The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(05-16-2020 02:00 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  If someone can explain to me what a college is going to do the first time they get a Covid-19 cluster please do tell. I just can't see how they play football let alone with fans this fall. The primary mission is educate students they can still do that online and open up later when we have a treatment or vaccine. I can't how selfish and money hungry this nation is, its actually very sad.

German soccer began today. Italy was probably the hardest hit country in the world per capita and starts the second week of June. For some reason we've had no team sports commit to resuming their seasons. To say our country is money hungry and selfish is just wrong. Playing in the fall shouldn't even be a discussion, the only discussion should center around how many fans will be allowed.

Sent from my SM-T720 using Tapatalk

(05-16-2020 02:00 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  If someone can explain to me what a college is going to do the first time they get a Covid-19 cluster please do tell. I just can't see how they play football let alone with fans this fall. The primary mission is educate students they can still do that online and open up later when we have a treatment or vaccine. I can't how selfish and money hungry this nation is, its actually very sad.

And when is that vaccine coming?
Six months, two years, never?

The WHO just announced that those expecting a vaccine in 2020 are being overly optimistic, and that it may very well be that there is NEVER a vaccine, and that Covid-19 is something that will never go away and that we may have to learn to live with it as a seasonal virus.

Do you suggest we accept never having open college campuses again, never having college athletics again?

I don’t understand this fantasyland thinking of “stay closed down until a cure / a vaccine”.

How quickly some in our society have been to accept a transition from “quarantine and accept restrictions on your freedoms for 2 weeks so we don’t overwhelm our hospitals” to “quarantine and give up your freedoms for as long as we tell you to because, well just because”.

We have not seen a single hospital in this country become overwhelmed. And on the contrary, most are in financial downfall due to not having enough patients to pay to keep the lights on.

There is sufficient evidence out there to tell us what demographics are at risk, and college aged kids aren’t one of them.

I think were at a point where we should slowly reopen and assess the impact thereafter while determining how much interconnectedness we can accommodate. It would require a substantial amount of progress to justify mass gatherings like sporting events would require. But I'm fine with the idea of reopening with contingencies until we have a better idea of when the vaccine will arrive. If it reaches a point where vaccination efforts are futile, we can then start extrapolating the soft reopening restrictions toward more long term solutions.



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Back to the OP, I feel even more confident that there will be college football in the fall. The P5 commissioners held a conference call meeting with Roger Goddell and it seems another die has been cast to move in that direction...

Quote:The Power 5 conference commissioners recently had a conference call with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and are hoping to glean some insight from the league as it takes the lead in navigating football through the coronavirus pandemic, ACC commissioner John Swofford said on Thursday.

Swofford, who recently concluded virtual ACC spring meetings, told several reporters on a teleconference that the conversation with Goodell was "very positive" and that he thinks there will be more.

"They're ahead of us in terms of developing protocols as to how they can bring players back, and how they would test, and if they [are] playing before [when] a full stadium of fans were allowed, how many fans would be allowed in the stadium," Swofford said. "They have to deal with different state regulations just like we may have to deal with that, but from a medical standpoint, I think we can certainly learn from them as they move into their training camps and playing games because their cycle is ahead of ours."

Swofford said the commissioners have a preexisting relationship with the NFL that has helped the communication between the two. In December, they typically have a meeting in New York with NFL executives when they are there for the College Football Hall of Fame dinner.

SEC commissioner Greg Sankey said he wanted to protect that privacy of the call, but that they have the ability to "talk to any number of people associated with the professional leagues" who are dealing with many of the same questions and issues.

"Each of us on every side of every phone call can learn a bit in this time," he said. "The more we can learn, the better decisions we'll make."

Last month, the College Football Playoff management committee spoke to Vice President Mike Pence about the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on college athletics, and the commissioners stressed to Pence how different the college landscape is from that of professional leagues. Swofford said that in spite of those differences -- the biggest being the closure of campuses around the country -- there still are plenty of benefits for both sides to continue conversations.

