Officially canceled season. Well, "delayed...

ss32000

Senior
Dec 2, 2001
2,402
1,374
113
I've typed and deleted more responses here than I care to admit.

Here is the question I just want answered. It takes potentially 10-15 years to create a vaccine. Let's say we have year 1 down (being generous), we got 9 years to really go. What should we do for the next 9 years? What do you do with 1 positive case, shut it down again? Just get me to that answer so that I can move on. We can't get rid of anything like the common cold or the flu, but with this one, what's the move? Just keep everyone at home forever, unless it's the grocery store, restaurants or protests?

I mean here in Chicago, school is remote, but this is completely ok even if it fails to follow any of the guidance we are being told:


We can do this, but can't go to school. Just tell me when it's ok to go outside and get my kids back to elementary school. I'm not sure what mental gymnastics went on to have kids back at IU, but they can't play football. Either it's unsafe to be outside or not. I think the frustrating thing I see is that my youngest have been back in daycare, full time, with masks and safety precautions with zero issues. I can't understand how a preschool can pull this off, but we can't do many other things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13 and DANC

ce36ei

Freshman
Sep 14, 2019
474
678
93
The actual death rate is about .5-.6% for all ages. It increases dramatically after age 60. One of the European countries put the study out but for anyone under 30 there were more than a couple 0’s after the decimal place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BayernFan

jsenleo

Junior
Gold Member
Sep 3, 2003
1,801
1,344
113
You don't even know if there is a 'heart issue'. You have 1 tweet from a concerned mom that MAYBE there's an issue.

If you come off of a serious illness, is all your blood work going to come back perfect? No. It takes time to recover.

And of course the deaths aren't the issue. They're going down all over the US and people in that age group have a lower death rate than the flu. How else can you ruin the economy if you focus on something that is improving?

This is how panic is spread.
WHOA!!! Now you're talking about something I know first hand... You are totally wrong..... They're finding heart and respiratory damage to be very high with COVID patients. My wife specializes in performing ultrasounds on heart & vascular patients along with respiratory scans. She's been doing this for 40+ years and she's seen just about everything. She knows what this does to people. Since March she's performed over 70+ scans on patients with COVID... about half of them serious enough to be in ICU. Several passed away later. The long-term, permanent damage they are seeing in BOTH young (say, 20-40 year olds) and old is what's the problem. In almost every instance she said the damage is life altering... Young and healthy kids with no previous health issues, no different than Brady Feeney, who will now need to be under the watch of a cardiologist or respiratory therapist for who knows how long, is what so many are ignoring. Please, don't down play the seriousness of this if you don't know facts and the truth. Sorry, but the truth is the close contact needed to play college football is nothing more than an open Petri dish full of COVID just waiting to spread itself around campus.
 

TMFT

Freshman
Nov 4, 2019
634
1,813
93
I've typed and deleted more responses here than I care to admit.

Here is the question I just want answered. It takes potentially 10-15 years to create a vaccine. Let's say we have year 1 down (being generous), we got 9 years to really go. What should we do for the next 9 years? What do you do with 1 positive case, shut it down again? Just get me to that answer so that I can move on. We can't get rid of anything like the common cold or the flu, but with this one, what's the move? Just keep everyone at home forever, unless it's the grocery store, restaurants or protests?

I mean here in Chicago, school is remote, but this is completely ok even if it fails to follow any of the guidance we are being told:



We can do this, but can't go to school. Just tell me when it's ok to go outside and get my kids back to elementary school. I'm not sure what mental gymnastics went on to have kids back at IU, but they can't play football. Either it's unsafe to be outside or not. I think the frustrating thing I see is that my youngest have been back in daycare, full time, with masks and safety precautions with zero issues. I can't understand how a preschool can pull this off, but we can't do many other things.
This will all be over when we're able to put together these three things:
(1) a vaccine that is even semi-effective. If it reduces the risk of transmission by even 60%, that's huge.
(2) widely available and quick-turnaround tests that can tell a sick person if they've been infected so they can go on their personal lockdown immediately
(3) improved therapeutics (like Tamiflu for the flu) that will significantly speed up recoveries and reduce hospitalizations

Those three are the what gets us back to normal.
 

ss32000

Senior
Dec 2, 2001
2,402
1,374
113
This will all be over when we're able to put together these three things:
(1) a vaccine that is even semi-effective. If it reduces the risk of transmission by even 60%, that's huge.
(2) widely available and quick-turnaround tests that can tell a sick person if they've been infected so they can go on their personal lockdown immediately
(3) improved therapeutics (like Tamiflu for the flu) that will significantly speed up recoveries and reduce hospitalizations

Those three are the what gets us back to normal.
So 9 years?
 
