVID deaths" but just deaths in which COVID was a factor. You could say that about every other disease too. Death is the sudden loss of brain function with many factors that contribute to it (be it illness, accident, whatever).
[/quote]

STL.....I don't think we disagree on much but I don't follow this last comment. The stats tell us that of the 897 respiratory deaths in this age group 428 were solely Covid and of the other 469 Covid was one of two or three factors contributed to the deaths ........they were not "Covid deaths." You just can't draw that conclusion from these stats. I would be just as incorrect if I called the 469 all "pnemonia deaths" oe "influenza deaths." Anyway, that's my last thought on the subject.

Sorry, I was just being pedantic. I apologize.

It just rubbed me the wrong way to call COVID a flu that is less deadly than the seasonal flu. I work in life insurance to make sure we have enough money to pay death claims when they come in. I'm only talking data when I say this and ignore any media propaganda: We've seen a large and significant increase in deaths claims this year which highly correlates to the CDC figure of deaths involving COVID. This is for every single age group older than 25. Younger than 25 we've only seen a slight increase. Whether or not these are people who are kind of unhealthy who would have died in 2 years anyway, it's decreasing life expectancy and putting a huge strain on our healthcare system.

COVID is not very dangerous for college aged kids. I think NU is just trying to be prepared from a PR standpoint. I think they are also trying to mitigate COVID overall and try to prevent our own students from passing the virus on to older family.

(11-27-2020 11:07 AM)SomebodyToLove Wrote:  Sorry, I was just being pedantic. I apologize.

It just rubbed me the wrong way to call COVID a flu that is less deadly than the seasonal flu. I work in life insurance to make sure we have enough money to pay death claims when they come in. I'm only talking data when I say this and ignore any media propaganda: We've seen a large and significant increase in deaths claims this year which highly correlates to the CDC figure of deaths involving COVID. This is for every single age group older than 25. Younger than 25 we've only seen a slight increase. Whether or not these are people who are kind of unhealthy who would have died in 2 years anyway, it's decreasing life expectancy and putting a huge strain on our healthcare system.

COVID is not very dangerous for college aged kids. I think NU is just trying to be prepared from a PR standpoint. I think they are also trying to mitigate COVID overall and try to prevent our own students from passing the virus on to older family.

I guess that wasn't my last post. I reread the stats I posted and realized that Ithe way I worded it was confusing. I've edited it. Back to sports!

(11-24-2020 07:25 PM)NUGUY Wrote:  How did someone decide on a twenty-four day shutdown and why would teams that didn't have any of any of their players test positive (like men's basketball) be prohibited from practicing?

This is what Jeff Konya wrote on DHD when asked the very same question...

"No confirmed positives does not mean there has not been Covid-related issues that can impact timing/participation. That said, we are always looking at the science/facts/numbers so we can bring our team into competition in the safest manner. Everything is a moving target right now."

And the teams not impacted CAN practice, they always could. They just can't play in any games until the 18th.

(12-01-2020 12:39 AM)geewizNU Wrote:  

(11-24-2020 07:25 PM)NUGUY Wrote:  How did someone decide on a twenty-four day shutdown and why would teams that didn't have any of any of their players test positive (like men's basketball) be prohibited from practicing?

This is what Jeff Konya wrote on DHD when asked the very same question...

"No confirmed positives does not mean there has not been Covid-related issues that can impact timing/participation. That said, we are always looking at the science/facts/numbers so we can bring our team into competition in the safest manner. Everything is a moving target right now."

And the teams not impacted CAN practice, they always could. They just can't play in any games until the 18th.

Did he explain why his press release said no games OR PRACTICES until 12/18? Or why he was quoted as saying he "hoped" that teams could start practicing again in early December? Or why he picked twenty-four days when scientists are now proposing ten days as the standard? I AM glad that what he says we are now doing is a little more sensible.

We are back....not sure when practice can resume but looks like

Dec 9 vs Lowell, Dec 13 vs UMass Amherst and Dec 22 still on the schedule at Georgia