Covid, non political

[Jssanto]

I cannot imagine a team (s) not having multiple players eventually test positive.
If those players have to sit for 14 days, who takes their place on the roster?
Do we have a 200 man roster?

 

[Courtsensetwo]

I cannot imagine a team (s) not having multiple players eventually test positive.
If those players have to sit for 14 days, who takes their place on the roster?
Do we have a 200 man roster?

Not just those that test positive...wouldn't the other players that were in close contact have to QT as well? Three becomes nine pretty quickly.

 

[Kelly_32]

I cannot imagine a team (s) not having multiple players eventually test positive.
If those players have to sit for 14 days, who takes their place on the roster?
Do we have a 200 man roster?

How do the teams handle it when a player gets the flu? For 18-22 year olds, the flu is more deadly than Covid-19.

 

[BoilerN]

If the schedule is played out like predicted, it will really help out teams that have to quarantine 25 guys. I believe the thinking is a game on week 1 and 2. Then a week off. I'm wondering if they go round Robbin style on those two weeks. So you might have a grouping of Purdue, IU, Illinois, and NW for this example. Only the teams in this pod play the first two weeks. Then if NW has a positive going into the off week after playing Purdue, Purdue can also take the necessary steps knowing they have a week off. Only releasing the schedule 2 games at a time also allows for quick rescheduling. Say NW gets a case during the bye week. They can quickly move the schedule around to give them another week and that game can be made up at a later bye week. Lots of flexibility to help combat that.

 

[Bowlmania]

How do the teams handle it when a player gets the flu? For 18-22 year olds, the flu is more deadly than Covid-19.

1) Only about 3-11% of the U.S. population gets the flu in any given year. And it's seasonal - - in the winter. Flu outbreaks on college football teams are extremely rare.
2) There's a vaccine for the flu.
3) Coronavirus is much more contagious than the flu.

 

[TMFT]

1) Only about 3-11% of the U.S. population gets the flu in any given year. And it's seasonal - - in the winter. Flu outbreaks on college football teams are extremely rare.
2) There's a vaccine for the flu.
3) Coronavirus is much more contagious than the flu.

I'd also add that the concern is not necessarily that there's going to be a rash of 20 year old elite athletes dying from COVID, it's the specter of outbreaks that would make their ways to more vulnerable populations that have a higher risk of dying. That's why my kids' school and the school where the Mrs. teaches are seeing teacher retirements & sabbaticals come pouring in.

Buckle up folks.

 

[Bligedy]

I'd also add that the concern is not necessarily that there's going to be a rash of 20 year old elite athletes dying from COVID, it's the specter of outbreaks that would make their ways to more vulnerable populations that have a higher risk of dying. That's why my kids' school and the school where the Mrs. teaches are seeing teacher retirements & sabbaticals come pouring in.

Buckle up folks.

What school systems are accepting sabbaticals? Most are treating those as resignations.

 

[TMFT]

What school systems are accepting sabbaticals? Most are treating those as resignations.

IPS. Although, now that I'm thinking on it, they may be taking FMLA as opposed to a technical sabbatical. But either way, I suppose, they aren't working.

 

[mushroomgod_1]

I cannot imagine a team (s) not having multiple players eventually test positive.
If those players have to sit for 14 days, who takes their place on the roster?
Do we have a 200 man roster?

The #s are there to do it.....85(?) sch players + maybe 40(?) WOs who would be thrilled to play in a game. So theoretically you could play with 30 kids sitting out. Similar to the situation in WW2. The biggest problem I see is what if the guys sitting out include all of the OL or all of the QBs et al.? When do you just FF?

The other thing, as others have pointed out......what happens when we get the first COVID-related football death? All hell will break loose.

But.........102 years ago, under much worse circumstances, in the middle of a pandemic that targeted young healthy males and a great world war, a full season of college football was played. Except, there was no twitter then.

Harvard and Yale didn't play.

