(09-08-2020 10:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  It doesnt matter. Its what Ive been saying all along. Not playing football this season bestows NO special immunity against Covid or its effects. You can get Covid just as easily from a trip to Walmart as you can from a trip to the end zone.

Yep.

(09-08-2020 08:09 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  I think the bigger question is whether it will have any effect on the mindset of the ACC, Big 12 or SEC.

Call my thinking perverse if you want, but this is an example of a school that is NOT playing football having a player die, so that would seem to be a mark against those that have shut down their football programs because it is allegedly safer than playing. If anything, it should cause the B1G/PAC to think twice about their decision not to play, not cause the SEC et al to reconsider playing.

(09-09-2020 09:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-08-2020 10:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  It doesnt matter. Its what Ive been saying all along. Not playing football this season bestows NO special immunity against Covid or its effects. You can get Covid just as easily from a trip to Walmart as you can from a trip to the end zone.

Yep.

Might be true although hotels and airports will certainly raise your risk. But if this happens at a school that's playing football, especially from a Power 5 school then a huge **** storm will follow for that school and CFB in general.

(09-09-2020 09:45 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 09:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-08-2020 10:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  It doesnt matter. Its what Ive been saying all along. Not playing football this season bestows NO special immunity against Covid or its effects. You can get Covid just as easily from a trip to Walmart as you can from a trip to the end zone.

Yep.

Might be true although hotels and airports will certainly raise your risk. But if this happens at a school that's playing football, especially from a Power 5 school then a huge **** storm will follow for that school and CFB in general.

Amongst the canceling conferences, there seems to be a belief that if players aren't playing, then they will be cloistered in home bubbles wearing masks and socially distancing 24-7, such that it's safer for them to not be playing.

But it might be the case that playing players are actually safer. During the season, football players naturally exist in a quasi-bubble, they spend most of their time with their teams, at practices and holed up in meetings, film sessions, hotels, traveling, etc. They don't have as much time for partying and socializing. And the teams that are playing are doing a lot more testing than those that aren't.

This death is definitely a mark against the idea that if football players aren't playing, they are somehow "safe" from the virus.

The only thing we know that canceling football and moving classes online does for sure is improve the image of the school in the eyes of liberal media elites. It also allows the school to wash its hands of any responsibility for outbreaks caused by students dispersed to the four winds. Whether it actually makes students "safer" or not is unknown.

David St, please explain to me how playing football this season caused this young man to die.

(09-09-2020 07:02 AM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(09-08-2020 10:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  It doesnt matter. Its what Ive been saying all along. Not playing football this season bestows NO special immunity against Covid or its effects. You can get Covid just as easily from a trip to Walmart as you can from a trip to the end zone. When this is all over, we will find that the infection rate among players that did not play will be little to no different than the infection rate of those that did play.

That said, if its too dangerous for 20 year olds (an age group where the fatality rate approaches zero) to play football, then anyone required to continue to work in an "essential" industry job should be getting hazard pay from the government---especially those over 55. Every grocery worker, hospital worker, utility worker, or trucker should get a big fat check for "risking their lives in this unsafe environment". I wouildnt hold my breath.

I'll bet their infection rate is actually higher than those playing football, but we won't have enough testing data to know. Those that aren't playing football won't have curfews or coaches keeping an eye on them or their time taken up with practices and other team activities.

It's also well known that early detection improves prognosis which is what athletes playing football will surely get with frequent testing while those practicing probably not as much and those doing no team activities won't get at all.

Anyone looking at this objectively can see these guys are safer having a season.

That would not surprise me at all--considering that the teams are doing an excessive amount of testing (compared to the general population) and cleaning everything in sight to try to keep those players infection free.

(09-09-2020 08:23 AM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 07:23 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 07:02 AM)EigenEagle Wrote:  Anyone looking at this objectively can see these guys are safer having a season.

You make it seem like the schools have this down as well as the NBA or NHL do. They don’t. And it’s not like they have a bunch of money lying around just to get it to that point. Or extra cash in case they’re sued.

Elitist as it is, I defer to the Ivies, who do have the pockets to spare. It wasn’t worth the risk for them. That should be enough for the rest who aren’t nearly as stocked.

If they Ivy League was willing to spend money in football,they wouldn't be in FCS not participating in the playoffs and only willing to play non-conference opponents in their region. Plus like a lot FCS programs they'll probably save money not having a season. They're a terrible barometer.

Obviously FBS colleges don't have quite have the resources of pro teams, but it's really hard to say with the testing protocols in place they're any less safe roaming campus and around town.

As to the second paragraph, what’s hard about it?

And the Ivy hurts from this just like the others. They even player a shorter season, start later, and don’t participate in the playoffs, so they could have easily waited to call things off. And those rivalry games and homecoming weekends...sports are often a centerpiece for events meant to rake in donations. It hurts them to not have those games in place. And not just football, even if the schools treat the sport differently than others they run. Athletics just serve more of a traditional role there as a component of all college operations and meant to serve and advance the mission of the institution.