We had a little debate in the comments to this post the other day about how anecdotal examples concerning the pandemic aren’t relevant in the face of statistical evidence. I’m not trying to start a flame war here, nor am I dismissing valid, verified data, but I do think it misses the point to claim that the data is all that matters as we watch the college football season unfold.
Take a look at these stories, all recent:
- “Nearly three-fourths of Idaho’s football players don’t want to play this fall because of health concerns regarding the unknown long-term impact of COVID-19, sources told Stadium.”
- “Opt’n-out just might be the better decision,” Toney wrote on his Twitter account on Monday afternoon.
- “For a big man, Feeney was in top shape, always one of the last in the weight room, and aside from a knee injury his senior season, had no real health complications or underlying issues. That’s why Pingel and others at the school were shocked this week to learn that Feeney had battled significant COVID-19 symptoms after contracting the virus during workouts this summer at Indiana.”
Dellinger goes on to mention other young athletes who have suffered serious problems from the coronavirus.
You may find it convincing to compare the death rate stats of, say, Northern Italy to those of the US Southeast in order to declare that college athletes don’t face a serious risk, but these kids and their parents probably don’t feel the same way. These anecdotes carry more weight when it’s you or your child facing those conditions.
Or if you’re a college athletics administrator, for that matter.
While the situations at Colorado State, UConn and Rutgers have echoed loudest in the news cycle this week, Feeney’s situation is the biggest force behind the scenes at the administrative level. His mother’s viral Facebook post about her son’s struggle with COVID-19, posted in a forum dedicated to the concerned parents of college football players, had a chilling effect on athletic administrators and beyond.
Feeney’s mother, Deborah Rucker, detailed her son going to the emergency room with breathing issues and enduring “14 days of hell.” The words that have administrators most nervous were this: “Now we are dealing with possible heart issues.”
Many schools have instilled a protocol that includes extensive cardiology reviews to be cleared to go back. But this is why a “novel virus” is so thorny for administrators to deal with: We won’t know the impact for years. For administrators, Feeney’s story represents both health risk and financial liability. And the early studies of COVID-19 and its impact on the heart suggest a “lasting impact.”
“It’s been important that most of the cases for this demographic of healthy student athletes have been asymptomatic or with just mild symptoms,” said another high-ranking official of the cases that have emerged. “The Feeney story makes everyone pause on the idea of just accepting and managing positive cases.”
That’s what makes relying on the statistics and insisting everything else is just noise in evaluating the risks these kids are being asked to take so dicey. As I keep saying here, we just don’t know enough about COVID to be definitive about anything.
The bottom line is that when the autopsy of the 2020 college football season is conducted, it will state the obvious about COVID-19’s role as saboteur. The spiral to get there – and it will be a classically disjointed process – has begun. The defections, cancellations and health concerns, taken individually, haven’t been enough to cancel the season. Collectively, they’ve created a new level of concern at the presidential level that will ultimately set the course for the sport.
“Each day, many campus executives become more unsure about playing fall sports,” said an industry source. “They read the headlines, they see the student concerns and they have a greater understanding of the risks involved. Ultimately, this may come down to simply who wants to go first.”
Apparently the data isn’t as convincing for those inside the sport as it is for many of us outside of it. All I’m saying is that dismissing the anecdotal in favor of the statistical isn’t going to get us any closer to a football season. If you want that — and we all do, right? — risk assessment has to take into account both factors because perception matters at least as much as the raw data does.
[Ed. note: Again, the point of this post isn’t to inflame or incite those who disagree with my take. Please consider that in commenting. I’d hate for this to be the first comment thread I have to take down because some can’t respond reasonably. Thanks.]
Get The Picture 
I’m not convinced this is the case. If it’s too dangerous (as many believe it to be), then, in the words of one anonymous Idaho player, “I know that this will get drastically worse as the season progresses and I know in my heart it’s not the morally correct thing to do,” a player said.
This decision is binary. Either it is too dangerous to play or it isn’t. Trying to thread the needle by saying, “yes it is dangerous, but we’ll do a $1M worth of testing” isn’t going to stop a player from getting the virus and it isn’t going to stop one-off cases where someone gets really sick. Cancel it or play, I don’t care either way at this point.
LikeLike
Not exactly the point I’m making. My question is in the abstract. It’s not the same as saying I want college football in 2020, regardless of the consequences. Indeed, that’s my point about risk assessment and what it has to take in to be convincing to both the players and the fans.
LikeLike
I understand what you are saying. It’s a hearts and minds thing. The administrators have a multi-billion dollar industry that they are trying to save, and to do that, they need parents and kids to buy in. It doesn’t sound like they are. If more than half of players don’t want to play, then how do you go forward?
It’s an impossible situation for the administrators: if any player gets sick, regardless of where he contracted the virus, the team (and the sport) will take a
political“hearts-and-minds” hit. Apparently, it will also be financially liable? This gets into the territory of “how financially liable?” will they be if someone dies, and whether that is more than the amount that will be lost if a season is not played. That’s a less than ideal place to be (not to mention, really gross), especially when you want to continue being the second most popular sport in America in 2021 and beyond.It’s not my millions on the line, but I would just cancel the season, tap the reserve fund, expire a year of eligibility for all of the players (because trying to manage rosters in 2021 becomes a logistical nightmare), and move on. I would also take the opportunity to do conference realignment, secede from the NCAA, and make my own league, but that’s how I roll.
LikeLike
Isn’t the question for the player:
“Is it too dangerous for me?”
The administrators get to answer the larger question. I hope you’re not suggesting that the players fall in line with that choice.
