SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6437
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: This proves that Covid can be managed at Universities
11-28-20 03:26 PM - Post#317391
In response to mrjames
Of course I hope you are right.
Do we know what the scholarship situation will be? I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they expand the number of scholarships for a couple of years so as not to force choices that would negatively impact the financial/educational situations of players. That of course presumes schools are in a financial position to give out extra scholarships. And even if they went up to, say 15 scholarships instead of 12, there would still be a playing time crunch.
|
bradley
PhD Student
Posts: 1842
Age: 75
Reg: 01-15-16
|
Re: This proves that Covid can be managed at Universities
11-28-20 06:03 PM - Post#317393
In response to mrjames
By definition, this BB season is a set back for the IL if all other conferences get through the season with some hiccups along the way. Conversely, if the season is cancelled by most conferences with no NCAA Tournament, it will be a very different story line.
Perhaps, Jaelin will be heading off to Wake Forest with only 3 years playing for the Tigers or perhaps he heads off to Europe after graduating from Princeton. Unfortunately, Tiger fans will probably only see him for one more season versus two.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3601
Reg: 02-15-15
|
11-28-20 08:14 PM - Post#317398
In response to bradley
I think the chances of the NCAA allowing schools to have more than 13 scholarships are about as strong as the chances the IL votes to have basketball this year. Revenues are declining due to Covid, they aren't looking to spend more money. I think that's a non starter. And the transfer rules are going to ultimately benefit the IL as more and more schools are recruiting experienced players from the transfer portal than they are HS players. IL will ultimately benefit from that trend, which is increasing not decreasing
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-28-20 09:01 PM - Post#317400
In response to PennFan10
I remember reading early on that the scholarship limits wouldn’t change except that any returning seniors to their specific team would be exempted from the limit. But to the extent that *everyone* is getting an extra year, the limits wouldn’t be expanded beyond next year for returning seniors. I believe I read it in the context of some football coaches complaining about the fact that even though the expanded limits would help next year, at some point down the line, the extra year for everyone would create a scholarship pinch.
I don’t have confirmation that’s how it will work for basketball, but if it does, then 2022 recruiting would be the first year we’d see a benefit, as an extra year of the current juniors would be in the system with no extra scholarships to compensate.
|
bradley
PhD Student
Posts: 1842
Age: 75
Reg: 01-15-16
|
11-29-20 09:29 AM - Post#317411
In response to mrjames
At the end of the day, IL administrators view sports very differently than many of their peers. I am sure that the vast majority of their peers are also extremely concerned about COVID but their sports programs, partially due to economics but also due to the culture of these institutions, view athletic endeavors differently. A former IL coach recently shared with several of us, some of the internal barriers that existed during her tenure.
There is a legitimate argument as to what is right and wrong as to where athletics fit at each university and conference but it will be very challenging for IL BB to reach the next level with the existing philosophy. Fortunately, IL BB is blessed to have coaches like Jones, Amaker, Henderson, Morris, Donahue etc. who can overcome some, not all, of the institutional barriers.
The decision to be the one conference to cancel BB before the start of the season says a lot. Other schools/conferences may ultimately shut BB down although time will tell.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3601
Reg: 02-15-15
|
11-29-20 08:49 PM - Post#317438
In response to bradley
IL decision to shut down basketball was not based on purely Covid safety. It's clear Covid can be managed as it has happened and is happening while still allowing sports. They never entertained it as an option despite having the expertise, the resources and the clear template on how to do it. It's clearly not a priority which is consistent with past decision making.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-29-20 10:31 PM - Post#317439
In response to PennFan10
C’mon. That’s just a tad harsh. There are a long list of things that I’d love to see the presidents drop their resistance to because they tend to be impactful to athletic achievement with minimal academic downside. But this situation is just a choice between a ton of bad options. Hard to fault them or tie it to areas where they do seem to express ignorance of the needs of athletics.
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
11-29-20 11:31 PM - Post#317442
In response to PennFan10
IL decision to shut down basketball was not based on purely Covid safety. It's clear Covid can be managed as it has happened and is happening while still allowing sports. They never entertained it as an option despite having the expertise, the resources and the clear template on how to do it. It's clearly not a priority which is consistent with past decision making.