 

[TMFT]

The #s are there to do it.....85(?) sch players + maybe 40(?) WOs who would be thrilled to play in a game. So theoretically you could play with 30 kids sitting out. Similar to the situation in WW2. The biggest problem I see is what if the guys sitting out include all of the OL or all of the QBs et al.? When do you just FF?

The other thing, as others have pointed out......what happens when we get the first COVID-related football death? All hell will break loose.

But.........102 years ago, under much worse circumstances, in the middle of a pandemic that targeted young healthy males and a great world war, a full season of college football was played. Except, there was no twitter then.

Harvard and Yale didn't play.

It'd sure feel good to be a WO if it comes down to it.

Someone should quickly trademark NCAAFL merch if we have games with 15 WOs on the field at one time (I jest).

 

[Bowlmania]

The #s are there to do it.....85(?) sch players + maybe 40(?) WOs who would be thrilled to play in a game. So theoretically you could play with 30 kids sitting out. Similar to the situation in WW2. The biggest problem I see is what if the guys sitting out include all of the OL or all of the QBs et al.? When do you just FF?

The other thing, as others have pointed out......what happens when we get the first COVID-related football death? All hell will break loose.

But.........102 years ago, under much worse circumstances, in the middle of a pandemic that targeted young healthy males and a great world war, a full season of college football was played. Except, there was no twitter then.

Harvard and Yale didn't play.

Yeah, but what was a "full season" back then? Seven games?

Also, there were some unique circumstances. As an alternative to the draft, guys could stay in school while participating in a military training/preparedness program. There was serious talk of canceling the football season in Fall 1918, but a vocal pro-football contingent was able to convince college administrators that football was an effective supplement to the military training.

 

[mushroomgod_1]

Yeah, but what was a "full season" back then? Seven games?

Also, there were some unique circumstances. As an alternative to the draft, guys could stay in school while participating in a military training/preparedness program. There was serious talk of canceling the football season in Fall 1918, but a vocal pro-football contingent was able to convince college administrators that football was an effective supplement to the military training.

Wiki says that in the BT we played the fewest games, with 4. Purdue & OSU-6. Iowa 9, MN 8. Michigan played 5 and is now regarded as a co-NC for that year.

There were also 20+ army & navy camp teams.

 

[rcaulfie]

How do the teams handle it when a player gets the flu? For 18-22 year olds, the flu is more deadly than Covid-19.

When they test a kid and he tests negative for Covid-19 and is determined to just have the flu, he will rest until he feels good enough to come back to practice. Same as last year, the year before, the year before, the year before.....shall I go on??

 

[jsbanks]

If the schedule is played out like predicted, it will really help out teams that have to quarantine 25 guys. I believe the thinking is a game on week 1 and 2. Then a week off. I'm wondering if they go round Robbin style on those two weeks. So you might have a grouping of Purdue, IU, Illinois, and NW for this example. Only the teams in this pod play the first two weeks. Then if NW has a positive going into the off week after playing Purdue, Purdue can also take the necessary steps knowing they have a week off. Only releasing the schedule 2 games at a time also allows for quick rescheduling. Say NW gets a case during the bye week. They can quickly move the schedule around to give them another week and that game can be made up at a later bye week. Lots of flexibility to help combat that.

This makes sense. Therefore not likely to happen.

 

[BoilerN]

This makes sense. Therefore not likely to happen.

Why? Everything the big ten has done so far has made since. The new commish is doing an excellent job so far.

 

[Jssanto]

The #s are there to do it.....85(?) sch players + maybe 40(?) WOs who would be thrilled to play in a game. So theoretically you could play with 30 kids sitting out. Similar to the situation in WW2. The biggest problem I see is what if the guys sitting out include all of the OL or all of the QBs et al.? When do you just FF?

The other thing, as others have pointed out......what happens when we get the first COVID-related football death? All hell will break loose.

But.........102 years ago, under much worse circumstances, in the middle of a pandemic that targeted young healthy males and a great world war, a full season of college football was played. Except, there was no twitter then.

