Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
College Football Attendance Trends
Author Message
Stugray2 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,753
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 278
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #21
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-02-2021 11:54 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  
(04-02-2021 11:28 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(04-02-2021 08:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-02-2021 07:47 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(04-01-2021 10:44 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  Ticket prices seem to be slightly lower except for the big rivalry games, of course.
Yes, football is still popular.
Given that the governor of Georgia is trying to open up the state, and Alabama is about to do so also, I would say that Covid-19 isn't scaring everyone, but I wouldn't say that is unanimous across the state or the Deep South. Covid-19 still scares quite a few folks down here.

New cases are down in Georgia, which is good. That said, another 132 people died of COVID in the last 2 days in the Peach State, which is obviously not good (average of 66 per day). I'm guessing that number will begin to drop soon - provided they don't do something to drive up the new cases and start another cycle, that is.

There seems to be a lot of pushback against taking the vaccine, which is a concern. Some of those are the very same people who refuse to wear masks, making it a double-whammy. I just hope the governors do what it takes to eradicate this pandemic before football season!

Masks and whatever are pretty meaningless at this point, IMO. Not in a scientific sense, whatever the scientists say about them, sure. But in the more important values sense, what we should care about. It's about the vaccine, and we are vaccinating over 3 million people a day. At that rate we will have the vast majority vaccinated within a matter of months.

If some don't want to get the vaccine, that's their business, they are exposing themselves, well, as much as we can say someone is exposing themselves to a weak virus that kills about 1 in 300 infected, and far lower than that if you aren't over 80 years old. And if you want to say "well they are also possibly exposing those who are vulnerable" well the vulnerable are getting vaccines so not a problem.

We should be good to go for football.

I don't disagree with your conclusion, but you are promoting inaccurate statistics. The total number of cases in the Unites States is 31,259,758. The total number of deaths from COVID-19 is 566,772. That works out to 1.8%, or 1 in 55 -- far from your estimate of 1 in 300 (almost 6X worse). If you're going to quote stats, at least try to be accurate - there's been too much misinformation floating around already.

The total number of cases IMHO is much higher as many were asymptomatic.

Possibly. Estimates of actual infected range from 50% to 300% higher. The truth is probably much closer to the low estimate, as early on there was no testing, but now testing is much more frequent and inclusive. That has actually been the case during the majority of the break out. The many multiples estimates were from the first few months, and probably were no longer valid by the Fall of 2020. The high multiple concept has been keep up in certain circles as part of a political campaign, one side's effort at drawing a culture war line (yes both sides are drawing lines, both sides ignore science when it doesn't align with their politics).

The bottom line is this virus has a very high R, meaning it spreads extremely easily, it has been mutating RNA that threatens to make it constantly recurring if not stamped out worldwide soon (variants mean we will probably need a 2nd set of shots in a couple years to incorporate the variant strains with different spike RNA), and it has killed more Americans in 15 months than we lost in the WWII. The excess deaths have been running significantly above normal - this despite much lower traffic deaths (fewer cars on the road) and lower seasonal flu deaths (side benefit of wearing masks and social distancing -- also tells you how much more contagious CoVid is that these measures did not slow the spread near as much as it did the flu).

What you should understand is that the lower death rate many believe is based on estimates of multiple from the early days when testing was not as widespread or frequent. But those conditions are no longer valid and have not been for at least 6 to 9 months.
04-02-2021 12:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 38,799
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1230
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #22
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-02-2021 11:28 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(04-02-2021 08:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-02-2021 07:47 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(04-01-2021 10:44 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  
(03-30-2021 07:27 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  Ok a general past truism: if your team did well in 2020 or there is hype your team should be better in 2021 that attendance should improve.

What is the consensus out there?

Is your school raising ticket prices?
Is Football popular still?
Any indication that Covid-19 will still keep folks afraid?

Ticket prices seem to be slightly lower except for the big rivalry games, of course.
Yes, football is still popular.
Given that the governor of Georgia is trying to open up the state, and Alabama is about to do so also, I would say that Covid-19 isn't scaring everyone, but I wouldn't say that is unanimous across the state or the Deep South. Covid-19 still scares quite a few folks down here.