"We'll keep those lines of communication open and see what we can learn as they get back into training camps and preparing to play a season ahead of us," Swofford said. "That can be a good thing in terms of us seeing what works for them and understanding what may not work so well for them and seeing how it can apply to the college game."

NFL Advising Power Conferences

(05-16-2020 02:00 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  If someone can explain to me what a college is going to do the first time they get a Covid-19 cluster please do tell. I just can't see how they play football let alone with fans this fall. The primary mission is educate students they can still do that online and open up later when we have a treatment or vaccine. I can't how selfish and money hungry this nation is, its actually very sad.

This may be the answer:

Quote:Wednesday afternoon, 14 college presidents from around the country gathered in front of their computers. On their screens they saw their peers, along with Vice President Mike Pence and U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, who asked what they needed to reopen their campuses in the fall.

The presidents spoke about the need to be able to do more testing for the coronavirus, according to those who were either on the call or were knowledgeable about the conversation. But the presidents also said they needed to know their college wouldn’t get sued if anyone got sick, which is almost inevitable.

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

(05-16-2020 04:35 PM)Cataclysmo Wrote:  I think were at a point where we should slowly reopen and assess the impact thereafter while determining how much interconnectedness we can accommodate. It would require a substantial amount of progress to justify mass gatherings like sporting events would require. But I'm fine with the idea of reopening with contingencies until we have a better idea of when the vaccine will arrive. If it reaches a point where vaccination efforts are futile, we can then start extrapolating the soft reopening restrictions toward more long term solutions.



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

^This.
A measure of common sense. Slowly reopen and watch the cases/deaths.
Mass gatherings can not be risked because we just don't know.
It's a new virus and we are learning as we go which makes the decision-making for everyone from the president to your local grocery store manager difficult.

(05-16-2020 10:30 PM)eroc Wrote:  

(05-16-2020 02:00 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  If someone can explain to me what a college is going to do the first time they get a Covid-19 cluster please do tell. I just can't see how they play football let alone with fans this fall. The primary mission is educate students they can still do that online and open up later when we have a treatment or vaccine. I can't how selfish and money hungry this nation is, its actually very sad.

This may be the answer:

Quote:Wednesday afternoon, 14 college presidents from around the country gathered in front of their computers. On their screens they saw their peers, along with Vice President Mike Pence and U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, who asked what they needed to reopen their campuses in the fall.

The presidents spoke about the need to be able to do more testing for the coronavirus, according to those who were either on the call or were knowledgeable about the conversation. But the presidents also said they needed to know their college wouldn’t get sued if anyone got sick, which is almost inevitable.

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.

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

(05-16-2020 10:30 PM)eroc Wrote:  

(05-16-2020 02:00 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  If someone can explain to me what a college is going to do the first time they get a Covid-19 cluster please do tell. I just can't see how they play football let alone with fans this fall. The primary mission is educate students they can still do that online and open up later when we have a treatment or vaccine. I can't how selfish and money hungry this nation is, its actually very sad.

This may be the answer:

Quote:Wednesday afternoon, 14 college presidents from around the country gathered in front of their computers. On their screens they saw their peers, along with Vice President Mike Pence and U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, who asked what they needed to reopen their campuses in the fall.

The presidents spoke about the need to be able to do more testing for the coronavirus, according to those who were either on the call or were knowledgeable about the conversation. But the presidents also said they needed to know their college wouldn’t get sued if anyone got sick, which is almost inevitable.

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.

That right there is the crux of the issue. If UC gets sued, none of this will be worth it...and they would ABSOLUTELY get sued unless significant protections are afforded Universities. The one thing UC has going for it that many others dont is a robust health system that treats students from two blocks away.