Harvard and Yale didn't play.

I do not know what to make of a 100 years ago. Were we more correct then via toughness and take care of you self. Or are we mor educated now?

 

[crossfire74]

I cannot imagine a team (s) not having multiple players eventually test positive.
If those players have to sit for 14 days, who takes their place on the roster?
Do we have a 200 man roster?

Technically, with walk ons, the roster sits for most power 5 teams around 130. Most home teams dress most of those players, but road teams usually take around 80 guys, sometimes much less than that. I suspect you'll see far fewer players dressed and on the field for the game, but will keep some players in the locker-room that can come out and play if needed due to injuries/etc.

For any team to not be able to field a team, in theory, you'd literally have to have 90 some kids test positive. Could this be the year where those unknown walk ons determine a game outcome?

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Why? Everything the big ten has done so far has made since. The new commish is doing an excellent job so far.

It would help but 14 days is the minimum QT.

Folks just need to get their head around no Football.

 

[BoilerN]

It would help but 14 days is the minimum QT.

Folks just need to get their head around no Football.

If one guy test positive, you quarantine him for 14 days, but if the rest of the room test negative twice over a few days, then they are good to go.

 

[82hoosier]

The #s are there to do it.....85(?) sch players + maybe 40(?) WOs who would be thrilled to play in a game. So theoretically you could play with 30 kids sitting out. Similar to the situation in WW2. The biggest problem I see is what if the guys sitting out include all of the OL or all of the QBs et al.? When do you just FF?

The other thing, as others have pointed out......what happens when we get the first COVID-related football death? All hell will break loose.

But.........102 years ago, under much worse circumstances, in the middle of a pandemic that targeted young healthy males and a great world war, a full season of college football was played. Except, there was no twitter then.

Harvard and Yale didn't play.

A full season of college football was NOT played during the 1918 pandemic.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

If one guy test positive, you quarantine him for 14 days, but if the rest of the room test negative twice over a few days, then they are good to go.

I am with you man...I want it to happen...but pour another of your favorite bourbon and cry with me:

Ain't gonna happen

 

[mushroomgod_1]

A full season of college football was NOT played during the 1918 pandemic.

The BT season ran from Sept 28th through Nov 30th in 1918. 10 teams played a total of 67 games.

In 1916, there were 70 games
In 1917, there were 74 games
In 1918, there were 70 games, all within the same general time frame as '18.

What is your point?

 

[Harry Hondo]

1) Only about 3-11% of the U.S. population gets the flu in any given year. And it's seasonal - - in the winter. Flu outbreaks on college football teams are extremely rare.
2) There's a vaccine for the flu.
3) Coronavirus is much more contagious than the flu.

This virus is showing the same markers as it did in March/April when it first hit. As a country we’re breaking records of daily infections in July! What virus strikes just as hard in the summer months? Not looking forward to what fall/winter will be like.

 

[BoilerN]

I am with you man...I want it to happen...but pour another of your favorite bourbon and cry with me:

Ain't gonna happen

Disagree. Very much think this season happens. Give the players the option to play or not play. Of they don't play, honor their scholarship. Do everything you can to prevent it. Flexible schedule. Then you also get the big ten money. Without that, athletic departments will be in a bad shape. non-P5 schools athletic departments might actually go under.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Disagree. Very much think this season happens. Give the players the option to play or not play. Of they don't play, honor their scholarship. Do everything you can to prevent it. Flexible schedule. Then you also get the big ten money. Without that, athletic departments will be in a bad shape. non-P5 schools athletic departments might actually go under.

I would love for you to be right,

 

[BoilerN]

I would love for you to be right,

Losing out on $52 million is tough for a lot of athletic departments in the big ten to overcome.

 

[82hoosier]

Don't look now but the practices are temporarily shut down. Six more players tested positive yesterday.

 

[rcaulfie]

Don't look now but the practices are temporarily shut down. Six more players tested positive yesterday.