New cases are down in Georgia, which is good. That said, another 132 people died of COVID in the last 2 days in the Peach State, which is obviously not good (average of 66 per day). I'm guessing that number will begin to drop soon - provided they don't do something to drive up the new cases and start another cycle, that is.

There seems to be a lot of pushback against taking the vaccine, which is a concern. Some of those are the very same people who refuse to wear masks, making it a double-whammy. I just hope the governors do what it takes to eradicate this pandemic before football season!

Masks and whatever are pretty meaningless at this point, IMO. Not in a scientific sense, whatever the scientists say about them, sure. But in the more important values sense, what we should care about. It's about the vaccine, and we are vaccinating over 3 million people a day. At that rate we will have the vast majority vaccinated within a matter of months.

If some don't want to get the vaccine, that's their business, they are exposing themselves, well, as much as we can say someone is exposing themselves to a weak virus that kills about 1 in 300 infected, and far lower than that if you aren't over 80 years old. And if you want to say "well they are also possibly exposing those who are vulnerable" well the vulnerable are getting vaccines so not a problem.

We should be good to go for football.

I don't disagree with your conclusion, but you are promoting inaccurate statistics. The total number of cases in the Unites States is 31,259,758. The total number of deaths from COVID-19 is 566,772. That works out to 1.8%, or 1 in 55 -- far from your estimate of 1 in 300 (almost 6X worse). If you're going to quote stats, at least try to be accurate - there's been too much misinformation floating around already.

Eh, you just described the "Case fatality rate", but I made reference to the "Infection fatality rate". Those are not the same things. Not everyone who gets infected is a "case", as a case is only someone who goes to the doctor or other health facility and gets officially recorded as a case. From the WHO:

"There are two measures used to assess the proportion of infected individuals with fatal outcomes. The first is infection fatality ratio (IFR), which estimates this proportion of deaths among all infected individuals. The second is case fatality ratio (CFR), which estimates this proportion of deaths among identified confirmed cases."

And the IFR is more important, as it is the "true" morbidity of the virus, not merely what has been reported to the authorities.

Of course, what I quoted is an estimated median value, but the actual IFR varies dramatically by age. For people over 65, it's 9% or so. So you have to know your age and risk factors. Basically, if you are someone over 65 or have a serious comorbidity like asthma, then your IFR is much higher. If you're a 12 year old kid with no health issues, it's vanishingly smaller.

https://www.who.int/bulletin/online_firs...265892.pdf
(This post was last modified: 04-02-2021 02:57 PM by quo vadis.)
04-02-2021 01:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 38,799
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1230
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #23
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-02-2021 12:15 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  What you should understand is that the lower death rate many believe is based on estimates of multiple from the early days when testing was not as widespread or frequent. But those conditions are no longer valid and have not been for at least 6 to 9 months.

Eh, a bit, but not that much. Early last August, the CDC published a "best estimate" IFR for different age groups that looked like this, which I translate in to a survival rate by just flipping the percentage (e.g., an IFR of 1% translates to a survival rate of 99%):

Age 0-19 ..... 99.997%
Age 20-49 ... 99.98%
Age 50-69 ... 99.5%
Age 70+ .......94.6%

Now these are the updates for March 2021. For some reason they changed the age groups a bit:

Age 0-17 ....... 99.998%
Age 18-49....... 99.95%
Age 50-64 .......99.4%
Age 65+ ......... 91.1%

So the IFRs have edged up slightly for the youngest categories. It's gone up what I would regard as significantly for old folks, not just by 3.5% but also because that number reaches down 5 more years to 65 whereas before it was 70.

But IMO, these numbers show how weak the virus is (even among the elderly less than 1 in 10 die from it and for all other age groups the chances of death are extremely low) relative to how much we've upended society over it (we've upended it to an enormously high degree, IMO).

The data seem to suggest that if we had done nothing at all, no masking, lockdowns, distancing etc. and just let the virus run rampant, about 1.5 million Americans would have died. Instead, we upended society to save about half of those, assuming the final death toll is around 750,000 for the covid-year. IMO, that was absurd. Before Covid, about 2 million Americans died each year anyway from all causes, and we didn't upend society to protect them.