Most (all) of the kids at Georgia will play, if allowed. The sad part in my view is the semi-pro nature of big time college football will cause a lot of kids to accept the health risk as superior to the risk to their pockets if they should choose not to play.
Its not at all surprising to me that the schools who are playing football as recreation rather than as vocation are more willing to say: see you next year.
Its the easier, safer answer.
For the kids who have professional aspirations, its a much harder choice and with the administration’s transparent quest for money as the driving factor to play, no matter what, it sets the whole thing up as a pretty ugly dynamic.
I want to watch football. But I’m not blinded to some pretty ugly dynamics that are going on if they do.
Would any of these presidents, ads, coaches etc… hesitate to let their middle school aged kids play football this fall? I bet they would. I bet they’d lie about it too. For money.
LikeLike
Yes, sure. I believe that people should do what they view is in their best interest. The players should be allowed to make that determination, as long as the scientific evidence, the medical professionals, the CDC, WHO, Twitter, and whatever else is considered a medical authority these days says that it is safe to do so. If the medical authorities say it is not safe, that people are in danger, then no, that decision should be made at a higher level.
You’re making a moral judgment on the decisions players may make and trying to hide it wrapped in your disdain of the College Football Mega-Corp and their “transparent quest for money”.
The Venn diagram of these two groups are nearly one circle. The players would play because they have professional aspirations, and are weighing – personally choosing, even – whether a shot at the NFL is worth the risk in their own hearts and minds. Some of the fringe NFL-ers are choosing to sit out. They made their own financial choice. These players, assuming football should be played at all, should get the same choice. If the season is played, I have no problem if players decide to opt out. If players don’t opt out, I think we should support them in that as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So I’m making a moral judgement when I say that poor kids with families who need money, the reason for their sacrifice up to this point, will accept a health risk to fulfill that ambition. Yep.
I shouldn’t criticize the guys who run the Roman Coliseum and make observations as to the motivations of the people they make their money on?
Why the fuck not?
LikeLike
I think the real question is why you entertain yourself with an endeavor you equate to the Roman Coliseum.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Well said. Only thing I would add is that we, as a country, have legally and constitutionally classified these folks as adults. They get a vote and all of the other responsibilities and privileges of adulthood.
So either they are or they aren’t adults. Should the colleges make very far-reaching concessions for whatever a player decides for 2020 ? Absolutely. But if we are going to just sit back and treat these folks like children, then move the GD voting age back to 25. Otherwise, let adults decide what is best for themselves.
LikeLike
Like don’t donate a bunch of money to get tickets if you’ll need the money back if the tickets don’t show up?
They’re big boys. They can take the loss. They knew the deal when they wrote the check. Its McGarity’s money now.
If we’re going to give them their money back we might as well revoke their voter registrations.
LikeLike
Derek, that’s the dumbest analogy I’ve ever heard. One is a transaction for the purchase of a product / service where said product / service may not be delivered. The other is an argument between groups of adults over the best way to manage risks for yet another 3rd group of OTHER ADULTS (who are perfectly capable, because they’re adults, of managing risks themselves).
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m talking about the donation you make to have a right to buy tickets. Not the money paid for the face value of the tickets themselves.
Now start over.
LikeLike
Ahh yes, now it totally makes sense. I bet if you bring in the implications to the changes in the tax code it will really hit home. /s
LikeLike
I don’t think… is anyone saying these players shouldn’t make their own individual decisions, even if it’s based on a flawed decision making process that overly relies on anecdotal evidence?
I think what many of us are saying is that our institutions (schools, local, state, and federal government, the NCAA, etc.) shouldn’t be making decisions using that same flawed process.
Especially because, contrary to media narrative, more players want to play than sit out. Why should we shut it down when there are still far more players that want to play than not?
LikeLike
We’re not in disagreement. I say play with who shows up. All I’m saying is that it’s getting ridiculous how much we coddle people that also vote in our elections.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ah, okay. I get you.
And I think you’re right. There is an incredible amount of patronizing going on in the media and others in regards to the players, but, I can kinda understand that given their situation as players who aren’t paid and don’t even have their own NIL rights.
Though I also understand the other argument that while they’re not paid, they get so many other benefits the patronizers never acknowledge, like free coaching, mentoring, tutoring, etc that could be worth millions of dollars if they had to pay for it themselves; if not that much, certainly hundreds of thousands of dollars.
I swear to God, if they could just have their own NIL rights, both of those people above would be neutralized and we could all mostly be happy.
LikeLike
Not when they’re dealing with the NCAA.
LikeLike
Of course they do, they can vote with their feet to not participate in NCAA activities. And they just might. You’re working from a place of presumed entitlement to…something… for these people. Nobody is entitled to anything in this world.
LikeLiked by 1 person
They can’t hire representation to negotiate, like anyone else can.
There’s more to life than voting with your feet. You and I have the privilege of doing so every day. The players don’t.
LikeLike
Someone else made a point yesterday in regards to critical thinking skills and how we as a nation, especially the younger generations, lack those skills, and this illustrates it perfectly. We lack logic and reason and are governed by emotion. I’m sure that’ll end well.
The point is, yes, we cannot make our large decisions based on anecdotal evidence, Senator. We cannot keep shutdowns going based on anecdotal evidence, as they’re doing in some states. Anecdotal evidence is what caused a governor to place sick elderly back in their nursing homes.
Anecdotal evidence however is fine for an individual to make their own choices. I’m never going to be against a player making their own decision, but I am against the decision to shut down an entire school or city or state or country based on anything but hard data.