  • Like
Reactions: i'vegotwinners

Bligedy

Hall of Famer
Sep 7, 2001
17,105
1,317
113
How do you calculate the death rate?

CDC says there are 163,651 deaths among 5,119,711 cases in the USA. A death rate per case of 3.2%.

Indiana State Department of Health says there have been 77,565 cases and 2,898 deaths. A death rate of 3.7%

That's probably not an accurate number because the first several months of testing being so limited resulted in a serious under count of total cases. How much of an under count is a guess.

I've seen people sport the 99.96% survival rate by using deaths as a percentage of total population. But that's a useless statistic because it's just another way of expressing the total number of case deaths but framed in a way to minimize it.

More importantly, expressing the death rate as a percentage of the total population in no way explains your likelihood of dying if infected. Example, with 163k deaths, we've lost 0.04% of our population. If that number is 330k at the end of the year, we've lost 0.1% of our population. If 3.3M end up dying, we've lost 1% of our population. Did the deaths/infection change with any of those scenarios, probably not. It's just a different expression of total deaths. The ONLY way deaths as a proportion of population is a useful statistic is if everyone is infected.

Let me put it another way, let's say a small town is wiped out by same terrible super deadly infectious disease. Like 15k out of a population of 18k. So far it's contained and hasn't spread to other cities. Do we say the hypothetical disease is no big deal because a TINY TINY percentage of Americans have died? No. Does it have a 0.0004% death rate? No, it has like an 80% death rate. It's just that the other 330,000,982 Americans haven't been infected.
Because more people have been infected than have been confirmed. They use antibody studies to predict how many people have been exposed to the virus to come up with the death rate.

For example, a random google search for an antibody study yields a CDC study that says that the virus is 6x more prevalent than the confirmed cases. So if you use yesterday's statistics of 5.2 million confirmed cases (rounded down) and 167k deaths (rounded up) you get a death rate in the half of a percent range.



https://hartfordhealthcare.org/about-us/news-press/news-detail?articleid=26868&publicId=395
 

TMFT

Freshman
Nov 4, 2019
634
1,813
93
So 9 years?
Strike me down for saying it, but I trust the professionals at Deep State University who are cautiously optimistic that they'll be find a semi-effective vaccine as early late 2020 or early 2021.

There are a lot more resources being poured into this than the average vaccine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: red hornet

jacksback

Sophomore
Feb 5, 2003
857
311
63
I've read the "football is more dangerous than Covid" argument probably 50 times on this board over the last five months, and I scratch my head every time. Here's the deal. CTE isn't contagious. Orthopedic injuries aren't contagious. It's impossible for guys playing football to maintain any kind of physical distance. In fact, quite the contrary, they're literally inches from each other's faces, breathing hard, coughing, talking, etc. The virus will spread rapidly from player to player and team to team. And these kids don't live in - - and they won't play in - - a bubble. They're going to transmit the disease to a coach, or a student with diabetes who lives across the hall, or someone who has overcome childhood cancer but is still immunocompromised. Playing football right now, in the midst of an uncontrolled pandemic, is a really bad idea.
If a kid is immunocompromised then they should be at home isolated and partaking in online schooling.
 

ss32000

Senior
Dec 2, 2001
2,402
1,374
113
Strike me down for saying it, but I trust the professionals at Deep State University who are cautiously optimistic that they'll be find a semi-effective vaccine as early late 2020 or early 2021.

There are a lot more resources being poured into this than the average vaccine.
I truly hope you are right. I think I'm most pissed because I have to sit and stew over that Gator Bowl until next fall. Sure would be better if we had that win.
 