IMO, we should have done basically what the Barrington Group proposed: Extreme lockdowns and double-lock protection for the elderly in nursing homes and other care facilities, self-lockdowns for younger people with serious health issues, "freedom" for everyone else. It's precisely because the virus is drastically more dangerous to some easily identifiable sub-populations rather than uniformly affecting everyone that makes it tailor-made for targeted solutions rather than mass-societal shutdown and "everyone should do this, everyone should do that" solutions. But governments everywhere have gone the mass-shutdown approach.
(This post was last modified: 04-02-2021 03:22 PM by quo vadis.)
04-02-2021 02:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
The REAL BillyBobby
*

Posts: 10,688
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 401
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #24
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-02-2021 02:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-02-2021 12:15 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  What you should understand is that the lower death rate many believe is based on estimates of multiple from the early days when testing was not as widespread or frequent. But those conditions are no longer valid and have not been for at least 6 to 9 months.

Eh, a bit, but not that much. Early last August, the CDC published a "best estimate" IFR for different age groups that looked like this, which I translate in to a survival rate by just flipping the percentage (e.g., an IFR of 1% translates to a survival rate of 99%):

Age 0-19 ..... 99.997%
Age 20-49 ... 99.98%
Age 50-69 ... 99.5%
Age 70+ .......94.6%

Now these are the updates for March 2021. For some reason they changed the age groups a bit:

Age 0-17 ....... 99.998%
Age 18-49....... 99.95%
Age 50-64 .......99.4%
Age 65+ ......... 91.1%

So the IFRs have edged up slightly for the youngest categories. It's gone up what I would regard as significantly for old folks, not just by 3.5% but also because that number reaches down 5 more years to 65 whereas before it was 70.

But IMO, these numbers show how weak the virus is (even among the elderly less than 1 in 10 die from it and for all other age groups the chances of death are extremely low) relative to how much we've upended society over it (we've upended it to an enormously high degree, IMO).

The data seem to suggest that if we had done nothing at all, no masking, lockdowns, distancing etc. and just let the virus run rampant, about 1.5 million Americans would have died. Instead, we upended society to save about half of those, assuming the final death toll is around 750,000 for the covid-year. IMO, that was absurd. Before Covid, about 2 million Americans died each year anyway from all causes, and we didn't upend society to protect them.

IMO, we should have done basically what the Barrington Group proposed: Extreme lockdowns and double-lock protection for the elderly in nursing homes and other care facilities, self-lockdowns for younger people with serious health issues, "freedom" for everyone else. It's precisely because the virus is drastically more dangerous to some easily identifiable sub-populations rather than uniformly affecting everyone that makes it tailor-made for targeted solutions rather than mass-societal shutdown and "everyone should do this, everyone should do that" solutions. But governments everywhere have gone the mass-shutdown approach.

Great post. Agreed 100%.
Also, why is Dr Fauci who’s been vaccinated, still wearing 2 masks as he throws out the 1st pitch at baseball games?
04-02-2021 03:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,992
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 260
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #25
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-02-2021 03:38 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Great post. Agreed 100%.
Also, why is Dr Fauci who’s been vaccinated, still wearing 2 masks as he throws out the 1st pitch at baseball games?

If his second shot was more than two weeks ago, it would be because there are lots of idiots in the country who have not had their vaccination who would take it as support for not wearing a mask. Especially once the picture starts circulating in the Facebook lie factory with the fact that he HAS been vaccinated omitted from the storyline being pitched.
04-03-2021 09:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoastalVANDAL Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 454
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 11
I Root For: Idaho
Location:
Post: #26
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-03-2021 09:21 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(04-02-2021 03:38 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Great post. Agreed 100%.
Also, why is Dr Fauci who’s been vaccinated, still wearing 2 masks as he throws out the 1st pitch at baseball games?

If his second shot was more than two weeks ago, it would be because there are lots of idiots in the country who have not had their vaccination who would take it as support for not wearing a mask. Especially once the picture starts circulating in the Facebook lie factory with the fact that he HAS been vaccinated omitted from the storyline being pitched.

Exactly the people asking where did the flu go.
Common sense tells the rest of us distancing and mask wearing slowed the flu down as well as what Covid could have been. Half a million dead I'm not worried about the survival rate . It was predicted without safety measures the infection rate would be six times higher at least. The fear of a deadlier variant make the survival rate unimportant .
04-04-2021 08:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,992
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 260
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #27
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-04-2021 08:57 PM)CoastalVANDAL Wrote:  
(04-03-2021 09:21 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(04-02-2021 03:38 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Great post. Agreed 100%.
Also, why is Dr Fauci who’s been vaccinated, still wearing 2 masks as he throws out the 1st pitch at baseball games?