Does that make sense?
LikeLike
You are conflating the narrow issue of what happens with college football with the economy and society at large, so to that extent, no.
LikeLike
To your point, there are some players that don’t want to play, but by all evidence, the vast majority do. So we shut it all down because a few players have allowed the media and unscrupulous politicians to convince them they’re in danger when no, they are in no statistically relevant danger?
And shutting down a CFB season carries with it severe economic consequences. To act as though it doesn’t and that anecdotal evidence is enough to take on those consequences is not a step we should take.
LikeLike
I’m gonna say that “I can’t shut down the college football season because we need these unpaid athletes to show up so we can pay our administrative staff and local business can make money” isn’t a particularly good look. YMMV.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree with that, which is why it has to be their choice and their scholarships should be honored regardless. If a few want to sit out the year, they should have that choice.
But that’s the thing, it needs to be an individual choice and not a decision made by a governing body based on anecdotal evidence.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maybe people just want a life-worth-living to go on. BTW, this is why some people accuse others of “rooting against sports.” I’ll just leave it at that.
Corch is right, leaders of very large groups can’t make decisions for the entire group based on anecdotal evidence. If that were the case, we’d have lost every war we’d ever been in.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And also, to the point I made the other day, I especially am against the anecdotal evidence when it’s almost completely skewed in the direction of the worst possible outcome while ignoring the anecdotal side that more closely resembles the available data, such as the media completely ignoring Clemson’s players full recovery / asymptomatic nature of their infections because it doesn’t match their preferred narrative.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I understood your position at the time. I’m not sure you understand that these kids and their parents may not see things as you do.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I get that. But, and I’m not saying this is you because I don’t believe this is you, but why are so many people against making sure we have all available information before making these types of decisions? Why are so many who cover sports seemingly vehemently against reporting ALL the information so the players and parents can make informed decisions? Shouldn’t that be their jobs?
I don’t want to go into playpen territory so I won’t, but to me, as it has been since I opened my eyes, the story isn’t how or what the sports media reports in regards to COVID-19, it’s what they don’t and why.
LikeLike
If you read Thamel’s article, I don’t think the most worrisome issue is with the media. It’s with the reference to Colorado State and Virginia Tech.
If I were a parent of a football player and saw stories about how coaches are cutting corners and then saw the lame official responses to the news, I’d sure be questioning things at my son’s program.
Bottom line, if you run a football program and don’t want the media to be a factor, you’d better be an open book on how you’re doing business.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I agree with pretty much all of this.
LikeLike
Further, the media narrative re: Clemson was about the ease of the spread and the lack of responsibility/oversight/management. And that is a big problem because of the occasional unpredictable reaction like Feeney’s, and the vulnerability of others in the organization (coaches, staff, etc.). And frankly everyone needs to be aware of that–especially players who need to be vigilant, and parents/players who need to hold their programs accountable.
LikeLike
If you want them to have ALL of the information then the answer is don’t play.
Why?
As the cancer researcher below notes, we’re not going to have ALL the information for a long while.
Therefore, no matter who you assign (yourself?) to convey info to the decision makers, the truthful, complete answer to many questions is:
“We don’t know.”
In light of that how can you distinguish whether a choice is being made on:
Bad info
Good info
Unknowns?
You can’t can you?
I hope this will prevent you from continuing to second guess the quality of the choices made by complete strangers to you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The obtuseness of this post cannot be measured by any available math I know, Derek, but I really appreciate the implied implication it ended with there.
We have the information we have to make the decisions we need to make. It isn’t perfect, but the idea that some have that we only need to have the worst anecdotal information that flies in the face of all available evidence of who is at risk from this virus flies in the face of logic and reason.
Maybe this makes me a Vulcan, but I expect people on positions of leadership to ignore the passions and emotions that govern the rest of us and make the best decisions possible based on the available data and the available information.
If a kid doesn’t want to play, by all means, don’t play. That does not mean those in leadership should make the decision to shut everything down based on that same process. They shouldn’t, and that’s the point.
LikeLike
And seriously dude, why are you incapable of having a discussion without even IMPLYING insults to others?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Perhaps I should have used “obstuseness” to avoid the implication of insult.
You may avoid my question and continue to assert that anyone who makes the free decision not to play is making the wrong decision because they haven’t consulted with you.
There is no implied insult in there. At all. Nor is there any air of elitism on your part.
Just good ole fashioned ‘merican horse sense, right?
Why? Because you say so. Who am I to question it? After all I haven’t consulted with you in advance as would be necessary to have a contrary opinion worthy of expression.
LikeLike
When you talk about not knowing the long term implications, we’re getting into the very real meat of the “life worth living” debate that is admittedly probably the “open up!” side’s proverbial “anecdotal evidence”. (if that makes sense). But the longer this goes, the more valid that becomes.
Serious question: are you going to feel this same way if we are sitting here having this same argument on 8/6/21 ? Do you think it will be more under control by then ? At what point is the more rational thing to press on ?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I just don’t think we should judge people we don’t know who are making decisions that impact themselves far more than they impact me.
All I’m arguing against are people who:
1) suggest covid is harmless to football players and to they’re loved ones.
2) assert that if people are concerned that its because they are stupid, can’t make reasonable choices and are unwitting victims of “the narrative.”
3) won’t concede that circumstances will push someone to play who isn’t really comfortable playing at all.
4) won’t concede that if the money weren’t THE issue the season would have long ago been cancelled due to player safety concerns.
If we can agree that is all wrong, then we can discuss the real issue: winning a natty, that hopefully counts, in 2020.