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

(05-16-2020 10:30 PM)eroc Wrote:  

(05-16-2020 02:00 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  If someone can explain to me what a college is going to do the first time they get a Covid-19 cluster please do tell. I just can't see how they play football let alone with fans this fall. The primary mission is educate students they can still do that online and open up later when we have a treatment or vaccine. I can't how selfish and money hungry this nation is, its actually very sad.

This may be the answer:

Quote:Wednesday afternoon, 14 college presidents from around the country gathered in front of their computers. On their screens they saw their peers, along with Vice President Mike Pence and U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, who asked what they needed to reopen their campuses in the fall.

The presidents spoke about the need to be able to do more testing for the coronavirus, according to those who were either on the call or were knowledgeable about the conversation. But the presidents also said they needed to know their college wouldn’t get sued if anyone got sick, which is almost inevitable.

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.

The population distribution of a college campus and the general population are quite different and thus your assumptions are bogus.

If we are talking under 80. Might want to change that 1% number your using^

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

(05-16-2020 10:30 PM)eroc Wrote:  

(05-16-2020 02:00 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  If someone can explain to me what a college is going to do the first time they get a Covid-19 cluster please do tell. I just can't see how they play football let alone with fans this fall. The primary mission is educate students they can still do that online and open up later when we have a treatment or vaccine. I can't how selfish and money hungry this nation is, its actually very sad.

This may be the answer:

Quote:Wednesday afternoon, 14 college presidents from around the country gathered in front of their computers. On their screens they saw their peers, along with Vice President Mike Pence and U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, who asked what they needed to reopen their campuses in the fall.

The presidents spoke about the need to be able to do more testing for the coronavirus, according to those who were either on the call or were knowledgeable about the conversation. But the presidents also said they needed to know their college wouldn’t get sued if anyone got sick, which is almost inevitable.

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.

College campuses, though young, are also disproportionately clustered. We have nearly 50,000 people roaming West campus in a given week. That's over 150,000 people per square mile. Then consider how many people are over on medical campus, not just at UC but at children's, the VA, Shriner's, etc. People who, again, are likely skewed young, but still have a high vulnerable at-risk population. Especially all the hospital patients with preexisting conditions.

I'm in favor of reopening. But it's foolish to think this will be simple.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

(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:  

(05-16-2020 02:00 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  If someone can explain to me what a college is going to do the first time they get a Covid-19 cluster please do tell. I just can't see how they play football let alone with fans this fall. The primary mission is educate students they can still do that online and open up later when we have a treatment or vaccine. I can't how selfish and money hungry this nation is, its actually very sad.

This may be the answer:

Quote:Wednesday afternoon, 14 college presidents from around the country gathered in front of their computers. On their screens they saw their peers, along with Vice President Mike Pence and U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, who asked what they needed to reopen their campuses in the fall.

The presidents spoke about the need to be able to do more testing for the coronavirus, according to those who were either on the call or were knowledgeable about the conversation. But the presidents also said they needed to know their college wouldn’t get sued if anyone got sick, which is almost inevitable.

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.

(05-17-2020 07:50 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote:  College campuses, though young, are also disproportionately clustered. We have nearly 50,000 people roaming West campus in a given week. That's over 150,000 people per square mile. Then consider how many people are over on medical campus, not just at UC but at children's, the VA, Shriner's, etc. People who, again, are likely skewed young, but still have a high vulnerable at-risk population. Especially all the hospital patients with preexisting conditions.

I'm in favor of reopening. But it's foolish to think this will be simple.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Yep, the state has seen that and is having each institution create 5 separate plans for reopening based on 5 scenarios that could be in place by August:

1) Conditions remain as they are now (worst case scenario)
2) 14 Consecutive Days of Statewide transmission decline
3) 14 Consecutive Days of both Statewide and Local transmission decline
4) 28 Consecutive Days of both Statewide and Local transmission decline
5) Pandemic is declared "over"

I could see us being somewhere between 2 and 3 by then, and most submissions I've seen from Universities within the state have 50/50 online vs. in person course offerings with most auxiliary services open (Rec Centers, Dining Halls, Residence Halls) with restrictions to concurrent use (limited students in residence halls, capacity limits in dining/rec, athletics resuming with limited capacities or no fans).