If his second shot was more than two weeks ago, it would be because there are lots of idiots in the country who have not had their vaccination who would take it as support for not wearing a mask. Especially once the picture starts circulating in the Facebook lie factory with the fact that he HAS been vaccinated omitted from the storyline being pitched.

Exactly the people asking where did the flu go.
Common sense tells the rest of us distancing and mask wearing slowed the flu down as well as what Covid could have been. Half a million dead I'm not worried about the survival rate . It was predicted without safety measures the infection rate would be six times higher at least. The fear of a deadlier variant make the survival rate unimportant .

It's not just that, it's also the fact that the survival rate for critical cases in adults 30-50 with effective hospital treatment is very high, and in adults 20-30 even higher, but those cases occupy hospital beds, and we already knew from the Milan experience that once the Hospital's capacity to provide oxygen hit its limit ... whether equipment, bed capacity in isolation wards or staff ... the death rate in different groups started following the triage decision, and younger people only had dramatically higher survival rates because they were the ones being given oxygen, and older people were left to survive or die as they would do without oxygen.

So people assuming that the IFR is a constant, and would have been the same under different policy responses and different infection rates, are making a critical assumption that is, as the scientists kept explaining, disconnected from reality.

I see this all the time in economic analyses ... some clever young punk with a model with all of the greek letters of the alphabet, with an impeccable mathematical derivation of the conclusions, but assuming that because he omitted an impact from his model, the real world is going to conveniently omit the same impact.

The fact is the countries that had a serious response early, whether a hard lockdown or near universal mask use with a soft lockdown for mass spreader events, were the countries able to get out of the lockdown in a much shorter period of time. Spending time arguing over which of the two was the superior response turned out to be the worst policy response of the three.

Either of those two could have been the US, but it would have taken an effective policy response, while the US seemed to be hoping that the epidemic could be sterilized by waves of hot air from cable opinion shows.
(This post was last modified: 04-04-2021 10:30 PM by BruceMcF.)
04-04-2021 10:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 38,799
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1230
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #28
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-04-2021 08:57 PM)CoastalVANDAL Wrote:  
(04-03-2021 09:21 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(04-02-2021 03:38 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Great post. Agreed 100%.
Also, why is Dr Fauci who’s been vaccinated, still wearing 2 masks as he throws out the 1st pitch at baseball games?

If his second shot was more than two weeks ago, it would be because there are lots of idiots in the country who have not had their vaccination who would take it as support for not wearing a mask. Especially once the picture starts circulating in the Facebook lie factory with the fact that he HAS been vaccinated omitted from the storyline being pitched.

Exactly the people asking where did the flu go.
Common sense tells the rest of us distancing and mask wearing slowed the flu down as well as what Covid could have been. Half a million dead I'm not worried about the survival rate .It was predicted without safety measures the infection rate would be six times higher at least. The fear of a deadlier variant make the survival rate unimportant .

About these comments:

"Half a million dead I'm not worried about the survival rate".

Personally, I like to know "out of what" because that helps me understand my personal risk and the risk of those around me. If I was suddenly transported to another planet and told "virus X will kill two billion people this year" I would want to know "out of how many", because if it is out of 4 billion I'm like "I need to hit the panic button yesterday" but if it's out of a trillion than "oh, no worries". Before covid-19, about 2 million people a year died in the USA from all causes. I never worried about the huge "2 million" number because I was aware of what things around me were a plausible threat to me and those around me. And as a country, we didn't grind society to a halt to do more to save those 2 million people either. Despite many mitigation efforts for different causes (e.g., spending billions to research cancer) society was basically "OK" with that number of people dying.

"It was predicted that without safety measures the infection rate would be six times as high at least".

Again, your risk is what the IFR is, not how many people are killed. An IFR is the % chance someone dies if they are infected. And yes, the IFR isn't one number, in this case, it varies significantly based on age and comorbidities, so I'd like to know those too.

"The fear of a deadlier variant make the survival rate unimportant ."