Just don’t piss on my back and call it a summer shower.
LikeLike
And yet, we do. All the time. We think our decisions are based on logic when many times we backwards rationalize the decision.
This isn’t a function of a “younger generation”; this is humanity in general. The older people are the better they are covering it up.
LikeLiked by 1 person
People have been saying young people lack critical thinking skills for millennia.
The truth is most humans lack critical thinking skills
Otherwise I mostly agree
LikeLiked by 2 people
This. Since when have humans NOT been governed by emotion? Wars have been started and religions split/created over much less than a pandemic.
LikeLike
Corch, I don’t think human beings in general are great at critical thinking–especially Boomers on social media. I find that they are the ones most susceptible to the lies, half-truths, and fake news. They grew up with 3 channels and a newspaper. They’re not equipped to sort through the flood of information coming at them online. Gen Y and Z grew up with the internet so they’ve developed better filters to discern what is legitimate within the online flood of information.
LikeLike
Th flaw I find in your argument is Millennials and Zoomers have been indoctrinated from birth with certain kinds of lies from our institutions.
How else can the majority of them when polled believe socialism is more acceptable than capitalism?
LikeLiked by 1 person
You really should stop with blanket assumptions like that. You claim to be all logical. That’s certainly not based in any kind of fact.
LikeLike
That’s why I said when polled. While I don’t generally believe all polls to be infallible or not have their own inherent biases based on how the poll was conducted, it is telling that even enough of Millennials and Zoomers believe socialism is better than capitalism to even make it a question.
LikeLike
I’m in neither group, but maybe they see our flavor of capitalism, with it’s focus on short term profits and shareholder value, as untenable.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have no problem with those who decide to opt out. Student-athletes are generally legal adults (very few are 17) and can make their own choices. I hope universities will honor their scholarships … they would be dumb to do otherwise for recruiting purposes. I do think if a student opts out, he/she loses the year of eligibility (unless the athlete has a redshirt year to give). Given scholarship limitations, the schools at least deserve that unless the NCAA is going to provide relief.
The anecdotal and the statistical always exist together. They have to be weighed together to make reasonable decisions.
The statistics show that the healthy young are much less likely to have complications from C-19. The anecdotes show it can happen. A rational adult has to take both and make a personal decision based on the individual’s risk tolerance.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Well Senator…..an anecdote is exactly that an anecdote. However, we can’t loose site that one’s perception tends to be one’s reality. As someone who deals with data on a daily basis in my day job (cancer research since matriculating from our fair school in ’85), it really is all about the data. However, risk assessment is the point and that is what has to be considered in making decisions about this sport that we all cherish so deeply. The secondary effects from the SARS CoV-2 virus are literally just now beginning to be elucidated. This will take time….simple as that. So….risk assessment will happen on an individual basis. No matter your politics in this…..it’s a helluva situation to be in as a parent, player, AD or coach. Basically the entire tangential universe of college football is in this.
Senator….on a personal note. Kudos for what you do here at GTP. Have been an avid fan of the site since ’07. After your housekeeping note of recent, I feel compelled to begin posting in an effort to bring another perspective to consider in commenting.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gracias, SD.
And “So….risk assessment will happen on an individual basis” is exactly where the conversation should start.
LikeLike
Govern yourself accordingly…no issue there..
LikeLike
Exactly! That’s why I think ti comes down to a “who wants to go first” kind of scenario. I live for college football as really do not care for others sports. It’s just the tradition and pageantry (naive I know). For the life of me as each day passes I just don’t see how this season is going to happen.
LikeLike
“Who wants to go first” . The first guys to hit the beach are usually killed. By the way, your 9:10 post was excellent.
LikeLike
Thank you sir.
LikeLike
Thanks for the work you do everyday to stamp out the scourge that is cancer.
LikeLike
Keep up the good work, SD. Cancer scares me a whole lot worse than COVID.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As with most health concerns…live your life to the fullest, enjoy your time spent here, thank others more than they thank you… cancer doesn’t know who you are and just pray that if any treatment is required, your support and beliefs are strong…..
LikeLike
I’m of the opinion that they are safer on the team NOT off. At least as far as P5 schools go.
Won’t they be tested into oblivion? Won’t they be continuously told to wear a mask, don’t attend parties, and social distance? Won’t the coaches and interns be checking in on them daily?
LikeLike
That’s a good point. However by being on the team they’re also doing many things that don’t support social distancing just by the nature of the sport. Tough call either way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The assumption there is that 18-22 year olds wouldn’t, in general, expose themselves to this anyway. Which makes it all the more difficult of a decision.
LikeLike
Hypothetical: A Georgia player steps away from 2020 citing fear of Covid risks. A month later, said player is spotted at massively crowded fraternity party where social distancing and mask usage are non-existent. Should Player retain his scholarship ?
LikeLike
That’s a really tough question, Tony. I would certainly consider revoking their scholarship in that case.
LikeLike
https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/06/23/coronavirus-covid-deaths-us-age-race-14863
LikeLiked by 1 person
You got over 50k to tack on since then. 10 thousand a week.
LikeLike
Speaking as a parent, it’s not the risk of death to young people that is what is scary (although, the potential lasting health implications still aren’t fully understood yet.) But all of these kids are spreaders, and they’re even more dangerous as spreaders because they’re largely asymptomatic. The president spouts every day about opening schools back up because kids largely aren’t affected by the virus. But these kids will all bring the virus back home with them and infect their parents and grandparents.
LikeLike
Available data says the exact opposite. Kids are not vectors for infection, either in the home or to teachers and administrators.
