Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1905
Reg: 11-29-04
|
01-04-21 07:14 PM - Post#318570
In response to mrjames
Can Covid be managed? There is more than enough data to say it can only be managed if people act within bands of behavior that minimize risk. None of us have enough experience with this to know exactly where the boundaries lie, but there is a good set of examples out there now.
Will having a college basketball sports season result in some longer term health issues and deaths for some population of people that might otherwise not have happened? Seems almost undeniable.
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/story...
Is it worth it to accept some further covid spread to let sports and other activities (restaurant openings, etc.)? That is a decision as a society. Clearly ours doesn't agree. I have my own views, but clearly current NCAA policies haven't made it safe for everyone.
|
bradley
PhD Student
Posts: 1842
Age: 75
Reg: 01-15-16
|
01-04-21 09:09 PM - Post#318578
In response to mrjames
I think that you might be over reacting regarding the conspiracy theory notion. What I have read is that several people have asked a relatively simple question -- "Did the IL Presidents consider playing a conference season in a bubble"? I may have missed it but not sure if an answer has been provided to simple question but perhaps the specific question has not even been raised to Robin Harris or a league representative. Again, I may have missed if an answer has been provided.
No matter what the answer to this question, some people, including myself, have raised the question if it is the correct decision as to not attempting to play conference games just like every other conference including conferences in the the Northeast and hot spots. As previously stated, people can legitimately have different opinions on the subject as there are a fair number of fans of other conferences who believe that it is a bad idea to play games.
What I find a tad bit disturbing is the notion that a Coach, University President, Medical Staff of the University or fans really do not care about the health of the players or society if they are supportive to the concept of playing games. The same question could also be asked if any other activity other than food, healthcare, etc. should be shutdown.
It seems somewhat close minded to not even consider the views of everyone but it is what it is.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-05-21 11:06 AM - Post#318612
In response to bradley
"Time" will not tell who was right or wrong. A broken clock is right 2x a day. The Ivy league didn't lead here and any narrative that they had it "right" even if everyone shuts down later (they won't) is coincidental, not discerning. They didn't care to compete in athletics because it was the easiest and most convenient decision, not because all the smart scientists , administrators and coaches got in a room and figured out it wasn't safe. If that had happened, then kudos may be in order. That didn't happen here and every other conference did the work the IL didn't care to do. Sad times for the athletes.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3590
Reg: 02-15-15
|
01-05-21 05:38 PM - Post#318632
In response to mrjames
That's my quote and you haven't presented any evidence other than your own opinion to contradict it. How do you explain your opinion that the IL Presidents "tried to have a season" when every other D1 conference made the effort to create a safe environment for their teams to play? The IL took the path of least resistance.
|
bradley
PhD Student
Posts: 1842
Age: 75
Reg: 01-15-16
|
01-05-21 06:30 PM - Post#318636
In response to penn nation
The whole country is moving forward without the IL. Every other school has figured out how to have sports. Even D3 schools are coming back to play basketball and other sports.
You mean they don't care about the consequences.
Yeah/Sure - College Presidents, ADs', Coaches and University Medical Staffs across the country "do not care about the consequences" as they are only concerned about money.
Literally, every coach that has been interviewed states that we listened to and are governed by the recommendations of the medical professionals whether to play or not. I guess the theory is that all of these MDs' have sold their soul to the devil for a dollar.
Irrational and non-sensical.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-06-21 02:46 PM - Post#318680
In response to PennFan10
I see no way that plans would be approved for different phases of return, that teams would be allowed to practice to prepare to return and that folks around the different programs around our league would have differing opinions (both differing from each other AND opinions that changed from the same team over time) if the presidents were dead set against this and it was never going to happen. I know what it sounds like when a proposal is DOA and when it has legs. The potential to return had legs. Until many things with the virus all went south at the same time right when a decision had to be made. Then it was, indeed, a really easy decision.
|
bradley
PhD Student
Posts: 1842
Age: 75
Reg: 01-15-16
|
01-08-21 09:56 AM - Post#318831
In response to PennFan10
Fact Check: Over the past week, approximately 250 games were scheduled with approximately 75% of the games played on a given night on a fairly consistent basis from night to night. For example, 27 of 32 Division I games were played as scheduled last night with 3 of the 5 games cancelled on the West Coast.
Not sure, if colleges are learning how to better handle COVID exposure or pure luck although the percentage of games played vs. scheduled has been consistent over the past 2+ weeks.
Always good to check reality vs. theory at the end of the day.
|
penn nation
Professor
Posts: 21312
Reg: 12-02-04
|
01-08-21 10:18 AM - Post#318833
In response to bradley
Here's a reality and data check:
Our country is in very bad shape and trends are not encouraging:
https://twitter.com/COVID19Tracking/statu s/1347351...
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-08-21 12:11 PM - Post#318848
In response to bradley
I probably should clarify my position here. I'm not saying that the Ivy League couldn't complete a season (that is, it would be impossible to do so). I'm saying that the Ivy League wouldn't endure the hurdles required to finish a season.