To you, fair enough. But I'm not in fear of something that hasn't happened. If a new variant, or an entirely new virus, emerges that has a mortality rate closer to a black mamba bite, I'll push the panic button too (see above). But I'm not going to live in fear in the present, when such a variant or virus is not an actual thing.
(This post was last modified: 04-05-2021 11:08 AM by quo vadis.)
04-05-2021 11:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 38,799
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1230
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #29
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-04-2021 10:25 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  The fact is the countries that had a serious response early, whether a hard lockdown or near universal mask use with a soft lockdown for mass spreader events, were the countries able to get out of the lockdown in a much shorter period of time.

Maybe, but then a lot of them went back in to one. E.g., France, Portugal, England, Germany, and Italy all went in to nationwide lockdowns in early to late March. All of them are either in some kind of lockdown right now or just got out of one (e.g., Italy's latest one ended April 30). France just went in to a new one.

The countries that seemed to get out of lockdowns earlier and had good results in terms of cases and deaths seem to be countries like China, which mobilized communist state power to close regions to a degree not possible in the USA, or islands like Ireland, New Zealand and Australia that have obvious geographical advantages.

FWIW, I don't doubt that lockdowns can, generally speaking, help stop the spread of a virus. But so could all of us jumping off a bridge. You have to look at the costs and benefits, and IMO that was never really done. The advice of public health experts, who are trained to only look at, and are only experts in, disease mitigation, not the overall costs of preventing a disease or deaths, was prioritized, and yes, prioritized even by the Trump administration.

As for IFR, yes, it varies by factors and it is always an estimate, never a rock-solid number. As mentioned earlier, the big ones seem to be age and recognized co-morbidities, which is why the CDC has published data on IFR by age, as age seems to be a huge factor. You mention hospitalization capacity, and that was the Great Fear last March, and of course it never materialized. It's not clear how important that is anyway - Africa isn't exactly a hot-spot for top quality hospitalization access and care, and yet Africa has a continent-wide IFR of about .23%, which is better than we in the USA, with our cutting edge capacity, has.

Of course, at a certain level, each of us has an unknown "individual IFR" risk simply because no two people have the exact same health and age profiles. But that doesn't mean looking at average profiles from similarly-situated people isn't useful. To me, it obviously is. That's why I look at the CDC data on it.

And here's the latest CDC "best estimate" data, converted to a survival rate:

Age 0-17 ......... 99.998%
Age 18-49........ 99.95%
Age 50-64 ........99.4%
Age 65+ .......... 91.1%

As mentioned above, these have actually gotten slightly *worse* since last summer, despite hospitals and care facilities being ramped up and presumably having climbed the learning curve on how to handle virus cases since then.

And whatever the "true" only God knows societal IFR, we do know that it's not a black mamba bite. It's way way weaker than that. Sadly, most people think the risks are higher than they are. That's one of the big myths about the virus - that Trump inspired "virus denial" has carried the day in terms of people's perceptions. In fact, the misapprehensions have run the other way, people of all stripes, including Republicans, think the risks of a bad outcome if you catch it are worse than they are. IMO, this explains persistent majority public support for "keeping society significantly closed" policies, despite their tremendous costs.

https://www.brookings.edu/research/how-m...xb15fPzkaI
(This post was last modified: 04-05-2021 11:56 AM by quo vadis.)
04-05-2021 11:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SoCalBobcat78 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,259
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 99
I Root For: TXST, UCLA, CBU
Location:
Post: #30
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-05-2021 11:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-04-2021 10:25 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  The fact is the countries that had a serious response early, whether a hard lockdown or near universal mask use with a soft lockdown for mass spreader events, were the countries able to get out of the lockdown in a much shorter period of time.

Maybe, but then a lot of them went back in to one. E.g., France, Portugal, England, Germany, and Italy all went in to nationwide lockdowns in early to late March. All of them are either in some kind of lockdown right now or just got out of one (e.g., Italy's latest one ended April 30). France just went in to a new one.

The countries that seemed to get out of lockdowns earlier and had good results in terms of cases and deaths seem to be countries like China, which mobilized communist state power to close regions to a degree not possible in the USA, or islands like Ireland, New Zealand and Australia that have obvious geographical advantages.