Not good, especially considering they tested negative on first returning. Which means they have somehow contracted it since then. This is going to happen with about every program. I just don't see how they are going to have a season. So depressing.....

 

[Bowlmania]

Not good, especially considering they tested negative on first returning. Which means they have somehow contracted it since then. This is going to happen with about every program. I just don't see how they are going to have a season. So depressing.....

Hope springs eternal.

 

[Jssanto]

My opinion:
1. Every one wears a mask in public (and correctly, over mouth and nose).
2. Restaurants that can, do spaced outdoor seating. If you cannot, then super spaced indoor seating.
3. Open schools, voluntary for students, but do 50% of students in the AM and the other 50% in the afternoons. Morning kids end with a lunch and leave. Afternoon kids Then come in and start with a lunch.
4. Open schools, voluntary for teachers, but those that opt out we try and replace with another teacher, teachers aide, etc. Opting out teachers do not lose their jobs.
5. Sports. Try and keep them going. We may have to increase roster sizes, adjust schedules with more time between games, and have quarantined care for positives. Maybe no weight room work but they could really focus on studies for 10-14 days.

 

[DANC]

My opinion:
1. Every one wears a mask in public (and correctly, over mouth and nose).
2. Restaurants that can, do spaced outdoor seating. If you cannot, then super spaced indoor seating.
3. Open schools, voluntary for students, but do 50% of students in the AM and the other 50% in the afternoons. Morning kids end with a lunch and leave. Afternoon kids Then come in and start with a lunch.
4. Open schools, voluntary for teachers, but those that opt out we try and replace with another teacher, teachers aide, etc. Opting out teachers do not lose their jobs.
5. Sports. Try and keep them going. We may have to increase roster sizes, adjust schedules with more time between games, and have quarantined care for positives. Maybe no weight room work but they could really focus on studies for 10-14 days.

I don't see why teachers couldn't teach remotely from their home, if they want, to the school if each classroom had an adult in the room to maintain order.

That adult could be a volunteer who sits away from the students and takes distancing precautions.

Children are not at risk, per statistics.

 

[rcaulfie]

My opinion:
1. Every one wears a mask in public (and correctly, over mouth and nose).
2. Restaurants that can, do spaced outdoor seating. If you cannot, then super spaced indoor seating.
3. Open schools, voluntary for students, but do 50% of students in the AM and the other 50% in the afternoons. Morning kids end with a lunch and leave. Afternoon kids Then come in and start with a lunch.
4. Open schools, voluntary for teachers, but those that opt out we try and replace with another teacher, teachers aide, etc. Opting out teachers do not lose their jobs.
5. Sports. Try and keep them going. We may have to increase roster sizes, adjust schedules with more time between games, and have quarantined care for positives. Maybe no weight room work but they could really focus on studies for 10-14 days.

Teachers can't "opt out".....doesn't work that way. And there is nobody to replace them......another teacher, teacher's aide, etc.....there are none of those. There isn't a big group of people just waiting to fill in for teachers.

 

[Jssanto]

Maybe my ideas aren’t any good.
Just frustrated.

 

[76-1]

Maybe my ideas aren’t any good.
Just frustrated.

Seemed like good ones to me. Those along with DANC's thought about teachers working from home (on camera) seem to present a good mix of options...

It appears the biggest hurdle is the day care problem for dual working parents...

It won't be a one size fits all solution. Each community will have to solve it locally...

 

[DANC]

Seemed like good ones to me. Those along with DANC's thought about teachers working from home (on camera) seem to present a good mix of options...

It appears the biggest hurdle is the day care problem for dual working parents...

It won't be a one size fits all solution. Each community will have to solve it locally...

I don't think the teachers unions want a workable solution until they get what they want politically.

 

[travlinhoosier]

I don't think the teachers unions want a workable solution until they get what they want politically.

Soo you're saying they want to get what they want along with a workable solution. Sounds better than average to me; some people just want to get what they want, workable solution be damned.