The data about the percentage of games being played isn't relevant from the perspective of 75% of games being enough or not to complete a season. The data is relevant from the perspective of whether we would try to administer a season at a time when 25% of games would need to be cancelled and postponed. All other leagues have made the decision to be okay with this (and almost every other D1 team), but I don't believe the Ivy would, nor would most fans blame it.
The bubble is a separate question with separate decision points governing it, but I believe even some that support a bubble would not support administering a travel-based season where 25% of games are being cancelled or postponed.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32916
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-08-21 01:08 PM - Post#318854
In response to mrjames
Agreed. But we could have created a bubble at Cornell during the 2 months that no one was there. No travel.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3590
Reg: 02-15-15
|
01-09-21 08:58 PM - Post#318924
In response to mrjames
I probably should clarify my position here. I'm not saying that the Ivy League couldn't complete a season (that is, it would be impossible to do so). I'm saying that the Ivy League wouldn't endure the hurdles required to finish a season.
The data about the percentage of games being played isn't relevant from the perspective of 75% of games being enough or not to complete a season. The data is relevant from the perspective of whether we would try to administer a season at a time when 25% of games would need to be cancelled and postponed. All other leagues have made the decision to be okay with this (and almost every other D1 team), but I don't believe the Ivy would, nor would most fans blame it.
The bubble is a separate question with separate decision points governing it, but I believe even some that support a bubble would not support administering a travel-based season where 25% of games are being cancelled or postponed.
This is indeed the question. What does it mean they “wouldn’t endure the hurdles†and the Ivy wouldn’t be ok with 25%� The reality is all other schools made the decision to try, not knowing how many games would get played. The Ivy decided not to try. To say they did try is contradicting the actual evidence. The easiest decision to make was the one they made. Anything else would have required meaningful discussion about protocols, procedures, testing availability and practices. All these other schools did that. The Ivy did not.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-09-21 09:22 PM - Post#318927
In response to PennFan10
No. The easiest decision would have been to cancel the entirety of the 2020-21 athletic season when it cancelled fall sports.
Instead the Ivy created protocols for how it would allow its athletes and practice for a season that still could have been played. It created the tracking and monitoring to trigger progression (or regression) through the phases. It continued as its teams made it out of Phase 0 and then fell back again.
To me, all of that is “trying.†You seem to believe that “trying†only starts with actual games. That’s a difference of opinion we’ll have to accept. But they clearly didn’t make the *easiest* decision, which would have been to wholesale cancel the 20-21 athletic season and not even bothered with establishing how teams could practice and ramp up.
|
rbg
Postdoc
Posts: 3068
Reg: 10-20-14
|
This proves that Covid can be managed at Universities
01-10-21 12:51 AM - Post#318929
In response to mrjames
I apologize in advance, but I'm trying to work things out in my head as I write this.
I believe Cornell, Dartmouth and Harvard were at Phase 2 when the winter sports were canceled in mid-November.
I'm not sure if Brown had moved into Phase 2 by that time, but seemed to be moving in a positive direction.
Yale had been at Phase 2, then moved all sports back to Phase 0 after several men's hockey players tested positive in mid-October. Later, it was reported they would not move any sport beyond Phase 1 for the rest of the semester.
Columbia, Penn and Princeton were all at Phase 0, since they did not welcome students back to campus in the fall.
At the time of the mid-November decision - If the Ivy League was like other conferences, Brown, Cornell, Dartmouth and Harvard would have continued on to see if they could successfully move to Phase 3. Yale would have returned and attempted to move to Phase 2. Also, the other three schools would have brought their athletes back to try to move forward.
If the teams were able to move forward successfully, then the decision would have been which sports would be played (all or a select group) and the timing/format for the seasons (traditional travel schedule or adjusted travel schedule if all sports; traditional travel schedule, adjusted travel schedule or bubble if select sports).
If the projected cancelation rate for a travel schedule was determined to be too problematic from a health & logistic standpoint, then a decision would be made between canceling all sports or trying to have a select group of sports in a bubble format.
If the cost & logistics of a bubble were too problematic, then no sports would be done.
In my opinion, the league seems to have made several decisions as it attempted to have winter sports:
Not to prioritize athletes over other students
Not to prioritize any sport over another
Not to put student and staff health at risk with a travel schedule
Not to put the necessary significant resources into creating one or more bubbles
Make a season long decision in mid-November, instead of waiting a few more weeks to see the status of league winter programs, national winter programs and the rest of the region/nation.
If those opinions are correct, then I feel the ultimate decisions were objectively equitable and understandable, erring on the side of caution. I just wished the ED would have been more forthcoming with her explanations.
(Subjectively, I will admit that I would have liked to see if a safe short-season bubble for basketball and/or hockey could have been done)
Edited by rbg on 01-10-21 12:54 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
bradley
PhD Student
Posts: 1842
Age: 75
Reg: 01-15-16
|
Re: This proves that Covid can be managed at Universities
01-10-21 09:50 AM - Post#318935
In response to rbg
I believe that the IL gave careful consideration if Winter Sports could be played. My opinion, based on what has actually occurred over the past several weeks is that they could and should have started the season. Once again, over the past two days with a very high volume of games, 75% of the games are being played. Games are being played and that is reality whether one wants to accept it or not.