FWIW, I don't doubt that lockdowns can, generally speaking, help stop the spread of a virus. But so could all of us jumping off a bridge. You have to look at the costs and benefits, and IMO that was never really done. The advice of public health experts, who are trained to only look at, and are only experts in, disease mitigation, not the overall costs of preventing a disease or deaths, was prioritized, and yes, prioritized even by the Trump administration.

These are the statistics for cases and deaths by age group in California:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCD...Group.aspx

There have been 58,090 Covid-19 related deaths in California, 39.5% coming from the age group of 80 and over. That age group got hit hard, but the virus hit all age groups. The age group from 18-34 produced 33.4% of the cases and the age group from 35-49 produced 23.8% of the cases. I guess the lesson from this should be that these two age groups need to do a better job of not catching and spreading the virus, by wearing masks and avoiding bars and parties. I know, good luck with that.

What people don't see are the pressures put on hospital personnel by having every bed filled. California is the only state in the country to require by law specific number of nurses to patients in every hospital unit. It requires hospitals to provide one nurse for every two patients in intensive care and one nurse for every four patients in emergency rooms. The hospitals received a waiver from the state on nursing ratios during the pandemic and with staffing shortages due to the virus and other issues, it has made the hospital environment even more crazy than it usually is and put even more pressure on the RN's.

Australia's success with stamping out Covid-19 did not come from geography, it comes from a hard lockdown and a hard crackdown on violators of Covid-19 restrictions. The police were given more power and they used it. I have a relative that lives in Melbourne and she kept us informed as to how it was going over there. Because they have it under control, they can do contact tracing and keep the spread to a minimum. What they did in Australia would not work here.

Back to sports. I think the stadiums will be almost back to normal in the fall and we will have a normal college football season. The Rose Bowl should be half-filled, as usual. The NFL did have a normal season for the most part, just without fans. I am looking forward to seeing 50,000 or more fans at the new SoFi Stadium and I hope to get out to see the Raiders playing in their new digs in Las Vegas.
04-05-2021 01:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TexanMark Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,991
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation: 1023
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Post: #31
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
Back on topic...I think many programs will see season ticket holders down 20%
04-05-2021 09:26 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bronco'14 Offline
WMU
*

Posts: 7,250
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 65
I Root For: WMU Broncos
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Post: #32
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
I expect many of the teams this fall to be at only 20% capacity, if that. Won't see anything 'old normal' for these teams until next year 2022. After that, I think you may see a slight uptick in attendance. Students & alumni will be excited to go to games again after a couple year break.
(This post was last modified: 04-06-2021 01:36 PM by Bronco'14.)
04-06-2021 01:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IWokeUpLikeThis Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,526
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 480
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location: South Side
Post: #33
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-06-2021 01:34 PM)Bronco14 Wrote:  I expect many of the teams this fall to be at only 20% capacity, if that. Won't see anything 'old normal' for these teams until next year 2022. After that, I think you may see a slight uptick in attendance. Students & alumni will be excited to go to games again after a couple year break.

That would suck. I'm 100% expecting full attendance except maybe pacific coast states.
04-06-2021 01:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 38,799
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1230
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #34
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-05-2021 01:52 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  Australia's success with stamping out Covid-19 did not come from geography, it comes from a hard lockdown and a hard crackdown on violators of Covid-19 restrictions. The police were given more power and they used it. I have a relative that lives in Melbourne and she kept us informed as to how it was going over there. Because they have it under control, they can do contact tracing and keep the spread to a minimum. What they did in Australia would not work here.

Eh, it probably came from both. It's a lot easier to control influxes of people when you can only be reached by boat or plane.

As I said, hard lockdowns can stop a virus. As I also said, if we all jumped off a tall bridge that would too. The issue is the costs of the cure, the crackdowns, vs the benefits of stopping the virus. In a situation where public health experts call the shots, we don't get that kind of tradeoff analysis, because public health experts are experts only in public health - knowing what to do stop a virus - and the culture of public health is to stop diseases by "any means necessary" regardless of the costs incurred in doing so.

That's what was so wrong about the media pontifications about "heeding the warning of public health scientists" to the exclusion of all other voices. Public health experts can tell us what steps are likely to stop or reduce the spread of a disease. They don't have the expertise to tell us if the stopping/reduction of the spread of the disease is worth the costs of the steps taken to do so.
(This post was last modified: 04-07-2021 10:00 AM by quo vadis.)
04-06-2021 01:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,129
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 337
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #35
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(03-30-2021 07:33 PM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  Expect to see a giant increase in the use of E-tickets. Ticket holders will have to provide proof of vaccine or negative covid test to gain entry. Proof will be linked to your E-ticket.

