(09-14-2020 03:46 PM)Unionman76 Wrote:  (sounds like this was an over hyped event by the houston media, so they could get
out of the memphis game and schedule the baylor game, it happen too fast to
not have been planned )

no kidding

Getting back to the statistics; here is what we know to be factual (notwithstanding the scam diagnoses), about covid in the US among those aged 15-24.

COVID
- 6% of deaths attributed to covid only
- 94% had at least one other underlying comorbidity

PLAYER AGE GROUP SPECIFIC
- 315 Deaths among those aged 15-24
- Assume 10% have no other serious underlying medical conditions, no other comorbidities (give the benefit of the doubt).
- Give the benefit of the doubt, all deaths among those 18-24
CDC Covid Deaths 15-24
- 21,630 million Americans between the ages of 15-24
US Population By Age

So if we assume that 10% of deaths involve no other comorbidities and we assume that no NCAA D1 players have any, here is what we can say about the chances of dying from covid as a D1 NCAA player.

COVID AGE 19-24
- Assume that NCAA players with any comorbidity is being held out
- 32 deaths
- 21,630 population
- A mortality rate of roughly 1.5 per million

Now to the fear mongering, from the CDC itself.

Quote:Dr. Sheldon Jacobson told CBS Sports he expects a 30%-50% infection rate of the approximately 13,000 players competing in FBS this season. Based on his research, he also projects 3-7 deaths among those players due to COVID-19. Taking into account that range and medical care provided for football players, the death rate would be lower than the general population, Jacobson said.

The CDC projects 3-7 deaths from a pool of 13,000 NCAA players. So far, out of a pool of 21,630,000 in the US between the ages of 15-24, there have been 315 covid deaths in this age group. This projects to .19 total deaths and that doesn't even take into account that none of the NCAA players will have a comorbidity, which is responsible for 94% of all covid deaths.

USA CAUSE OF DEATH 15-24 (per million)
SOURCE: CDC NATIONAL VITAL STATISTICS REPORT
CDC NVSR
1,480 Overall
226 Homicide
311 Accidents
177 Firearm
145 Suicide
130 Accidental Overdose
30 Involuntary Alcohol Poisoning
21 Heart disease
14.5 Covid
1.5 Covid (no comorbidities)

So, we all understand that every life is precious, every death is tragic. We all understand that personal tragedy isn't bound by statistics or percentages. When people want everything to open up, they aren't saying that they want everyone to die. When people say to keep everything shut down, they don't want everyone to enter into poverty or commit suicide.

The trick is to find a balance between the two. Based on the data and the science, it seems that playing football is the obvious choice for four reasons. One, the players are tested at an exponentially higher rate than the general public. Two, almost nobody in their age group dies even if they become infected. Three, they have access to very high quality medical care. Four, there is a much better chance that the virus can be detected which will prevent the players from unknowingly spreading it to others.

Feel free to try and dispute any of this.

(09-14-2020 03:06 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(09-14-2020 03:02 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(09-14-2020 02:58 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(09-14-2020 11:23 AM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(09-14-2020 11:22 AM)Stammers Wrote:  IF you disagree with macgar32, you are guaranteed to be right. As an example; this is the guy that claimed that Henderson was a good but not great back who didn't make plays, he just zig zagged around and ran by defenders.

He also keeps saying that we’ll have to forfeit games due to COVID

What is reasonable about knowingly allowing kids who have tested positive for COVID to go out on the field and play a game and put everyone else on the field at risk...He said there is no issue with it because they wouldn't get sick if they played with COVID.

So yeah I posted a sarcastic comment to make a parody of his position.

Sorry... I just thought that no one could be that dumb, and was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Guess I was wrong.

You are aware that the jury is still out on whether having COVID once prevents you from getting it again, right? And no one is sure how long it might last IF there is actual immunity?

What am I saying... You still think teams are forfeiting due to COVID.

WTH are you talking about...Eric was the one who said let the kids with COVID play.

You are such blatant liar, I said ideally they should be quarantined for 10-14 days THEN allowed to play if that was possible.

You are incapable of having an honest discussion.

(09-12-2020 02:29 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(09-12-2020 01:59 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  IMO they should still be allowed to play. If its necessary to keep them quarantined or something till game day, fine.

But the simple undeniable fact is there is nearly a ZERO percent chance anyone them will get sick or die, and virtually a ZERO percent chance they will infect someone who will get sick and die.

They are LITERALLY more likely to die in a car accident or 100 other things. Not only the players, but everyone they come in contract with. Which would be very few people if they kept them in a tight bubble for 10-14 days.

Its time we stop panicking over positive tests in healthy young people. Just keep them in a bubble and away from old or high risk people.

That is far too logical and obvious response though for it to actually happen in 2020.

Do you quarantine anyone who has come in contact with players during the game?

That is over 140 people.

What about the refs...The Linesmen...Stadium staff.

Is that a lie...

These are your words....Allowed to play. They may still have Covid on gameday...And you logic is they wont infect anyone who may die.