 

[oldcougar77]

I don't think the teachers unions want a workable solution until they get what they want politically.

My daughter is a teacher (as am I and my wife). Ten days ago her husband was exposed to covid in his workplace when 3 co-workers tested positive after coming down with the symptoms. Two of the three share an office with my son-in-law. One of the guys had just returned from visiting his children and grandchildren in Texas and likely brought it back. My son-in-law was informed by one of the coworkers last Friday.

Neither my daughter nor her husband could even get in to get tested until last Wednesday, despite calling with their concerns Saturday morning. It is now Monday and neither my daughter or son-in-law have been given the results of their tests yet. So they have been self-quarantined along with my grandchildren for 10 days. Fortunately, nobody in the household is symptomatic.

Nobody could have prevented the coronavirus from reaching this country. But the abject failure of this government to have adequate testing measures, adequate supply of protective gear, or a comprehensive plan for mask-wearing and social distancing in place by this time is indicative of complete incompetence at the highest level. Yet the President and Secretary of Education express complete confidence that school should start on time and in-person. The imbecile governor of Missouri says , "what the hell, kids are just going to get it". Never mind that some of the adults in that building check a lot of boxes for high risk.

So my question is, how do you propose to insure the safety of starting school in this environment ? Or the chaos of having people exposed who can't get tested or get test results in a timely manner ? Had this been two weeks later my daughter would have already burned through more than a week of sick days and missed a week of instructional time with her students even though she very likely will turn out negative.

This is likely to turn into a clusterf#%k as we try to start school without adequate testing and protection and people find out they or the students have been exposed. Here's the real kicker. The staff at my daughter's school system (also where my wife teaches and my granddaughter attends) have been told that students in their classrooms won't be required to wear masks if they or their parents choose not to.

Maybe the people who are so goddamned determined to open schools should give a little bit of thought as to how that might be done without causing a community-wide outbreak.

 

[DANC]

My daughter is a teacher (as am I and my wife). Ten days ago her husband was exposed to covid in his workplace when 3 co-workers tested positive after coming down with the symptoms. Two of the three share an office with my son-in-law. One of the guys had just returned from visiting his children and grandchildren in Texas and likely brought it back. My son-in-law was informed by one of the coworkers last Friday.

Neither my daughter nor her husband could even get in to get tested until last Wednesday, despite calling with their concerns Saturday morning. It is now Monday and neither my daughter or son-in-law have been given the results of their tests yet. So they have been self-quarantined along with my grandchildren for 10 days. Fortunately, nobody in the household is symptomatic.

Nobody could have prevented the coronavirus from reaching this country. But the abject failure of this government to have adequate testing measures, adequate supply of protective gear, or a comprehensive plan for mask-wearing and social distancing in place by this time is indicative of complete incompetence at the highest level. Yet the President and Secretary of Education express complete confidence that school should start on time and in-person. The imbecile governor of Missouri says , "what the hell, kids are just going to get it". Never mind that some of the adults in that building check a lot of boxes for high risk.

So my question is, how do you propose to insure the safety of starting school in this environment ? Or the chaos of having people exposed who can't get tested or get test results in a timely manner ? Had this been two weeks later my daughter would have already burned through more than a week of sick days and missed a week of instructional time with her students even though she very likely will turn out negative.

This is likely to turn into a clusterf#%k as we try to start school without adequate testing and protection and people find out they or the students have been exposed. Here's the real kicker. The staff at my daughter's school system (also where my wife teaches and my granddaughter attends) have been told that students in their classrooms won't be required to wear masks if they or their parents choose not to.

Maybe the people who are so goddamned determined to open schools should give a little bit of thought as to how that might be done without causing a community-wide outbreak.

Your son-in-law we exposed to it doing his job. That happens all over the US. I don't want to appear callous, but how is teaching different from any other job where there is a chance of being exposed?

