(08-19-2020 11:13 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote: Am I living on entirely different planet? (Yes, that's a rhetorical question - from the comments that I've seen from many quarters, I apparently *am* living on a different planet.)
UNC and Notre Dame (decidedly not Big Ten schools) just went to all-remote instruction after having students on-campus for barely a week. In only a week, UNC went from a 3% positivity rate to an insanely high 14% positivity rate for testing. Is anyone delusional enough to think that they're going to be the only ones? How do schools shutting their entire campuses down point to *more* support for playing football over the coming weeks (outside of preserving revenue over public health)?
These parents that are frothing at the mouth for their kids to play would also be the first ones in line to sue these schools in the event that any of them developed a heart condition or other side effect from getting COVID-19. Why on Earth would I listen to them if I was running a university?
My main disappointment as a Big Ten alum is the exposure of how many deluded Big Ten fans exist out there. I still firmly believe that this will end up being a non-debate within the next few weeks - we can't be emptying out UNC and Notre Dame within a week of students being on-campus and simultaneously think that any conference is going to be playing football this fall (much less the crazy notion of the Big Ten backtracking on its decision).
If people want to criticize the Big Ten for its lack of communication, then that's fair. I actually agree on that point. However, considering where UNC and Notre Dame are right now as the canaries in the coal mine for students on-campus this fall, I'm failing to see how anyone sees the public health evidence that support that the conferences and schools that have postponed football are going to backtrack. In all likelihood, it's going to be the exact opposite where we're not going to see any football games this fall anywhere.
To address the bolded points:
1) No, sadly, you, meaning your views, are very much living on this planet. Meaning that among the elites who are calling the shots, outbreaks of the virus such as have been seen at UNC and Notre Dame are indeed viewed as very valid and compelling reasons to shut things down, like athletics and the school campus. Those of us who think those moves are unjustified are unfortunately a clear minority among decision makers. So there is a bit of mutual-cheering among a minority going on in this thread.
The sad reality is that the SEC is much more likely to cancel football this fall than the B1G is to revive it. Way more likely.
2) IMO, there are no parents "frothing at the mouth" and we have no idea if they would file a lawsuit if their kids were hurt by Covid.
But we do know that as of now, B1G Commissioner Warren is OK with his son playing football down at Mississippi State.
3) The public health evidence does not, in and of itself, support a decision to cancel football or close campuses. That evidence can only tell decision makers what is likely to happen in terms of virus spread if campuses are kept open or football played, it can't tell them how to weigh the costs (health, monetary) of that virus spread against the costs of not having classes on campus, or football. That weighing is a value judgment. And as I indicated above, sadly, the values of the elites running these schools is a "lockdown mentality" one where they believe that shutting things down is worth it to stop the spread of a virus that kills about 1 in 300 people overall, and far fewer than that among college-age students. Even sans evidence that the virus would spread less if the kids are not on campus.
But those are the values were are stuck with, so your predictions about fall football are all likely to come true.
/
Ohio St. leading Big 10 rebellion
![[Image: franklin-gallup-1.jpg]](https://wirepoints.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/franklin-gallup-1.jpg)
