+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: CAAbbs (/forum-676.html)
+---- Forum: CAA Conference Talk (/forum-677.html)
+----- Forum: William & Mary (/forum-691.html)
+----- Thread: COVID-19 (/thread-896141.html)
RE: COVID-19 - nogretheogre - 06-07-2020 09:25 PM
(06-07-2020 06:48 PM)Tribal Wrote:(06-07-2020 05:22 PM)nogretheogre Wrote: This doesnt bode well for sports in the fall. Liability is all that mattersTeam participation is voluntary, I assume. Take a medical redshirt and stay away, if that's what the player wants to do.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/07/us/universities-athletic-programs-coronavirus/index.html
Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
Lets say a student athlete gets Covid and dies after a small outbreak in the team. I dont think the Universities and Conferences etc are primarily worried about wrongful death lawsuits...theyre worried about being fired. Theyre worried about losing in the court of public opinion. Theyre worried about the negative press that comes about "why nothing was done" or why wasnt this or that. Theyre worried about protests. Doubt theres a redshirt year scholarship option for many of the olympic sports. Also its hard to know you need to take a medical redshirt in advance of getting sick.
RE: COVID-19 - zablenoise - 06-07-2020 10:43 PM
(06-07-2020 07:54 PM)Tribal Wrote: Hockey is king up there. US won't cancel college football and Canada won't cancel hockey.I agree with this. We're in a position right now where I think leadership can afford to be a little more conservative and push a decision down the road. However, what worries me isn't the Aug-Sept part of the season but the Nov-Dec part. There's at least a reasonable probability of a second spike in that time frame and I don't know how schools will deal with cancelling games as we come into the championship season.
I've heard no official word about our game vs Stanford. President Rowe would be wise to wait another month or so before determining our academic & athletic fall semester. No use in panicking.
Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk
RE: COVID-19 - billymac - 06-08-2020 08:39 AM
...or what it will probably do to the basketball season.
RE: COVID-19 - 82hawk - 06-08-2020 08:53 PM
(05-27-2020 03:26 PM)WMTribe90 Wrote:(05-26-2020 09:46 PM)Tribal Wrote: App State cuts men's soccer, men's tennis and men's indoor track
And, UConn, a flagship school, once proud mbb program, and former CAA fb member, is in a whole heap of trouble.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si.com/.amp/college/2020/05/26/uconn-football-sports-cuts
According to media reports, the University of Connecticut is laying the groundwork to eliminate multiple sports next month. Also, talk about going back to FCS ball. Poor Randy Edsall.
Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
The attempt at big-time football never made sense at UConn to begin with. The recruiting footprint is small and shallow. The home stadium is in Hartford, 30 miles from the Storrs campus, a lousy arrangement. The demise of the Big East left the Huskies as the northernmost outpost in the geographically absurd AAC.
The above gets right to the heart of the matter. No doubt there was some administrative malpractice, but UConn was simply a poor FBS candidate to begin with. Is it really the AD’s fault there were no quality candidates lining up for the job based on what they were offering in pay. Coaches aren’t stupid and knew what they would be taking on.
But UConn kept throwing money at the problems, kept clinging to the ego trip. Even as the school was moving back to the Big East and essentially bailing on football, there were splashy announcements last summer touting a revamped weight room and new locker room.
A vocal minority was panicked during the last round of conference realignment that saw UMass, ODU, Liberty and the likes jump up to FBS and “leave us behind". The wisdom of sticking to the core mission (cranking out quality student athletes and providing a good collegiate athletic experience) is born out in the current situation. Blowing the budget and ignoring the entrenched obstacles to success at the FBS level to keep up the Jones’ in the short-term would’ve been a disaster. How many sports would be on the chopping block at WM if we had followed ODU to greatness?
If UConn moves back to FCS it likely gives cover for UMass to do the same.
Because W&M has generally run a sustainable athletics department (Shaver firing and buyout aside), we are in a position to improve our position relative to our peers in all sports. If the last round of conference alignment was aspirational, the next round will be fueled by pragmatism.
New CAA Football
WM
UR
JMU
Elon
UD
ODU
Towson
ECU
Villanova
New Yankee Conference
UMass
UConn
UNH
Maine
Stony Brook
URI
Albany
Robert Morris
Duquesne
That new CAA conference would be entirely a bus league that would be better than a few current FBS conference on day 1. How Huge navigates the pandemic fallout will be her legacy at WM.