Is it being managed or does the NFL just operating under DGAF? Because the Ravens don't seem to be managing anything and the Broncos game was an embarrassment.
OTOH, the one thing I think has not been captured well by those who want a shut down of athletics is that the players' and coaches' feelings (not just their health) should have been considered more. I would bet most would have liked to risk playing and we've denied them that agency.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3601
Reg: 02-15-15
|
11-30-20 01:02 AM - Post#317444
In response to mrjames
C’mon. That’s just a tad harsh. There are a long list of things that I’d love to see the presidents drop their resistance to because they tend to be impactful to athletic achievement with minimal academic downside. But this situation is just a choice between a ton of bad options. Hard to fault them or tie it to areas where they do seem to express ignorance of the needs of athletics.
It would be easier to agree with you if they considered any of the "bad" options before deciding. But the hay was in the barn well before the vote. There was no debate or consideration so it clearly wasn't about athletics.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3601
Reg: 02-15-15
|
11-30-20 01:06 AM - Post#317445
In response to Jeff2sf
No clue what DGAF means but I am taking your post generally as a joke right? I mean you do understand the difference between managing and avoiding right? If you don't want sports just go the IL route and send em all home. No one can avoid the virus completely.
Last I checked, the 3 Denver QB's was on those guys. They decided they were better than everyone else and didn't follow protocols. After their selfish decision, they were isolated. That's called managing a situation.
I can't say I have any insight into what the Ravens did to get infected, but their response as a team and the NFL's protocols have "managed" the situation.
If you play, you are gonna have situations. The IL said "let's not bother" and EVERYONE else said, "we can manage this.
|
westcoast
Senior
Posts: 303
Reg: 03-08-16
|
11-30-20 01:14 AM - Post#317447
In response to PennFan10
The priority for the Ivy League is to give students the opportunity to return to campus for academics. Athletes will not be brought to campus (or sent to bubbles) until all students have the opportunity to return to campus. Once that happens, then sports can be considered.
|
Quake Show
Junior
Posts: 218
Reg: 03-04-20
|
11-30-20 04:07 AM - Post#317451
In response to westcoast
As a current student with many friends who are athletes at Penn, I can assure you that while the decision to cancel sports is tough - their respective seasons aren’t the sole priority for most athletes themselves, and so it’s inappropriate to treat basketball as such.
Most students are presently concerned with being able to come back to school at all and receive the quality education we all worked so hard to earn. While sports is a major factor and motivator for Ivy athletes, don’t forget that they are more than athletes: they are intelligent students who understand the real risk covid poses to themselves and the surrounding community, and how athletes are uniquely positioned to be vectors of the virus given the existing/future protocols of these schools in the face of said virus.
I empathize with your frustrations - I too would love to see Ivy basketball this year - but Ivy student athletes are more than their sports, more than a product, which cannot really be said for some scholarship athletes at many other schools. It is important as alumni and fans to recognize and remember that, and appreciate why the league would come to the decision it did.
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
11-30-20 09:27 AM - Post#317457
In response to Quake Show
DGAF is Don't Give a F...
The NFL put on a non competitive game, potentially risking players livelihoods in a game that was a sham because the show had to go on. They also somehow got 18 people on the Ravens sick (some of whom are obese and at higher risk). I'm not even that against playing. But I would not point to what the NFL is doing as a model of anything. I would not point to what the AAC did making Temple play with like a 7th string QB as managing anything. In both cases, it seems like they are putting "the game" above the people. And again, I'm quite aware that it's not 18 people sick in the Ravens case vs 0 if they didn't play. When the virus is raging in the community, players are going to get sick even if they don't play. At least in this case they are getting paid.
Now what the Quake Show says surprises me. I would think the players wanted to play and if you polled them, that's what they'd vote for and pretty overwhelmingly. I have to defer to him though in the absence of any evidence.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8857
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-30-20 09:56 AM - Post#317461
In response to Quake Show
As a current student with many friends who are athletes at Penn, I can assure you that while the decision to cancel sports is tough - their respective seasons aren’t the sole priority for most athletes themselves, and so it’s inappropriate to treat basketball as such.