I suggested having teachers teach remotely from their home if they're worried about getting it. They have online learning now with children at home - why not have the children in schools and the teacher at home. Of course, an adult would have to be somewhere in the room, but it doesn't have to be a teacher. And that person could distance him or her self in the classroom.

How is teaching any different from the people running my granddaughter's daycare, which is open in North Carolina?

Children have not been found to be super-spreaders. Their infection rate is extremely low. I assume there is no rule against teachers wearing masks?

 

[oldcougar77]

Your son-in-law we exposed to it doing his job. That happens all over the US. I don't want to appear callous, but how is teaching different from any other job where there is a chance of being exposed?

I suggested having teachers teach remotely from their home if they're worried about getting it. They have online learning now with children at home - why not have the children in schools and the teacher at home. Of course, an adult would have to be somewhere in the room, but it doesn't have to be a teacher. And that person could distance him or her self in the classroom.

How is teaching any different from the people running my granddaughter's daycare, which is open in North Carolina?

Children have not been found to be super-spreaders. Their infection rate is extremely low. I assume there is no rule against teachers wearing masks?

Yes he was exposed doing his job - a job he has been unable to go to and do effectively now for over a week. His employer has lost the productivity of about a dozen employees this past week as 3 have been ill with the virus and 8 or 9 have been quarantined. Imagine this happening in a school where hundreds of people are in intimate proximity for eight hours a day.

I don't even know where to start with the rest of your post. The problems with the things you suggest are too numerous for me to even begin to describe here. Just suffice it to say that no, you cannot effectively teach a classroom full of kids from home, no matter how many non-teaching adults are in the room. I applaud your optimism however. Every education professional I know would get a good laugh. You obviously haven't spent any time in a school since your own graduation.

As much conversation as has been had here regarding masks, I still cannot believe that you can't grasp the concept - though I suspect you just don't want to. So let me try it this way. If I'm wearing pants and you are not, and you piss on me, I'm getting wet. If you're wearing pants and you attempt to piss on me, only you get pissed on. That's the concept.

It's amazing how people who never spent a day in a classroom outside of their own days as a student think they know how to educate. It's like thinking if you've flown on an airplane, you can fly the damn thing. Or thinking that because you had surgery, you could perform it.

 

[DANC]

Yes he was exposed doing his job - a job he has been unable to go to and do effectively now for over a week. His employer has lost the productivity of about a dozen employees this past week as 3 have been ill with the virus and 8 or 9 have been quarantined. Imagine this happening in a school where hundreds of people are in intimate proximity for eight hours a day.

I don't even know where to start with the rest of your post. The problems with the things you suggest are too numerous for me to even begin to describe here. Just suffice it to say that no, you cannot effectively teach a classroom full of kids from home, no matter how many non-teaching adults are in the room. I applaud your optimism however. Every education professional I know would get a good laugh. You obviously haven't spent any time in a school since your own graduation.

As much conversation as has been had here regarding masks, I still cannot believe that you can't grasp the concept - though I suspect you just don't want to. So let me try it this way. If I'm wearing pants and you are not, and you piss on me, I'm getting wet. If you're wearing pants and you attempt to piss on me, only you get pissed on. That's the concept.

It's amazing how people who never spent a day in a classroom outside of their own days as a student think they know how to educate. It's like thinking if you've flown on an airplane, you can fly the damn thing. Or thinking that because you had surgery, you could perform it.

Your pissing your pants example is a joke. We're not talking liquid passing through a mask. We're talking about droplets. If they are inhibited from going out, they can be inhibited from going out.

You say you cannot effectively teach from home, but you've don't explain why - you just dismiss it out of hand. Yet I assume you think you can teach kids from your home as long as they're home? That makes no sense.

I'm not telling you how to teach, so you can quit using that strawman to attack me.

Put up a plexiglass between you and the students - you know, like the 'essential' workers have to do at a retail store.

I'm really tired of the whining by teachers who think they should be safer than anyone else. Either do your job as required or find another career - that's the choice everyone else has to make.