Vaccine proof=the mark of the beast
04-07-2021 04:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mikeinsec127 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,497
Joined: Jul 2009
Reputation: 58
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #36
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-07-2021 04:52 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(03-30-2021 07:33 PM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  Expect to see a giant increase in the use of E-tickets. Ticket holders will have to provide proof of vaccine or negative covid test to gain entry. Proof will be linked to your E-ticket.

Vaccine proof=the mark of the beast

If you say so. Don't book a cruise, because the cruise lines all have this procedure built into their restart plans.
04-07-2021 09:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 38,799
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1230
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #37
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-07-2021 09:18 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  
(04-07-2021 04:52 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(03-30-2021 07:33 PM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  Expect to see a giant increase in the use of E-tickets. Ticket holders will have to provide proof of vaccine or negative covid test to gain entry. Proof will be linked to your E-ticket.

Vaccine proof=the mark of the beast

If you say so. Don't book a cruise, because the cruise lines all have this procedure built into their restart plans.

I am a Trump-supporting Republican, but I also like to cruise. I have two Caribbean cruises booked right now leaving from USA ports. One for this October, the other for October 2022. Needless to say, the cruise for this October is in grave jeopardy of falling victim to Biden-CDC restrictions.

I am also in the process of getting vaccinated, and if showing proof of that is what will be necessary to get the Biden-led CDC to allow cruises from US ports, or to convince foreign governments to allow US cruise ships to dock at their ports, then I have no problem with displaying my vaccination card to them, nor with the cruise lines requiring that everyone on board be vaccinated.

I would not like to see "proof of vaccination" become part of every day domestic life, that would be intrusively wrong, and I would include admission to ball parks and other sports arenas in that. But for special things like foreign travel, no problem.
(This post was last modified: 04-07-2021 10:05 AM by quo vadis.)
04-07-2021 10:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Big Frog II Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,296
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 55
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #38
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
I think we will see 100% capacity in college stadiums in Texas for 2021. Everyone 16 and over will have had access to the vaccination. The younger kids will be getting them soon as well. If you don't get the vaccination and you get the virus it's on you.
04-07-2021 12:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wahoowa84 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 814
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 98
I Root For: UVa
Location:
Post: #39
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-05-2021 09:26 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Back on topic...I think many programs will see season ticket holders down 20%

Agree. There will still be issues (e.g., unpredictable virus variants, individuals who can’t or won’t vaccinate, economic and legal constraints) going on in the fall. But the progress will be notable. Going to games with friends once again will be fun...even if we’re still wearing masks or have to show a vaccine passport/app.
04-07-2021 01:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Edgebrookjeff Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 806
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation: 13
I Root For: bearcats
Location:
Post: #40
RE: College Football Attendance Trends
(04-07-2021 10:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-07-2021 09:18 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  
(04-07-2021 04:52 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(03-30-2021 07:33 PM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  Expect to see a giant increase in the use of E-tickets. Ticket holders will have to provide proof of vaccine or negative covid test to gain entry. Proof will be linked to your E-ticket.

Vaccine proof=the mark of the beast

If you say so. Don't book a cruise, because the cruise lines all have this procedure built into their restart plans.

I am a Trump-supporting Republican, but I also like to cruise. I have two Caribbean cruises booked right now leaving from USA ports. One for this October, the other for October 2022. Needless to say, the cruise for this October is in grave jeopardy of falling victim to Biden-CDC restrictions.

I am also in the process of getting vaccinated, and if showing proof of that is what will be necessary to get the Biden-led CDC to allow cruises from US ports, or to convince foreign governments to allow US cruise ships to dock at their ports, then I have no problem with displaying my vaccination card to them, nor with the cruise lines requiring that everyone on board be vaccinated.

I would not like to see "proof of vaccination" become part of every day domestic life, that would be intrusively wrong, and I would include admission to ball parks and other sports arenas in that. But for special things like foreign travel, no problem.

Too late. I've already reserved my season tickets and booked a cruise.
04-08-2021 08:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2021 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.