College students are another matter, but here’s the thing, if they’re at school in a somewhat closed environment away from family, there’s less a chance of them to infect their family.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Or not:
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/children-often-carry-more-coronavirus-than-adults-study-67785
Perhaps you were just joking.
LikeLike
Or maybe you’re just incredibly wrong, as you often tend to be:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/07/200710100934.htm
Nice try, though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maybe theres a debate?
A difference of opinion?
Maybe the facts aren’t yet in?
Perhaps a declaration of your omniscience on all things covid would be premature?
LikeLike
As you said, this is a “novel” virus. We know much more than we knew in March. We will know more in a month, even more in a year, even more in 10 years. The timeline in battling these things is years or decades, not months. Look at HIV, polio, etc. People want this to be like getting the clap, get a shot of Rocephin and you’re good to go. Covid ain’t the clap.
LikeLike
The REAL Vandals are literally rolling over in their graves at hearing this.
Those guys were intense.
LikeLike
This discussion reminds me of a New Yorker article I read while in J-School, in the ’70s, entitled “The Selection of Reality.”
The thrust of the article, as I remember, was that as more and more people rely on TV news as their primary source of information, the less and less “real” the news got. Because, the editors of the news stories selected certain flashpoints to throw in front of millions of viewers, who then believe that “reality” totally consists of what they see in a minute or two of a news story.
This article dealt mainly with Viet Nam and the coverage thereof, on network TV news; but fast forward to today and the Coronavirus crisis, and throw social media into the “news” mix, and you have a whole lot of minds made up by the selections of reality that are presented in trending tweets and talking heads (and sometimes the reality isn’t even real; don’t know if anyone else watched Channel 2 6PM news last night, but the newscaster reporting Covid cases in Chattahoochee County GA got his numbers really mixed up).
All of which is why we can’t let ourselves make up our minds based on anecdotes, because they seldom reflect overall reality.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The implication being that the Vietnam experiment was actually a moral foreign policy stroke of genius ??
LikeLike
We all have to ask ourselves why, in the face of a still spreading pandemic, we want the 2020 college football season to happen.
The administrators and AD’s want it to happen because of the money.
The fans want it to happen because we crave a return to normalcy.
So those of us with no skin in the game are asking a bunch of 18-22 year olds to accept potential and unknown short-term and long-term risks for money they’ll never see and for our entertainment.
I’m not sure the juice outweighs the squeeze.
LikeLike
This is a good question, and I think the answer is multi-faceted for a few reasons:
1) Sports tend to be our national escape from the daily grind of our reality
2) Sports are also the microcosm by which our reality was always judged (the cream rises to the top – sports are a meritocracy regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.)
3) Sports are also a reflection of society at large. We paused sports following September 11th, but then when sports came back it helped unite us in ways we hadn’t been since the 80’s after the Congress and President Clinton spent 6 years at each other’s throats and then a contested 2000 election.
Given that:
1) I admit to my selfish need for sports as an escape from all this, to include far more than the virus but that’s not the topic.
2) This doesn’t really transfer, but again, watching supreme human achievement in sports shows us all things are possible.
3) If sports shut down we have no hope because the idiot politicians will then use the same bad anecdotal information that lack logic and reason to continue to force us indoors, where we’re no safer, and shut down our businesses and schools and economy. The available data says we should be open, so that means ALL parts of us should be open. That includes sports, importantly so.
LikeLike
If anything, I’ve learned that I can live without college football and sports in general a whole lot easier than I can deal with my kids missing out on so many things. My kids have missed out on a senior year of high school events like prom, graduation, schools plays, sports. Now going to college and experiencing living in dorms, going to classes in the Fall for the first time, hanging out and making new friends in college. It’s sad and I’ve gotten to where college football doesn’t seem to matter at all honestly. Perhaps when they come back, sports will help heal us from this mess like you’re saying.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m so glad we didn’t have a college or high school senior this year. One of the last big events our high schooler had was the performance of their Shuler Award musical. A lot of other competing schools didn’t get to perform their shows for judging. They were nominated for best show for a 2nd year in a row but, of course, couldn’t perform at the Cobb Energy Center as they had the previous year. Maybe the most depressing moment of the last 5 months was riding with my daughter to Athens on a rainy afternoon to move her out of her sorority house. They were only allowing one girl at a time to move out. We sat in the Cane’s parking lot and ate afterwards. We couldn’t bring ourselves to drive through campus before heading back to ATL. My 3rd lost her job at Disney right before she could start applying for full-time positions.
Ugh. 2020 can go pound sand.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m sorry your kids are losing out on memories that should last a lifetime, and you and your family are losing out on sharing in those memories.
The one thing I’ve tried tollways bring to light in my arguments here are the hidden costs of blindly shutting everything down based on bad information and against available data.
I honestly worry what will happen to the mental health of kids and young adults if they can’t attend school in person this autumn. We know from the last six or seven months that suicides, addiction & OD’s, mental illness, and domestic abuse are way up because of the shutdowns. God help us if that begins to trickle down from the adult population into the child and young adult population.
LikeLike
Corch, in many cases, my girls have been more resilient than I have. I don’t think there’s an appreciation for the other societal challenges that have reared their ugly heads since the shutdowns happened. Kids and young adults aren’t wired just to sit at home all day. Sure, they interact a lot virtually with their friends, but they want to hang out with each other.
I didn’t mean for my post to be a “poor me” thing. Everyone has their version of what I posted. That philosopher Andy Dufresne said it best:
LikeLiked by 1 person
Those who want to keep everyone else and all our institutions shutdown based almost solely on anecdotal evidence is Brooks.