This may not be what you meant...But this is what your post states. You don't state that they must have x number of negative tests and quarantine for X days afterwards (Which likely is the current policy)

Quote:IMO they should still be allowed to play. If its necessary to keep them quarantined or something till game day, fine.

The university professor who originally sounded the alarm that playing college football could lead to 40% infection rates - and that was cited by the B1G and the PAC - has changed his position. He re-analyzed after getting numbers from training camps, and feels like teams are keeping things under control. Early results are that the numbers from football programs are not any different from numbers within the overall demographics. That is, the risks for players are not greater than the risks for their peers in the student body.

At least that was his analysis in August. I would be curious to see his data now that the season has started and students are kinda back on campus. Unfortunately, I can't recall the guy's name and I can't locate the article I read about him.

It was a bit galling of him to say that the B1G and PAC over-reacted, when he was the one predicting huge outbreaks and multiple deaths of college players.

(09-14-2020 03:06 PM)macgar32 Wrote:  And I said 1 time that we are lucky we had a bye week or we may have had to forfeit a game...Because we would have had to reschedule two weeks worth of games if we didn't...Difficult to do.

There have been no forfeits this year. Even by teams who cancelled their entire seasons. For example, we did not go 1-0 over Purdue this year. You keep bringing up something that is entirely wrong. Like the guy who keeps saying the SCHD said they would let our attendance move to 10%.

(09-15-2020 10:46 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  The university professor who originally sounded the alarm that playing college football could lead to 40% infection rates - and that was cited by the B1G and the PAC - has changed his position. He re-analyzed after getting numbers from training camps, and feels like teams are keeping things under control. Early results are that the numbers from football programs are not any different from numbers within the overall demographics. That is, the risks for players are not greater than the risks for their peers in the student body.

At least that was his analysis in August. I would be curious to see his data now that the season has started and students are kinda back on campus. Unfortunately, I can't recall the guy's name and I can't locate the article I read about him.

It was a bit galling of him to say that the B1G and PAC over-reacted, when he was the one predicting huge outbreaks and multiple deaths of college players.

Quote:Early results are that the numbers from football programs are not any different from numbers within the overall demographics. That is, the risks for players are not greater than the risks for their peers in the student body.

He predicted 3-7 deaths from a pool of 13,000 players. There have been 315 deaths from a pool of 21,630,000 US citizens. Going straight down the middle and assuming 5 deaths; that would project to 8,319 deaths among the peer group in the country. A slight difference of 26 times the number of deaths in the general population. Just a little mistake, no big deal, the same as saying 4 million deaths instead of 250,000 deaths.

Quote:Dr. Sheldon Jacobson told CBS Sports he expects a 30%-50% infection rate of the approximately 13,000 players competing in FBS this season. Based on his research, he also projects 3-7 deaths among those players due to COVID-19. Taking into account that range and medical care provided for football players, the death rate would be lower than the general population, Jacobson said.

The CDC projects 3-7 deaths from a pool of 13,000 NCAA players. So far, out of a pool of 21,630,000 in the US between the ages of 15-24, there have been 315 covid deaths. This projects to .19 total deaths and that doesn't even take into account that none of the NCAA players will have any comorbidities; which are often the sole causes of death, and most often at least a major factor in 94% of all covid deaths.

The CDC thinks it's no big deal to spread the word that the virus can't be spread from human to human and China is doing a great job, then say that the virus won't be a threat and you can travel to China and go to the Super Bowl, then that there will be 2-4 million deaths, then we can open up when we flatten the curve, then 3 months after every curve is flattened, come up with new rules, no masks, then masks. No big deal.

They are all still getting paid.

(09-15-2020 01:32 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(09-15-2020 10:46 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  The university professor who originally sounded the alarm that playing college football could lead to 40% infection rates - and that was cited by the B1G and the PAC - has changed his position. He re-analyzed after getting numbers from training camps, and feels like teams are keeping things under control. Early results are that the numbers from football programs are not any different from numbers within the overall demographics. That is, the risks for players are not greater than the risks for their peers in the student body.

At least that was his analysis in August. I would be curious to see his data now that the season has started and students are kinda back on campus. Unfortunately, I can't recall the guy's name and I can't locate the article I read about him.

It was a bit galling of him to say that the B1G and PAC over-reacted, when he was the one predicting huge outbreaks and multiple deaths of college players.

He predicted 3-7 deaths from a pool of 13,000 players. There have been 315 deaths from a pool of 21,630,000 US citizens. Going straight down the middle and assuming 5 deaths; that would project to 8,319 deaths among the peer group in the country. A slight difference of 26 times the number of deaths in the general population. Just a little mistake, no big deal, the same as saying 4 million deaths instead of 250,000 deaths.

Dr. Sheldon Jacobson told CBS Sports he expects a 30%-50% infection rate of the approximately 13,000 players competing in FBS this season. Based on his research, he also projects 3-7 deaths among those players due to COVID-19. Taking into account that range and medical care provided for football players, the death rate would be lower than the general population, Jacobson said.

Yeah that's the guy. I found the updated article I was referencing.

https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/co...368291001/

And another column authored by Jacobson where he really shows he's changed his position.

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/...371380001/