Bowlmania

All-Big Ten
Sep 23, 2016
3,489
8,053
113
WHOA!!! Now you're talking about something I know first hand... You are totally wrong..... They're finding heart and respiratory damage to be very high with COVID patients. My wife specializes in performing ultrasounds on heart & vascular patients along with respiratory scans. She's been doing this for 40+ years and she's seen just about everything. She knows what this does to people. Since March she's performed over 70+ scans on patients with COVID... about half of them serious enough to be in ICU. Several passed away later. The long-term, permanent damage they are seeing in BOTH young (say, 20-40 year olds) and old is what's the problem. In almost every instance she said the damage is life altering... Young and healthy kids with no previous health issues, no different than Brady Feeney, who will now need to be under the watch of a cardiologist or respiratory therapist for who knows how long, is what so many are ignoring. Please, don't down play the seriousness of this if you don't know facts and the truth. Sorry, but the truth is the close contact needed to play college football is nothing more than an open Petri dish full of COVID just waiting to spread itself around campus.
From Dr. Brian Hainline, NCAA Chief Medical Officer, today:

The NCAA Tournament and other college sports sports were canceled in the spring because of the surging pandemic. Hainline said he hoped by now testing and surveillance nationally would have led to the virus being better contained.

“That hasn’t happened, and it’s made it very challenging to make decisions,” he said.

Also:

Concerns about an inflammatory heart condition called myocarditis and the uncertainty about its long-term effects in some COVID-19 patients were cited by the Big Ten and Pac-12 as one of the reasons for shutting down fall sports. Hainline said he was aware of about 12 virus-related cases of myocarditis among college athletes.

“We are playing with fire," Dr. Colleen Kraft, a professor and infectious disease expert at Emory and the NCAA's advisory panel, said of myocarditis.

The SEC, ACC and Big 12 may be talking tough, but no team in any conference will be playing anything close to a full schedule this fall, if they play at all. Wait another few weeks until all the kids are back in school. We'll be back to 70,000+ cases a day. Just further evidence of our country's miserable response to the pandemic.
 

TMFT

Freshman
Nov 4, 2019
634
1,813
93
According to this story, the B1G medical experts maintained that the infection rate per 100,000 population should be no more than 5-10 for it to be safe to play football. If my math is right, this fall when 43,000 students return to the Bloomington campus, that would be no more than 2 - 4 should test positive.
https://www.wdrb.com/sports/crawfor...cle_01977624-dd80-11ea-b60a-93c96bc4183d.html
I think that's 5-10 per 100k per day. I think their point is that in crowded confines like a college campus, that can lead to quick exponential growth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13

chaboom

Junior
Mar 17, 2005
1,360
233
63
The question is are football players, or any other fall sports athletes, more likely to be infected by going back to campus and participating in their sport than just going back to campus? Some medical experts think the risk is about the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13 and DANC

DANC

All-American
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
9,166
13,423
113
WHOA!!! Now you're talking about something I know first hand... You are totally wrong..... They're finding heart and respiratory damage to be very high with COVID patients. My wife specializes in performing ultrasounds on heart & vascular patients along with respiratory scans. She's been doing this for 40+ years and she's seen just about everything. She knows what this does to people. Since March she's performed over 70+ scans on patients with COVID... about half of them serious enough to be in ICU. Several passed away later. The long-term, permanent damage they are seeing in BOTH young (say, 20-40 year olds) and old is what's the problem. In almost every instance she said the damage is life altering... Young and healthy kids with no previous health issues, no different than Brady Feeney, who will now need to be under the watch of a cardiologist or respiratory therapist for who knows how long, is what so many are ignoring. Please, don't down play the seriousness of this if you don't know facts and the truth. Sorry, but the truth is the close contact needed to play college football is nothing more than an open Petri dish full of COVID just waiting to spread itself around campus.
All I was saying is that we don't know what, if any, heart damage was done. None of us know. Even the mother seems to know only that some numbers came back wrong. And chances are, we won't know because of HIPPA laws.

I'm not saying this can't cause potentially serious long-term damage. But that's true of other diseases, too, which we can also catch. It's not unique to Covid-19.

There's also the risk of paralysis when playing football. Is that enough to call off the season? Obviously not.

We need to gain a sense of proportion here.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13

TMFT

Freshman
Nov 4, 2019
634
1,813
93
Somebody willing to dig into the numbers rather than just throw out numbers with no context.
Nah, he's someone who doesn't understand (intentionally or unintentionally) the death reporting. Deaths that get reported on August 14th that actually occurred on August 1st are not "August 14th deaths," he's right about that much. But then the numbers we saw reported on August 1st were an under count, and there will continue to be deaths added to August 14th two weeks from now when the late arrivals come in.

So his analysis also lacks context because he's not "baking in" the fact that not all deaths are immediately reported to state agencies and there is an inherent and consistent lag in some deaths being counted.
 