Those who wants us to leave the choice up to the individual, and have our institutions only make the decision to shutdown or not shutdown based only on available data while ignoring anecdotal evidence is Andy and Red.
LikeLike
That’s exactly why our youngest will be heading back to high school in person next week with appropriate precautions, and our other two will be going back to school in Athens (one grad school and the other undergrad).
LikeLike
I have a now-graduated senior and a rising junior and can completely relate to this sentiment. It has been very sad for them. My senior had picked out her dress with her mom and grandmother and they had alterations made and had plans to get nails and hair done and then the day before the prom – which was to take place at the Fox Theater – it was cancelled. Heartbroken daughter. No manual for the parents.
LikeLike
I suppose I am in the minority, but I think the decision should be made by a governing body; the governing body controls everything else, isn’t that kind of the point?
As for players sitting out because of the potential risk, I would hope that those students also sit out of the social gatherings that a lot of kids are still enjoying and also opting for distance learning.
My personal belief is that the season should be shuddered. Too much liability and uncertainty around the disease. It would be reckless to force a season just to preserve $$$.
LikeLike
If some of the players opt out, assuming they retain that year of eligibility, how does that impact overall scholarship limits and recruiting? If some of the players opting out are seniors who otherwise wouldn’t have been with the program next year, do you have to recruit fewer players this cycle so that you don’t exceed the limit next year?
LikeLike
The fact is, you are much more likely to die of something other than COVID…
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s not a fact.
LikeLike
It is indeed if you’re under the age of 60 and healthy. It is indeed a fact.
LikeLike
No its not. I know you like to get on to Derek for reading comprehension but PTC said “The fact is, you are much more likely to die of something other than COVID…” . Am I more likely to die from a swarm of African Killer Bees, or lighting, or a jelly fish than from Covid? No. So what he literally said is not a fact.
LikeLike
Statistically Corch is correct. Lightning scares me to death. The odds of me being hit by lightning are 700,000 to 1. I always think I’m the one. The media has helped a lot of people view covid like I view lightning.
LikeLike
Corch didn’t give a statistic and what PTC said is not a fact.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Data = Facts. You can question the data but not what the results of the data are.
LikeLike
If PTC or Corch would have provided data then there would be some validity to both their statements. In this case there was none provided.
“The fact is, you are much more likely to die of something other than COVID…”
Not a fact.
LikeLike
At over 150k deaths and a 350 million pop. what the math?
1 of 2300 or so?
LikeLike
0.00042857142 if my math is correct.
LikeLike
Does that include subtracting any deaths labeled covid-19 that weren’t covid-19, like the guy in Florida who died in a motorcycle accident who happened to have covid-19 at the time he died and his death certificate literally said he died from covid-19?
You know, I know y’all are talking deaths here, but to bring it back to the “cases” the media was freaking out about last month, I keep reading from doctors that they believe our known cases are off by a factor of 10, so given that, aren’t we actually pretty dang close to the 20% herd immunity we’ve seen take hold in other countries that make the rest of population relatively safe from further infection spikes?
I’d like to find more information about that. Weird I know, but the media seems rather disinterested in that line of curiosity.
LikeLike
Why no links to that anecdote?
I need an accident report and a death certificate.
Certified.
LikeLike
Someone made this point on twitter the other day: Leave it to a Leftist to demand you do the work for them.
Derek, Google is extremely easy to use. I mean EXTREMELY easy to use.
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/data-analytics/florida-covid-19-fatalities-data-included-man-who-died-in-motorcycle-accident.html
LikeLike
So it was a mistake and has since been corrected and is not part of the count anymore.
A corrected mistake means there are a enough mistakes that no one has caught to matter in some significant way, only to you.
Got it.
LikeLike
How many mistakes are not caught? Why the lack of curiosity as to why this kind of mistake happened at all? The person filling out the death certificate is not some paper pusher, it’s the pathologist who actually sees the body and knows why they died. So why would they make a mistake of this magnitude after visually inspecting and medically inspecting the body?
What is going on in our hospitals and morgues that mistakes of this nature have happened?
LikeLike
Your math is way off.
LikeLike
Thats pretty much the same as about 1 in 2300.
LikeLike
Now I’d love to see the breakdown by age range and comorbidities as opposed all together, given the available data (stats) that shows that a simple breakdown like this is insufficient and does not even begin to tell the story of who is at risk of mortality.
LikeLike
I think PTC’s point was that there are lots of other ways to die and the collection of those things together outweigh the one COV-ID way. I doubt killer bees and lighting came to his mind when typing that comment. I’m not sure where COV-ID will rank on this list from the CDC but I think PTC has some validity to his claim.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/282929
LikeLike
And that is perfectly fine. I simply said that what he said was fact was not a fact. If he would have supplied his comment with data then there could be some validity there. “Something” can be many things. As you can see a few people above think “something” is worth arguing over.
LikeLike
The only “Something” worth arguing over is if it is the best Beatles song ever written, which would indeed be something as it was written by George Harrison as opposed to Lennon / McCartney.
LikeLike
I’m personally more of a Stones guy than a Beatles guy.
LikeLike
I love both bands for their own separate reasons. I never got the binary choice when it comes to music. Let’s keep the binary choices where they belong: covid-19 and political opinions. 😂
LikeLike
Beatles were pretty lame until they started doing drugs.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh man… biting my tongue so hard right now.