I agree with your thoughts that some Presidents were not fans of playing sports if students were not on campus in the classroom as it is an outlier in their belief system. An excuse for Il Presidents are economic concerns as that argument has zero credibility and is almost laughable to a non-IL fan. As an IL icon shared with a friend, he never believed that IL Presidents would support playing sports during the pandemic based on where sports fit in the pecking order of the IL. I know my non-IL friends believe the same thing about the IL.
I listen to a fair amount of conversation about how the NCAA does not treat student athletes fairly. Why I disagree with the IL President's decision is that the IL Presidents could have given Knight, Schwiegger, Parker and Littlefied one more opportunity to play IL BB. For the underclassmen to watch everyone else play in this country while they sit would leave me with mixed emotions as a student athlete. If only 75% of the games were played, so be it as every other conference has accepted the possibility and IL Presidents are concerned about the purity of sports????
In retrospect, the decision turned out to be a wrong one as to not giving it a try based on subsequent empirical evidence. It could have been the right one if reality turned out differently. I am sure that it was a tough call albeit a wrong call as to at least not trying to play. The suggestion that the IL President's decision will not have a negative impact on IL sports, at least in the short-term, is wishful thinking.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: This proves that Covid can be managed at Universities
01-10-21 10:19 AM - Post#318936
In response to bradley
Just to be clear, when you say that 75% of games are being played, you understand that what you’re also saying is that 25% of games have one or both teams with a known or presumed outbreak of a pandemic virus, right? It’s not like there’s a big snowstorm, and we have to decide whether the games will go on or not. It means that the players, coaches and/or staff have a confirmed or presumed COVID-19 infection.
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2702
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
01-10-21 03:11 PM - Post#318956
In response to mrjames
Daily Beast just posted an article entitled: "Players Rip a '#%$@ Corrupt' College Football Season."
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2702
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
01-10-21 03:12 PM - Post#318957
In response to HARVARDDADGRAD
Hey, the filter on this site just 'bleeped' out the literal title of the article - I didn't.
|
bradley
PhD Student
Posts: 1842
Age: 75
Reg: 01-15-16
|
Re: This proves that Covid can be managed at Universities
01-10-21 06:12 PM - Post#318967
In response to mrjames
Duh - yeah??
IL Presidents made the correct call to cancel the IL BB tournament last March and other conferences followed their lead. This year, all other conferences took a different approach than the IL. We are now roughly 1/3 or more thru the season with plans to play the NCAA Tournament in a bubble. The NCAAF championship game is Monday night and the NFL playoffs have started. The NBA is in full swing.
The reality is that the IL President's decision was an outlier to what others have done. Several people have stated on this forum and the NCAAM season would be a very short one. Some suggested that the other College Presidents were simply reckless and were only interested in the "gold". Occasionally, some have even recently suggested that the season will be shutdown due to the uptick in COVID activity. Now, we occasionally hear about the notion that playing 75% of IL games would simply not be acceptable.
Others have supported the notion to give the BB IL season a try and if circumstances had changed, shut it down and other conferences probably would have the done the same based on facts/reality.
If NCAAM BB would have been shutdown in the first 30 days, it would have supported the decision of IL Presidents. Logically, the converse holds true.
As no one is going to change anyone's minds at this point and time, it is probably a good time to fade away from the conversation when reality is simply discarded.
It will be a lot more fun talking about how IL BB teams and players are doing versus this circular conversation.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: This proves that Covid can be managed at Universities
01-10-21 07:11 PM - Post#318968
In response to bradley
Okay... I think you *heard* what I said, but you didn't *process* what I said.
If 75% of games are being played... 25% of games are being cancelled or postponed... which means, that in those games either one or both of the teams have players (or coaches, staff) that have contracted a virus during a pandemic.
Now, I know the numbers nationally are huge, and that has desensitized us to the notion of catching a virus during a pandemic, but no matter how "survivable" the virus is, I'd hope we can still all agree that it's better not to catch it than to catch it. And what's also clear at this point is that lots of teams that are playing basketball are catching and transmitting the virus, likely in large part through the athletics-related activities they're undertaking. That's not good for anyone. The student-athletes, their coaches and the communities surrounding them.
The Ivy League doesn't need the March Madness win share $$$ nor does it have a big TV contract to play for, so it doesn't face the same math that other conferences do, and thus it has a different decision set than those conferences. Conferences that need the TV contract and the NCAA that needs the March Madness money are going to continue for precisely the reason that you pointed out - that even with 25% of games being cancelled, 75% aren't and that's enough to keep the progress going toward the lucrative conclusion.
There are plenty of dumb ways the Ivy League "pretends" to be different than other leagues that are often quite punitive for no true idealistic gains. Like an embarrassing number. But this isn't one of them. I'm sorry that you and a handful of other folks can see that.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3590
Reg: 02-15-15
|
Re: This proves that Covid can be managed at Universities
01-11-21 11:21 AM - Post#318998
In response to mrjames
There are many more people than "a handful" scratching their heads on this decision. I'm sorry if you can't see that.
Edited by PennFan10 on 01-11-21 11:22 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