Bowlmania

All-Big Ten
Sep 23, 2016
3,489
8,053
113
I'm not saying this can't cause potentially serious long-term damage. But that's true of other diseases, too, which we can also catch. It's not unique to Covid-19.
What is unique to Covid, and what is particularly dangerous about Covid, is that you can have someone with the virus who doesn't know they have it, because they feel perfectly fine, transmit it to someone who soon dies from it. That's why rapid testing and contact tracing are so critically important. Sadly, the U.S. has failed miserably in these endeavors to date, which is adversely impacting our ability to return to any semblance of normalcy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chriselli

Bligedy

Hall of Famer
Sep 7, 2001
17,105
1,317
113
Nah, he's someone who doesn't understand (intentionally or unintentionally) the death reporting. Deaths that get reported on August 14th that actually occurred on August 1st are not "August 14th deaths," he's right about that much. But then the numbers we saw reported on August 1st were an under count, and there will continue to be deaths added to August 14th two weeks from now when the late arrivals come in.

So his analysis also lacks context because he's not "baking in" the fact that not all deaths are immediately reported to state agencies and there is an inherent and consistent lag in some deaths being counted.
I had no idea who he was until yesterday and reading this thread. I only read his tweets from a day or so but nothing he put out indicates that he doesn't understand how deaths are reported, imo.
 

TMFT

Freshman
Nov 4, 2019
634
1,813
93
I had no idea who he was until yesterday and reading this thread. I only read his tweets from a day or so but nothing he put out indicates that he doesn't understand how deaths are reported, imo.
Unless he updates or revisits the tweet a month or so from now after all of the deaths that occurred on the particular date are accounted for, the he either doesn't understand or he's being intentionally misleading.

Because his statement that "1,485 didn't die in the US yesterday" doesn't take into account that the number for that date WILL grow. Like, he's correct that some number of the 1,485 reported that day are from previous days, but his implication is understood by those who want to minimize things that the number for a day minus backlogged numbers = the day's death toll. Completely ignores that future days' reports will include deaths from the date in question.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chriselli

Bligedy

Hall of Famer
Sep 7, 2001
17,105
1,317
113
Unless he updates or revisits the tweet a month or so from now after all of the deaths that occurred on the particular date are accounted for, the he either doesn't understand or he's being intentionally misleading.

Because his statement that "1,485 didn't die in the US yesterday" doesn't take into account that the number for that date WILL grow. Like, he's correct that some number of the 1,485 reported that day are from previous days, but his implication is understood by those who want to minimize things that the number for a day minus backlogged numbers = the day's death toll. Completely ignores that future days' reports will include deaths from the date in question.

But nobody knows if the actual number of folks who died on 8/13 will be higher than 1485. Maybe the deaths reported exceed the actual deaths....but maybe they won’t. All you can do is go with what is reported when it’s reported. The “yeah but” Stuff doesn’t do anyone any good.

Just my opinion
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC

crossfire74

All-American
Nov 28, 2014
9,634
13,316
113
I'm sorry Crossfire, but spring football isn't going to happen. I would have to disagree that things are encouraging with the virus. The death rate has been greatly reduced for a long time now, & it's had zero impact(positively)on public & professional perception of the pandemic, & tbh, a 2%(approximately)death rate--while far better than 5+%--is still way too high for such a contagious virus. & between now & spring, I think it's highly, highly unlikely the situation will improve to the point which will allow the B1G presidents to feel comfortable in terms of liability, which is the reason for the season being canceled, make no mistake about that. Also too though, if we were to play in the spring, what about the following season? Football is too physically demanding a sport to play 2 seasons in 1 calendar year, actually it would be much less than a year. More like 9 months. At least that's my take on the subject, but I tell you, as I said, it's not going to matter anyway, because we will not play this spring. The Commish threw that out there as a bone to the teams & fans & I suspect they have no intentions of even considering playing in the spring. I would advise everyone to not get their hopes up, honestly. It will just result in more disappointment, unless we get a miracle.
That's your opinion....but cancelling spring football hasn't even been remotely discussed. We shall see what happens after November, but until then, it's just speculation and opinions. The first SARS ran it's course in 18 months, so if SARS 2 does that, then I would agree that playing anything in this academic year won't happen, but remember this virus doesn't affect rioters/protesters outside or college students that live in dorms or attend classes but does highly infect athletes, church goers, and kids over 9 years old. With such a smart virus, it's hard to say what it'll be doing by March of 2021!
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13 and DANC

