Will We Have Football in the Fall?
- Thread starter Ree4
- Start date
- Status
AreWeThereYet
Well-Known Member
The H1N1 has been included in the yearly influenza vaccine for a number of years. The yearly vaccine has antibodies to several strains. On average it's around 60% effective, so it misses on some strains. sometimes you can get hit by something that isn't a flu virus. There was an adenovirus going around a number of summers ago. I didn't go in for it, but had all the symptoms they were reporting. That was nasty stuff but not many people were getting it.
koralakers
Well-Known Member
For Gods sake. The PUNISHMENT continues for ppl this dam virus doesn’t even effect. We are destroying everyone’s lives who is 20-60, to let a few 70 to 90 year olds perhaps live a few extra years
HawkPrdatr40
Well-Known Member
I think this situation really exposes the hypocrisy of the amateur sports model for the big revenue sports.
Higher education is a situation that generates millions of nodes of social interaction from people far and wide, and it can be done virtually with minimal degradation of the product. So it is a somewhat obvious move to keep students off campus in the current environment.
Which leads us to NCAA President Mark Emmert's statement that if regular students are not on campus, certainly we cannot ask student athletes to be on campus, we can't ask them to put themselves at risk.
There is just so much BS in that.
First of all, athletes put themselves at risk all the time (CTE, long-term joint issues, etc.).
Secondly, for big-time revenue sports like football, these student-athletes are ATHLETES 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, and they are students a distant 5th. I have taught many Iowa football players, and they take their studies very seriously. They have been without exception pleasant within the classroom. But the things they go through within the football complex and in Kinnick make them different. They can never fully relate with regular students, nor can those students fully relate to them. I see no benefit in closing our eyes and pretending that they are no different from any other student on campus.
Third, we are removing substantial opportunity from these student-athletes. Would Michael Ojemudia be a millionaire right now without his just-completed senior season? I doubt it. Would Ben Niemann have earned over a million dollars and have a super bowl title without his senior season? I doubt it. You move a senior biochem student off-campus and force him to learn virtually, he still gets roughly the same experience (minus some hands-on lab stuff), and he gets the same job or gets into the same grad program. And if he really needs that lab experience, he can always come back later and get it. If you take away a football season, there will be players hugely impacted in a way that cannot be undone.
So all of that is to set up this: we absolutely COULD have football this fall in a manner that does not substantially increase public health risk. Football student athletes could be the only students on campus, and they could be given strict rules to follow regarding social distancing and hygiene. Student-athletes could be given the option to participate and take the risk, or stay away and remain on scholarship (I would guess the participation rate would be close to 100%). This, combined with lots of testing, would make it possible to have games without fans, or perhaps just with luxury suites. It would only make sense for P5 schools as their broadcast rights would make this a huge positive (other conferences would probably cancel seasons). It would bring joy to millions, and it would help keep P5 athletic departments afloat.
But we WON'T have football in the fall because of concern about optics. College presidents will be concern about how it looks to have football players on campus and not regular students. Mark Emmert will be concerned about how it looks to be asking football players to risk COVID in order to bring millions into athletic department coffers while being relattively lightly compensated. Social media uproar would be at a din.
In the grand scheme, it is just sports, and we will all be okay when a season is cancelled. But I feel for the student-athletes this will affect, and I am frustrated by the fact that we could figure this out, but we won't because of the pressure of public opinion.
Higher education is a situation that generates millions of nodes of social interaction from people far and wide, and it can be done virtually with minimal degradation of the product. So it is a somewhat obvious move to keep students off campus in the current environment.
Which leads us to NCAA President Mark Emmert's statement that if regular students are not on campus, certainly we cannot ask student athletes to be on campus, we can't ask them to put themselves at risk.
There is just so much BS in that.
First of all, athletes put themselves at risk all the time (CTE, long-term joint issues, etc.).
Secondly, for big-time revenue sports like football, these student-athletes are ATHLETES 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, and they are students a distant 5th. I have taught many Iowa football players, and they take their studies very seriously. They have been without exception pleasant within the classroom. But the things they go through within the football complex and in Kinnick make them different. They can never fully relate with regular students, nor can those students fully relate to them. I see no benefit in closing our eyes and pretending that they are no different from any other student on campus.