ECU fans and alumni see themselves as Big10 worthy. No way on earth they are a part of this conference alignment
COVID-19 - Tribal - 06-09-2020 02:34 PM
Anyway...CDC & WHO want you to know
.
![[Image: e897246b743fe1c5d878b25659c2fee9.jpg]](https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200609/e897246b743fe1c5d878b25659c2fee9.jpg)
![[Image: 3a5229941b20cd7ead1d0aed2b2370e8.jpg]](https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200609/3a5229941b20cd7ead1d0aed2b2370e8.jpg)
Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
RE: COVID-19 - WMInTheBurg - 06-09-2020 02:37 PM
"WHO official walks back comments on asymptomatic transmission being 'very rare'"
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/06/09/coronavirus-who-walks-back-comments-asymptomatic-spread/5325282002/
The WHO original statement about asymptomatic spreading was them attempting to clarify the potential difference between asymptomatic and presymptomatic. In the former, the person contracts the disease but never shows symptoms. In the latter, the person is in the incubation period and has not shown symptoms yet, but will show symptoms before the virus runs its course. The WHO is mostly saying that there's uncertainty whether the first category is contagious and how many people are truly asymptomatic vs. presymptomatic. In prior descriptions of transmission there wasn't any distinction.
COVID-19 - Tribal - 06-09-2020 02:48 PM
I knew you'd jump on that. Ha ha
Walked back to what? What study has been presented to counter her initial statement? Their just playing the semantics card now. Some. Not all. Not very rare. Medium well. Geesh.
477 inmates and 12 staff near my home tested positive. 0 hospitalizations. 0 deaths. Inmates on a poor diet, almost no vitamin D, etc but they're fine. I'm suprised the county didn't close the jail.
I'm not going down that rabbit hole again. I think my feelings dating back 2 months have seemingly been vindicated.
Stay healthy, everyone!
Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
RE: COVID-19 - nogretheogre - 06-09-2020 03:07 PM
To me this is a poorly illustrated explanation of their observation, which is why theyre walking it back.
I think the bottom line is that "asymptomatic" is not truly asymptomatic, but very mild...so minimal that one might have previously not even called it a cold ("no its just a tickle, no its allergies, no its etc etc). These recent WHO observations were based on studying patients via contact tracing..so basically these patients were specifically asked if they had symptoms AFTER being exposed. Theyre hypervigilant after known exposure so of course youd say "oh yeah, I guess I do have a little tiny cough."
With nearly 70% drop in mobility and people mostly following isolation orders, still thus far:
2M cases US
115K dead US
RE: COVID-19 - WMInTheBurg - 06-09-2020 03:21 PM
(06-09-2020 02:48 PM)Tribal Wrote: I knew you'd jump on that. Ha ha
Walked back to what? What study has been presented to counter her initial statement? Their just playing the semantics card now. Some. Not all. Not very rare. Medium well. Geesh.
477 inmates and 12 staff near my home tested positive. 0 hospitalizations. 0 deaths. Inmates on a poor diet, almost no vitamin D, etc but they're fine. I'm suprised the county didn't close the jail.
I'm not going down that rabbit hole again. I think my feelings dating back 2 months have seemingly been vindicated.
Stay healthy, everyone!
Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
One of the biggest struggles in all of this is that information is being released and then commented on without context, then you have millions of not-qualified-to-analyze-this-data people like us reading about it and making an armchair statement. If we're going to argue that defensive coordinators know their job better than we do, I think we should extend the same courtesy to the actual experts who are studying the virus.
COVID-19 - Tribal - 06-09-2020 03:44 PM
So WHO said is was nothing, then a worldly killer, then not so bad, then walked that back. So why would we trust those experts?
My point was and is, we didn't need to kill the economy and ruin lives. Too many out of work, businesses closed, and people facing all of the associated aftermath. We should've protected the vulnerable and allowed others to practice commonsense. I'm sorry for those who were/are sick and for those who love & care for them.
Phase II in Virginia this Friday. Let's hope for the best.
Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
COVID-19 - ColonelEbirt - 06-09-2020 07:19 PM
This thread is entertaining. We’re all going crazy! COVID made amateur public health experts out of all of us. Isolated data points extrapolated into bold conclusions about whether large-scale stay at home orders should or should not have been put in place. Outcomes (viewed with the bias of hindsight) used to justify or argue against whether policies should have been enacted in the first place. I have zero expertise on this topic. But just thinking about this analytically, it sure seems like public health officials love it when people complain that the enacted policies were too harsh. That means the virus didn’t spread as much as we feared, and so people think we could have done less and still been safe. If others know better, please correct me. But I’d think that’s a huge win in their books! They want us mad at them for that reason.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RE: COVID-19 - LeadBolt - 06-10-2020 08:12 AM
Common sense is a rare, uncommon commodity. I get that public health officials will get balme if they under re-act and don't get much credit if their policy calls work.
That being said, in hindsight our reaction was overblown, imho. Agree with Tribal, protect the vulnerable, quarantine and treat the sick, allow as many as possible to retain their livelihoods, health coverage, don't wreck more of the economy than necessary.
I have to feel that much of the frustration that has been turned from legitimate and appropriate protests of egregious wrongs into illegitimate rioting and looting, wrecking the lives of many more, can in part be traced to the over reaching response with regard to COVID.
RE: COVID-19 - TDenverFan - 06-10-2020 08:48 AM
I think our reaction basically had to be overblown. We knew very little about the disease initially, and it seemed like it could have a fatality rate of 2 or 3%. As we got more info, and our testing capabilities improved, it turned out that wasn't the case, but I don't think I would fault anyone for being cautious at the get go.
And at the end of the day well over 100,000 Americans have died from it, far more than die from the flu annually.
RE: COVID-19 - Zorch - 06-10-2020 09:05 AM
(06-09-2020 03:21 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote: ... If we're going to argue that defensive coordinators know their job better than we do, I think we should extend the same courtesy to the actual experts who are studying the virus.
Excellent point, very well said in words that are clear to readers of this forum.
RE: COVID-19 - nj alum - 06-10-2020 11:37 AM
Here's an opinion piece questioning the credibility of "the actual experts who are studying the virus":
https://amgreatness.com/2020/06/09/the-suicide-of-expertise/
Can anyone point me to a similar piece questioning the credibility of defensive coordinators?
RE: COVID-19 - WMInTheBurg - 06-10-2020 11:55 AM
I can't read that post, but I'll assume it agrees with Zorch.
RE: COVID-19 - WMInTheBurg - 06-10-2020 11:59 AM
(06-09-2020 02:37 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote: "WHO official walks back comments on asymptomatic transmission being 'very rare'"
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/06/09/coronavirus-who-walks-back-comments-asymptomatic-spread/5325282002/
The WHO original statement about asymptomatic spreading was them attempting to clarify the potential difference between asymptomatic and presymptomatic. In the former, the person contracts the disease but never shows symptoms. In the latter, the person is in the incubation period and has not shown symptoms yet, but will show symptoms before the virus runs its course. The WHO is mostly saying that there's uncertainty whether the first category is contagious and how many people are truly asymptomatic vs. presymptomatic. In prior descriptions of transmission there wasn't any distinction.
More on the "walking back"...
https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/06/who-butchers-asymptomatic-covid-comments-heres-what-they-meant/
Important to not let the messengers get in the way of the message here.
"When reporters and members of the public ask about symptomless spread—which we are all rightly concerned about—the conversation typically veers to a pedantic discussion on asymptomatic case definition.
Instead, what the organization should be doing is making clear that symptomless spread is certainly happening. And although we don’t yet know to what extent, pre-symptomatic spread very well may make up a significant portion of transmission. As such, we need to take precautions to prevent that spread."
RE: COVID-19 - Tribe32 - 06-10-2020 12:34 PM
We will never know the answer to this becuase it is impossible to answer, but it would be interesting to know how many of the people that died would have died by now anyway. I'll bet number isn't a real small one.
RE: COVID-19 - Sitting bull - 06-10-2020 12:39 PM
(06-10-2020 08:12 AM)LeadBolt Wrote: Common sense is a rare, uncommon commodity. I get that public health officials will get balme if they under re-act and don't get much credit if their policy calls work.