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

(05-17-2020 08:32 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(05-17-2020 07:50 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote:  College campuses, though young, are also disproportionately clustered. We have nearly 50,000 people roaming West campus in a given week. That's over 150,000 people per square mile. Then consider how many people are over on medical campus, not just at UC but at children's, the VA, Shriner's, etc. People who, again, are likely skewed young, but still have a high vulnerable at-risk population. Especially all the hospital patients with preexisting conditions.

I'm in favor of reopening. But it's foolish to think this will be simple.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Yep, the state has seen that and is having each institution create 5 separate plans for reopening based on 5 scenarios that could be in place by August:

1) Conditions remain as they are now (worst case scenario)
2) 14 Consecutive Days of Statewide transmission decline
3) 14 Consecutive Days of both Statewide and Local transmission decline
4) 28 Consecutive Days of both Statewide and Local transmission decline
5) Pandemic is declared "over"

I could see us being somewhere between 2 and 3 by then, and most submissions I've seen from Universities within the state have 50/50 online vs. in person course offerings with most auxiliary services open (Rec Centers, Dining Halls, Residence Halls) with restrictions to concurrent use (limited students in residence halls, capacity limits in dining/rec, athletics resuming with limited capacities or no fans).

Well-reasoned and based on watching to see how this goes.
We will know more over the coming weeks as things reopen.

Everyone wants things back to normal but for now — things are not normal.
The virus did not miraculously go away with the lifting of restrictions.

I want a football season as much as anyone — whether we have one viewed in person or only on tv — however, I am not willing to take needless risk of spreading Covid19 to have a football season.
Football is not an essential activity.

(05-17-2020 07:50 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote:  College campuses, though young, are also disproportionately clustered. We have nearly 50,000 people roaming West campus in a given week. That's over 150,000 people per square mile. Then consider how many people are over on medical campus, not just at UC but at children's, the VA, Shriner's, etc. People who, again, are likely skewed young, but still have a high vulnerable at-risk population. Especially all the hospital patients with preexisting conditions.

I'm in favor of reopening. But it's foolish to think this will be simple.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

What does the hospitals (VA, Shriners, Children's) have to do with the main campus reopening?

(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.)

(05-17-2020 08:50 AM)doss2 Wrote:  

(05-17-2020 07:50 AM)Cataclysmo Wrote:  College campuses, though young, are also disproportionately clustered. We have nearly 50,000 people roaming West campus in a given week. That's over 150,000 people per square mile. Then consider how many people are over on medical campus, not just at UC but at children's, the VA, Shriner's, etc. People who, again, are likely skewed young, but still have a high vulnerable at-risk population. Especially all the hospital patients with preexisting conditions.

I'm in favor of reopening. But it's foolish to think this will be simple.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

What does the hospitals (VA, Shriners, Children's) have to do with the main campus reopening?

There is crossover — UC students do internships and practicums in those facilities and the workers in those facilities go to the same restaurants, stores in Clifton etc as students.

(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:  

(05-16-2020 02:00 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  If someone can explain to me what a college is going to do the first time they get a Covid-19 cluster please do tell. I just can't see how they play football let alone with fans this fall. The primary mission is educate students they can still do that online and open up later when we have a treatment or vaccine. I can't how selfish and money hungry this nation is, its actually very sad.

This may be the answer:

Quote:Wednesday afternoon, 14 college presidents from around the country gathered in front of their computers. On their screens they saw their peers, along with Vice President Mike Pence and U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, who asked what they needed to reopen their campuses in the fall.

The presidents spoke about the need to be able to do more testing for the coronavirus, according to those who were either on the call or were knowledgeable about the conversation. But the presidents also said they needed to know their college wouldn’t get sued if anyone got sick, which is almost inevitable.

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.