We should continue this tanget in next week’s playpen, because I have many, many thoughts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Just reading your comments I knew you had some class. Now I’m certain. Stones all the way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s not even close! You can live in a yellow submarine or you can gimme shelter. Easy choice for me LOL
LikeLike
See the chart above, when COVID deaths get over 50% of of total deaths it will no longer be a fact…it’s not close now..
LikeLike
Can you attempt to make your comments coherent?
LikeLike
You’re also more likely to die of many things than a car accident. Yet we still mandate seat belts and have speed limits.
Just because COVID isn’t an automatic death sentence doesn’t make it harmless. I don’t know how you can be so dismissive about a disease that has already killed more than fifty 9/11s worth of people.
LikeLike
But why have we stopped at seat belts and moderate speed limits? People still die in car accidents. Shouldn’t the goal be zero fatalities? Why not 15 mph speed limits on the interstates and 5 point seat belts, helmets, and 52 air bags in everything from a riding lawn mower on up?
LikeLike
And with that, I think we’ve hit Groundhog Day.
LikeLike
“The fact is, you are much more likely to die of something other than COVID…”
“If he be like to die, he had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.” – Scrooge.
LikeLike
I can’t validate this but it did make me think about where we are and where we are going and what has changed. The info came from a professor in Toronto to a buddy.
For this pandemic there’s a greater chance of survival for those getting infected 3 months later like June 2020 than those who got infected 3 months earlier say February 2020. The reason for this is that Doctors and scientists know more about Covid-19 now than 3 months ago and hence are able to treat patients better. I will list 5 important things that we know now that we didn’t know in February
2020 for your understanding.
COVID-19 was initially thought to cause deaths due to pneumonia- a lung infection– and so Ventilators were thought to be the best way to treat sick patients who couldn’t breathe. Now we are realizing that the virus causes blood clots in the blood vessels of the lungs and other parts of the body and this causes the reduced oxygenation . Now we know that just providing oxygen by ventilators will not help but we have to prevent and dissolve the micro clots in the lungs. This is why we are using drugs like *Aspirin and Heparin ( blood thinners that prevents clotting) as protocol in treatment regimens in June 2020. *
Previously patients used to drop dead on the road or even before reaching a hospital due to reduced oxygen in their blood- OXYGEN SATURATION. This was because of HAPPY HYPOXIA– where even though the oxygen saturation was gradually reducing the COVID-19 patients did not have symptoms until it became critically less, like sometimes even 70%. **Normally we become breathless if oxygen saturation reduces below 90%. **This breathlessness is not triggered in Covid patients and so we were getting the sick patients very late to the hospitals in February 2020. Now since knowing about happy hypoxia we are monitoring oxygen saturation of all covid patients with a simple home use pulse oximeter and getting them to hospital if their oxygen saturation drops to 93% or less. This gives more time for doctors to correct the oxygen deficiency in the blood and a better survival chance in June 2020.
We did not have drugs to fight the corona virus in February 2020.
We were only treating the complications caused by it… hypoxia. Hence most patients became severely infected.
**Now we have 2 important medicinesFAVIPIRAVIR & REMDESIVIR**
These are ANTIVIRALS that can kill the corona virus. By using these two medicines we can prevent patients from becoming severely infected and therefore cure them BEFORE THEY GO TO HYPOXIA. This knowledge we have in JUNE 2020… not in February 2020.
Many Covid-19 patients die not just because of the virus but also due the patient’s own immune system responding In an exaggerated manner called CYTOKINE STORM. This stormy strong immune response not only kills the virus but also kills the patients. In February 2020 we didn’t know how to prevent it from happening. Now in June 2020, we know that easily available medicines called Steroids, that doctors around the world have been using for almost 80 years can be used to prevent the cytokine storm in some patients.
Now we also know that people with hypoxia became better just by making them lie down on their belly- known as prone position. Apart from this a few days ago Israeli scientists have discovered that a chemical known as Alpha Defensin produced by the patients White blood cells can cause the micro clots in blood vessels of the lungs and this could possibly be prevented by a drug called Colchicine used over many decades in the treatment of Gout.
So now we know for sure that patients have a better chance at surviving the COVID-19 infection in June 2020 than in February 2020, for sure.
Going forward there’s nothing to panic about Covid-19 if we remember that a person who gets infected later has a better chance at survival than one who got infected early.
Let’s continue to follow precautions, wear masks and practice social distancing Please distribute this message, as we all need some positive news…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you, Spur!
LikeLike
I would feel a lot better if the kids had some kind of representation that gave them a unified voice; that gave them a say in the matter. It may well be that the vast majority of them want to play the games and want to compete. But I certainly don’t want a disenfranchised group of unpaid kids to be forced to compete just to scratch my itch to see a football season and provide a distraction to those of us who bear no risk. Put that mantle on the professionals in the NBA, the MLB and the NFL, who get paid and who have a voice. Don’t put it on these kids.
LikeLike
“risk assessment has to take into account both factors because perception matters at least as much as the raw data does.” First of all, I couldn’t agree more. Your statement is the epitome of AND. Risk assessments always include fact AND perception. What is unique about the football conversation on health risk is it is an already risky sport. The risk of CTE that consumed the sport five years ago led to perception and data and all parties doing their own risk assessment. The sport became safer through its targeting rules — but concussions still happen. The real question in my mind, as it relates to your risk assessment observation, is at what point has the sport done enough for safety to say we have mitigated risk enough to overcome the perception and the data.
LikeLike
As I’ve progressed in my career, to the point where I supervise people under me and delegate work, I’ve tried to follow Eleanor Roosevelt’s rule: “It is not fair to ask of others what you are not willing to do yourself.”