That being said, in hindsight our reaction was overblown, imho. Agree with Tribal, protect the vulnerable, quarantine and treat the sick, allow as many as possible to retain their livelihoods, health coverage, don't wreck more of the economy than necessary.
I have to feel that much of the frustration that has been turned from legitimate and appropriate protests of egregious wrongs into illegitimate rioting and looting, wrecking the lives of many more, can in part be traced to the over reaching response with regard to COVID.
Agree overall. The word we all heard repeated for days early on - and I think we all fell in line - was "abundance of caution". That was the term repeated to justify a near total shutdown of our society - work, worship, family, schools.
After 90 days and counting - common sense is telling me now (actually felt this after 45 days) this is much closer to a bad strain of the flu than a plague. We have also learned from the data so far that the risk is predominant to the elderly and those with other symptoms.
I personally know no one - after 90 days - who has been affected by this, in terms of hospitalization, bed rest or death. Among family and close friends, the answer I get back is the same. The only person I can say would be close is Jay Colley, which I read about on this board. It just makes sense - anything SO dangerous as was originally portrayed - you would have multiple people in your orbit affected. Thankfully none that I know, even casually.
I read headlines - as example the one where John's Glenn life passed from COVID. That was the headline. In the story, you read she was 100 years old.
Then the riots and protests started 5/31. Days prior, people in NYC were being arrested for attending funerals. Now you have hundreds and thousands in the streets. The same "leaders" lecturing on shelter at home are now totally silent on this obvious break from social distancing - not to mention the burning, looting, injury to others, etc.. Why would anyone want to take their lead now - particularly if you ran a business that had to close, your life position in real jeopardy.
In retrospect, the lockdown has done more damage than good from my perspective. That's hindsight and I still don't disagree with the initial concern, the initial steps to control this. It's just all the hypocrisy that has resulted since, more recently, which makes you so much angrier today.
People - and politicians - are now taking advantage of the conditions - destruction and activity that should require public consent. What's happening in Richmond is such a disgraceful example. Last night it was the Christopher Columbus memorial - not just toppled - also burned and thrown into Byrd Park Lake. It was a memorial erected in 1927 by the Italian and Catholic community of Richmond and approved by the City. No one I could see lifted a finger to stop the destruction. A mob decided to remove it - and did so. Scary.
There will be a lot of changes out of this. Social distancing is one positive one - airplanes, restaurants, etc - looking forward to more room and distance. It's a positive, even if the cost goes up. They were both too cramped previously, with or without a pandemic. The importance of good and careful hygiene also. Another - I am hoping - is that people watching all this in horror, as they did the murder of George Floyd, will make their voice heard in November. The people in charge of these cities are destroying them.
RE: COVID-19 - nogretheogre - 06-10-2020 12:45 PM
(06-10-2020 11:37 AM)nj alum Wrote: Here's an opinion piece questioning the credibility of "the actual experts who are studying the virus":
https://amgreatness.com/2020/06/09/the-suicide-of-expertise/
Can anyone point me to a similar piece questioning the credibility of defensive coordinators?
This is a laughable piece. He expects the scientists to call out the protesters for not social distancing? Really? El Jefe might have used his platform to do that amongst many other potential offerings, but instead, welllllll......
This pandemic is first-of-its-kind. Remember, much like every recent crisis, the 24hr news and instant-information of the internet as well as pseudo-expert blogs create information overload that often confuses the picture. We have never had an unfold-live worldwide crisis. Can you imagine past historical world tragedies unfolding in todays world? Cuban Missile crisis? WWII and Pearl Harbor? News and recommendations would change rapidly just like now and it would be similarly confusing. The experts arent "wrong," they are put into a VERY different position to be available to the press early and often. These arent well-thought-out position papers that an organization releases like the old days. Any rational science-observing person would understand that all of these precautions and recommendations were given in an "as it stands" scenario. They are learning on the fly and interpreting the data to the best of their abilities. Criticizing that is ridiculous. Why dont we start to appreciate the difficulty of the situation. Them getting something wrong in retrospect should not embolden anyone to deny the scientific method and process. If anything, they should go re-read their sons 5th grade textbook to understand why it happens, instead of parading their ignorance.
The papers that were retracted are supposedly being resubmitted after appropriately confirming their data. Further, they are one of MANY that show HCQ to be ineffective and/or harmful.