abraxis

All-American
Gold Member
Sep 3, 2001
9,298
4,347
113
70
Stone Head, IN
In all reality, I don't see why they can't play in the spring and basketball can't start in mid January. As we are seeing now the virus is still present in terms of numbers of sick, but the death rate is dropping tremendously. It's too soon to know if things are going to stay this way or not, but for now it's encouraging. Getting through late fall and into winter will tell the tale in my mind. If things continue to progress downward, I see no reason why spring football can't be played, and conference basketball can be modified to allow games to be played. Just going to have to wait and see.
Lots of scenarios will be clarified after the election, one way or the other. Unknowns will become knowns. No it’s not political. It will be just a reset of focus through a different lens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13 and DANC

Chriselli

All-Big Ten
Nov 27, 2001
3,457
1,763
113
Is even one life worth it????
NO! Which is why we should all stop driving and immediately throw away all sharp objects and not play with fire and and and and.............
We HAVE to drive to live in 98% of America. Football is a GAME. There is no equivalency. Nobody needs to die for our entertainment. These are unpaid kids. This is a really embarrassing look for grown men to sacrifice our kids like they're fighting for Western Civilization...no we're just talking about playing an amateur football game against the University of Wisconsin. A game that will be forgotten by almost everyone in ten years.
 

Pigalow

All-American
Nov 8, 2012
5,916
3,529
113
That's your opinion....but cancelling spring football hasn't even been remotely discussed. We shall see what happens after November, but until then, it's just speculation and opinions. The first SARS ran it's course in 18 months, so if SARS 2 does that, then I would agree that playing anything in this academic year won't happen, but remember this virus doesn't affect rioters/protesters outside or college students that live in dorms or attend classes but does highly infect athletes, church goers, and kids over 9 years old. With such a smart virus, it's hard to say what it'll be doing by March of 2021!
Well, I agree the virus is smart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crossfire74

Bowlmania

All-Big Ten
Sep 23, 2016
3,489
8,053
113
We HAVE to drive to live in 98% of America. Football is a GAME. There is no equivalency. Nobody needs to die for our entertainment. These are unpaid kids. This is a really embarrassing look for grown men to sacrifice our kids like they're fighting for Western Civilization...no we're just talking about playing an amateur football game against the University of Wisconsin. A game that will be forgotten by almost everyone in ten years.
Logic and common sense are not strong suits of some who've participated in this thread.
 

VanPastorMan

Hall of Famer
Mar 21, 2002
15,048
2,951
113
Central Pennsylvania Via Washington Indiana
In all reality, I don't see why they can't play in the spring and basketball can't start in mid January. As we are seeing now the virus is still present in terms of numbers of sick, but the death rate is dropping tremendously. It's too soon to know if things are going to stay this way or not, but for now it's encouraging. Getting through late fall and into winter will tell the tale in my mind. If things continue to progress downward, I see no reason why spring football can't be played, and conference basketball can be modified to allow games to be played. Just going to have to wait and see.
I am glad you brought up the death rate because very few in the press are mentioning it. One question I have is if they have spring football does that mean they would have to do the same thing next season or would they go back to normal play?
 

Chriselli

All-Big Ten
Nov 27, 2001
3,457
1,763
113
Does the spring "season" need to be more than 7 games? Play your division, one crossover game, and a conference championship game?

Then, try to start the season on time?
 

UncleMark

Hall of Famer
Sep 1, 2001
20,442
18,077
113
Does the spring "season" need to be more than 7 games? Play your division, one crossover game, and a conference championship game?

Then, try to start the season on time?
My thought has been that if you were dead set on having some kind of fall season that it be six games, all against your division foes, played every other week. That would give them time to deal with the inevitable positive test results after each game, and possibly allow the positive players to only miss one game if they are cleared after quarantining. Play a championship afterwards between the division winners. Yes, I know that would eliminate the Bucket game.
 

DANC

All-American
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
9,166
13,423
113
My thought has been that if you were dead set on having some kind of fall season that it be six games, all against your division foes, played every other week. That would give them time to deal with the inevitable positive test results after each game, and possibly allow the positive players to only miss one game if they are cleared after quarantining. Play a championship afterwards between the division winners. Yes, I know that would eliminate the Bucket game.
I think, while the winners of the divisions would play a championship game, the others could play a cross-division game, either a rivalry or paired up by standings in the division - 2v2, 3v3, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chriselli

crossfire74

All-American
Nov 28, 2014
9,634
13,316
113
I am glad you brought up the death rate because very few in the press are mentioning it. One question I have is if they have spring football does that mean they would have to do the same thing next season or would they go back to normal play?
Idk about spring yet, and I'm pretty certain no one else does either at this point. My guess would be play in the spring then try to play again in the fall and get back on track.
 

i'vegotwinners

Hall of Famer
Dec 1, 2006
10,604
3,079
113
How do you calculate the death rate?