Right now, I am not willing to travel to five or six cities in a three-month span, coming into direct physical contact with dozens of strangers who may or may not have been following mask/social distancing guidelines. Certainly not when the people above me are basically saying “We’ll do our best, but some of y’all are gonna catch this, life’s a gamble.” So I can’t in good conscience ask any of Georgia’s players to do the same. Or any college football player, for that matter.
Thus I can’t quarrel with any player who wants to opt out of the 2020 season. The question is, what happens if so many players opt out that it impacts the quality of play? What do you do if Team A is playing at more or less full strength but Team B is basically starting its second or third string because so many players have opted out—or gotten sick? Do you still play that game as scheduled?
I don’t have good answers to those questions. It doesn’t sound like the ADs or conference commissioners have them either, but they continue to act like they do, basically telling us, “Yeah, some players will catch this, but it’ll all be OK, just trust us.” All that does is make me think of the old Yiddish proverb, “Man makes plans, God laughs.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
“As I’ve progressed in my career, to the point where I supervise people under me and delegate work,”
Do you drive a Dodge Status?
Sorry I couldn’t help myself.
LikeLiked by 1 person
No, but my ex-wife did when we first met . . . emphasis on “ex-.”
Anyway, that sketch will never get old . . . and I don’t think it’s any coincidence that when Chrysler got around to redesigning the car a few years later, they renamed it the Avenger. I guess the “Stratus” badge had become a scarlet letter by that point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am glad I don’t have a student having to makes these decisions. This anecdotal evidence is being confirmed by data that show that heart issues are there for many patients even those who have mild cases. I can wait to watch football until we have better data.
LikeLike
Another huge factor in player risk assessment: trust.
Colorado State broke into the headlines because enough players and staffers did not trust Adazzio’s approach to the virus AND Adazzio’s ability to hear other views on the subject in good faith. That’s pretty much been the common theme of the programs that end up with a news mess. Programs with solid leadership are going to weather this.
We’ve seen two major conferences with a critical mass of athletes who do not trust their leadership at the university and conference level. That’s ultimately behind the #United movements in the B1G and P12. That leadership “earned” that mistrust.
And that erosion long predates Covid 19.
Covid 19 dramatically magnifies that issue, but it didn’t create it.
Colorado State’s president now has a really difficult situation to navigate. Does she trust Adazzio’s ability to manage his relationship with his players? If the season proceeds, and Adazzio does something really stupid, that’s going to rebound on her. Add to that the uncertainty of the virus itself.
For the participants, this issue isn’t being processed at 10,000 feet via a data spreadsheet. And it comes down as much to the issue of how everyone in those rooms perceives each other as much as how everyone views the virus.
LikeLike
I don’t suppose you’ve got the ability to limit the number of posts per person per comments section, do you?
We had a regular management seminar where two people just went back and forth. Someone finally just brought a river rock. They held up the river rock and said the only person allowed to talk was the person holding the rock. And the person got to choose who got the rock next.
It totally shut down the two people in the room who were dominating every conversation with their back-and-forths. But the real benefit was everyone stopped worrying about getting their turn, actually listened, and used their opportunities to present their own perspectives rather than wasting everyone’s time in an endless effort to dismantle someone else’s.
Just a thought.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“We had a regular management seminar where two people just went back and forth. Someone finally just brought a river rock”
You could have stopped right there, leaving it to imagination…
But I supposed your way works as well.
The pedantic back and forth does get tedious, just scroll past it.
LikeLike
Rock and a sling 🙂
LikeLike
I second that thought. If not it is too bad there is not mute button. Corch and Derek just quit. You are not going to convince each other that you are right and it is tiresome to the rest of us.
LikeLike
I don’t understand how this is different from a Playpen?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nobody has said “Jane you ignorant slut”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks. Almost Jackson Pollacked my monitor with my lunch 🙂
LikeLike
As I understand it:
No name calling, no politics.
We can discuss covid (stats even) if we can be civil.
Otherwise, this gets shut down.
This may be a test of the efficacy of any “cleansing” that may have taken place without our knowledge. (That last part is speculation on my part.)
LikeLike
This may be a covert test to see if we can stay on topic and not give into the baser elements of our natures.
For the most part, we seem to be succeeding.
LikeLike
Maybe the Senator isn’t a lawyer but is a researcher involved in some sort of modern day Milford Experiment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Could be. That would be fascinating to see that study.
LikeLike
Or better yet, he’s really late to the game to do his peer review of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
LikeLike
ok den
LikeLike
It’s not.
LikeLike
Risk assessment is always part of the equation. I don’t have numbers to back up my comment but it is still a valid question. What if high school players were told they have an “X” percentage of being injured playing CFB. What would the “x” percentage need to be for them to say nope – not doing that. What if they were also told they could sustain an injury that killed their CFB career. How about if they were told the injury could be lasting and cause issues when they were 30 or 50 years old. Life is always about risk assessment – YOU get the facts and make a decision that fits – go or no go.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Idea – Allow an insurance adjuster to visit with each and every college sports and pro sports team to provide them some raw numbers to counterbalance the anecdotal evidence so everyone can make an actual informed decision.
I’m only kinda joking here.
LikeLike
The problem is that it’s impossible to quantify the risk you might personally pose to others. Again, very few people are thinking about this virus purely in terms of risk only to themselves.
LikeLike
True. It really is a mess huh.
LikeLike
The conversation today has me thinking. If a school cancels fall sports, shouldn’t the school cancel in person classes as well? If not, is the message that sports are inherently higher risk for COVID than classroom/campus activities?
LikeLike