Third, we are removing substantial opportunity from these student-athletes. Would Michael Ojemudia be a millionaire right now without his just-completed senior season? I doubt it. Would Ben Niemann have earned over a million dollars and have a super bowl title without his senior season? I doubt it. You move a senior biochem student off-campus and force him to learn virtually, he still gets roughly the same experience (minus some hands-on lab stuff), and he gets the same job or gets into the same grad program. And if he really needs that lab experience, he can always come back later and get it. If you take away a football season, there will be players hugely impacted in a way that cannot be undone.
So all of that is to set up this: we absolutely COULD have football this fall in a manner that does not substantially increase public health risk. Football student athletes could be the only students on campus, and they could be given strict rules to follow regarding social distancing and hygiene. Student-athletes could be given the option to participate and take the risk, or stay away and remain on scholarship (I would guess the participation rate would be close to 100%). This, combined with lots of testing, would make it possible to have games without fans, or perhaps just with luxury suites. It would only make sense for P5 schools as their broadcast rights would make this a huge positive (other conferences would probably cancel seasons). It would bring joy to millions, and it would help keep P5 athletic departments afloat.
But we WON'T have football in the fall because of concern about optics. College presidents will be concern about how it looks to have football players on campus and not regular students. Mark Emmert will be concerned about how it looks to be asking football players to risk COVID in order to bring millions into athletic department coffers while being relattively lightly compensated. Social media uproar would be at a din.
In the grand scheme, it is just sports, and we will all be okay when a season is cancelled. But I feel for the student-athletes this will affect, and I am frustrated by the fact that we could figure this out, but we won't because of the pressure of public opinion.
Yeah wish I had a crystal ball. Why can't they just all plan on things opening up for it and just slowly back things up the closer we get if need be? But.be ready to go. To make in stone definitive decisions 2 plus months out doesn't work. It's in their best interest to be able to go with the flow and be flexible.
Fryowa
Administrator
Let's keep this one pertaining to sports so it doesn't turn into COVID thread 2.0 and get locked.
Also, as requested, I started a new forum for off-topic discussion with Hawkeye fans where everyone here can talk religion, politics, and COVID to their hearts' content.
Here ya go.
Fryowa
Administrator
This is exactly what will happen. Basketball too. The actual COVID situation isn't what matters, it's public perception whether we like it or not.
I agree that we'll all be ok, but there are going to be some major athletic departments that don't make it through this and conferences will realign.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
Your board blows goats. Everyone can go post at the Wasteland, which was the Durty 30 splinter board when a former moderator, who shall remain nameless, banned a bunch of people with no good reason. Moderators are me, Ghost, SoCal and MNHawkFreak. https://hnwasteland.proboards.com/board/2/wasteland
Fryowa
Administrator
You missed the whole point of the creation of that board.
Automatically makes it a fail.
Nobody cares if Cooter Ray Dooley won an ASSCAR race.
kicker22
Well-Known Member
I think one of the biggest drawbacks is going to be about who is calling the shots to get things moving. The NCAA cannot force states individually to reopen colleges/facilities across the country, but at the same time I think there has to be a central decision maker involved as there is no way (IMO) politicians are going to be able to come across the isles to address this. I don't see how it moves forward without leadership being assigned to move forward to create a plan.
Ree4
Well-Known Member
I actually thought it was incredibly likely for it to be shutdown in March, as much as I didn't want it to be and was surprised that it hadn't been yet. Watching the Big East tournament in a packed MSG was surreal with everything that was going on around it. I couldn't believe my eyes at the time.
Fryowa
Administrator
Apples/oranges. Nobody attends Hillbilly Cruise Nights anyway. There's no danger in starting that one up because there's no one in the stands to begin with.
There were more people at that Seymour horse auction a few weeks ago than the Daytona 500 gets all weekend.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
This stopped being a medical issue and became a political issue a long time ago. As such, because universities are some of the biggest "political" organizations around, I find it hard to believe that we will have college football this fall. But I could absolutely envision a scenario where the SEC is playing college football this fall and no one else is.
Fryowa
Administrator
Even the SEC would have to pull the plug if the NCAA said so. They'd lose too much money. No way the NCAA would allow one P5 conference to continue and risk the public shit storm that would follow. And the first time a player with deep-pocketed parents sues the SEC and NCAA as co-respondents because their kid got sick, any benefit to playing football would be gone.
Political and financial pretty much mean the same thing in this context. There's so much $ at stake with so much that's already been lost. They need to figure out a way to do it...
- Status