CDC says there are 163,651 deaths among 5,119,711 cases in the USA. A death rate per case of 3.2%.

Indiana State Department of Health says there have been 77,565 cases and 2,898 deaths. A death rate of 3.7%

That's probably not an accurate number because the first several months of testing being so limited resulted in a serious under count of total cases. How much of an under count is a guess.

I've seen people sport the 99.96% survival rate by using deaths as a percentage of total population. But that's a useless statistic because it's just another way of expressing the total number of case deaths but framed in a way to minimize it.

More importantly, expressing the death rate as a percentage of the total population in no way explains your likelihood of dying if infected. Example, with 163k deaths, we've lost 0.04% of our population. If that number is 330k at the end of the year, we've lost 0.1% of our population. If 3.3M end up dying, we've lost 1% of our population. Did the deaths/infection change with any of those scenarios, probably not. It's just a different expression of total deaths. The ONLY way deaths as a proportion of population is a useful statistic is if everyone is infected.

Let me put it another way, let's say a small town is wiped out by same terrible super deadly infectious disease. Like 15k out of a population of 18k. So far it's contained and hasn't spread to other cities. Do we say the hypothetical disease is no big deal because a TINY TINY percentage of Americans have died? No. Does it have a 0.0004% death rate? No, it has like an 80% death rate. It's just that the other 330,000,982 Americans haven't been infected.




per the CDC, as of their 8/12/2020 numbers, (which run a little behind), there have been 149,142 US covid deaths.

that said, for those 24 yrs old and under, (which would probably be age of most 5th yr seniors at graduation), there have been a total of 291 deaths.

291, total.

no doubt a tiny fraction of vehicle or gun deaths for that age group.

i know, 291 is almost as many as 149,142, but not quite. (again, 2 universes)

https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Sex-Age-and-S/9bhg-hcku

thus for purposes of this discussion, to not break things down by age is to totally discredit your entire post.

that said, to not acknowledge that virtually the same number of team members who haven't already had it will likely acquire the virus this yr regardless of whether the team plays or not, also totally discredits many of the arguments i see, as many of them seem based on the non reality that not playing will somehow make a big difference in how many acquire the virus this yr.


as to regularly testing everyone for heart complications, no covid testing resources are necessary for those i wouldn't think.

if we're going to be testing the players, seems testing them for heart conditions should be where the emphasis is, as if there is a danger it's there, not in those under 25 getting covid due to playing football.

all the kids who haven't already are going to get covid, and far far better when young than when older. (literally the younger the better).

if heart conditions are the real issue, then focus the testing there.

if i'm off on this, i don't mind anyone correcting me.
 

DANC

All-American
Gold Member
Dec 21, 2001
9,166
13,423
113



per the CDC, as of their 8/12/2020 numbers, (which run a little behind), there have been 149,142 US covid deaths.

that said, for those 24 yrs old and under, (which would probably be age of most 5th yr seniors at graduation), there have been a total of 291 deaths.

291, total.

no doubt a tiny fraction of vehicle or gun deaths for that age group.

i know, 291 is almost as many as 149,142, but not quite. (again, 2 universes)

https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Sex-Age-and-S/9bhg-hcku

thus for purposes of this discussion, to not break things down by age is to totally discredit your entire post.

that said, to not acknowledge that virtually the same number of team members who haven't already had it will likely acquire the virus this yr regardless of whether the team plays or not, also totally discredits many of the arguments i see, as many of them seem based on the non reality that not playing will somehow make a big difference in how many acquire the virus this yr.


as to regularly testing everyone for heart complications, no covid testing resources are necessary for those i wouldn't think.

if we're going to be testing the players, seems testing them for heart conditions should be where the emphasis is, as if there is a danger it's there, not in those under 25 getting covid due to playing football.

all the kids who haven't already are going to get covid, and far far better when young than when older. (literally the younger the better).

if heart conditions are the real issue, then focus the testing there.

if i'm off on this, i don't mind anyone correcting me.
You're late to the party.