Most students are presently concerned with being able to come back to school at all and receive the quality education we all worked so hard to earn. While sports is a major factor and motivator for Ivy athletes, don’t forget that they are more than athletes: they are intelligent students who understand the real risk covid poses to themselves and the surrounding community, and how athletes are uniquely positioned to be vectors of the virus given the existing/future protocols of these schools in the face of said virus.
I empathize with your frustrations - I too would love to see Ivy basketball this year - but Ivy student athletes are more than their sports, more than a product, which cannot really be said for some scholarship athletes at many other schools. It is important as alumni and fans to recognize and remember that, and appreciate why the league would come to the decision it did.
I quoted all of this so people could read it again. I was pretty sure this would be the majority sentiment, but having a current student put it out there is a welcome perspective on this board. As badly as I feel for those athletes who have worked so hard only to lose their seasons, I feel this was the correct call.
OTOH, I’m not convinced that every IL school has completely brought their resources and expertise to bear in an attempt to educate their students in the optimal manner given the pandemic.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 33567
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-30-20 10:32 AM - Post#317470
In response to Streamers
The one thing I think everyone who supports this decision misses is that it is precisely the fact that students are not allowed on campus that made a bubble possible. Once students are on campus, a bubble cannot work. Notwithstanding Mike's statement about how complicated it is, I disagree that sending the 8 teams (mens' and womens') to Cornell and using their dorms and eating facilities in a bubble is all that complicated. They all can do their school work just as everyone else is doing it--virtually. And the fact that as someone pointed out, the decision was made before any real consideration of a bubble was attempted makes it pretty clear that the decision was made for appearances. I support the decision not to play a regular schedule. I think it would have been worth it to have our athletes participate in the only sports where we compete at the highest level and money is involved.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8857
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-30-20 12:50 PM - Post#317481
In response to palestra38
I think it would have been worth it to have our athletes participate in the only sports where we compete at the highest level and money is involved.
I can think of several other sports where we compete at the "highest" level (Lax, soccer, wrestling, even fencing) and hoops does not make enough money to matter.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 33567
Reg: 11-21-04
|
This proves that Covid can be managed at Universities
11-30-20 01:00 PM - Post#317482
In response to Streamers
I'm talking spectator sports, but I should have included hockey as well. And most of the sports you mention are not winter sports, anyway. A one and done NCAA spot is worth $282,000 which probably exceeds the cost of the bubble or at least makes it close.
|
Quake Show
Junior
Posts: 218
Reg: 03-04-20
|
11-30-20 01:38 PM - Post#317484
In response to palestra38
I’m just curious as to why hoops is the sport that gets the exception to be in the above hypothetical bubble up at Cornell. There are literally thousands of winter/spring sport athletes across all eight schools. Are we supposed to deny some a season while others get one? Not even Power 5 schools are doing this - most sports are being given a chance to play if at all possible. I think that’s a key consideration that puts the equity and feasibility of an Ivy bubble into questions.
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
11-30-20 01:49 PM - Post#317485
In response to Quake Show
because the other sports don't matter. I'm sorry you had to hear that from me. But it's true.
This isn't the ALLSPORTS-U board after all.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 33567
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-30-20 01:52 PM - Post#317486
In response to Quake Show
Basketball and hockey are different than the other sports in that they actually can bring in paying customers, have a real fan base and have a possibility of positive revenue. Penn Basketball is the signature athletic program at Penn. I don't buy this "fairness" doctrine as if we have to treat all students or all athletes the same. They're not, and the recruiting for basketball players and hockey players at the schools that have hockey is at a very different level than other sports. As I mentioned, basketball has the ability to pay for itself if it were to go to a bubble. Other than hockey, which has much higher costs, no other sport is even close to revenue neutral, nor does it have fan bases around the country. It's just not a real comparison with squash, gymnastics, fencing, or even baseball or football (which has MUCH higher costs and is a revenue destroyer). Now sitting here on a basketball site, I may not be typical of all fandom and I have recognized repeatedly that the student body is very different than when I attended Penn in the '70s (I know from my daughter, who is Class of '15), but if the only reason that we didn't do a basketball bubble at Cornell when everyone is taking class virtually that it isn't fair to others, I think that is ridiculous.
|
