2020 Season Is B1G Only

JJ Husker said:
All I know is, if it’s too unsafe to play the non-cons, I seriously doubt we see any of the foosball this season. Feels like that was just a warning shot for what’s coming. They just haven’t yet come to terms with the loss of revenue...
Click to expand...


That's entirely possible.  But it does actually cut the potential exposure by orders of magnitude.  All 14 teams would only be playing the same teams so it's just those 14 teams (and the potential exposure they bring with them).  If you're potentially exposed (even if one or two steps removed) from basically every FBS and FCS team in the country, that's a lot.

 
JJ Husker said:
All I know is, if it’s too unsafe to play the non-cons, I seriously doubt we see any of the foosball this season. Feels like that was just a warning shot for what’s coming. They just haven’t yet come to terms with the loss of revenue...
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is all wishing and window dressing.  

I mean they are hoping for the best as we all are but it is not going to happen.

 
teachercd said:
Yeah, this is all wishing and window dressing.  

I mean they are hoping for the best as we all are but it is not going to happen.
Click to expand...
Yep, that’s how I’m approaching it from now on.

A month ago I thought the chances were looking pretty good but now, it’s obvious they are just struggling to face reality. It’s just wishful thinking, sorta like holding out hope that ten game parlay will hit.

 
kansas45 said:
1. how does this mitigate the spread of the virus or contain and eliminate the potential exposure of the virus?

2. will there be college classes being held in person or as we say "face-to-face or f2f" for the entire student body?

3. how does this insure that the safety and health as being a priority for student-athletes?

4. is this plan based on there being zero cases in the country?
Click to expand...
I am not a doctor but I just wanted to give some insight on some later start dates for the 2020 season. I found the discussion in the thread interesting and decided to add to it with potential days we could start with B1G only games. 

Instead of cancelling the season they will just push it farther and farther back until they have to move it to Spring or cancel. These, in my mind, are some potential dates they move it back to. 

To answer your questions-

1- It is to move the schedule back to get safest start date for a 2020 season. I outlined a few of them. Number 1 was regular start time which is looking less and less likely. 

2- Has nothing to do with my post. Many are going f2f with cleaning measures and social distancing.

3- It ensures we start at the safest time possible. There is a possibility we have no football or we move it to the Spring where some schools have moved fall sports to. 

4- They will play even if there are cases in the country. No way we can get it to zero for a long time. 

 
Toe said:
Moos wants 12 conference games:


https://journalstar.com/sports/huskers/football/as-big-ten-brass-mulls-schedule-moos-pushes-for-12-league-games-while-protecting-division/article_6057c9a9-c16d-5628-a67c-6ec8cf636a37.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share
Click to expand...
He has to do this to please Husker fans in my mind. The safest and best method would be 10 games because we have more possibility to have off weeks and less games where there is exposure to other teams. I like what he is doing but in my view 10 is the way to go. I applaud him for adding to the discussion as it is definitely something worth talking about. 

 
Mavric said:
That's entirely possible.  But it does actually cut the potential exposure by orders of magnitude.  All 14 teams would only be playing the same teams so it's just those 14 teams (and the potential exposure they bring with them).  If you're potentially exposed (even if one or two steps removed) from basically every FBS and FCS team in the country, that's a lot.
Click to expand...


And if you really want to decrease the number of cases and cut the potential exposure by orders of magnitude; do not have players on campus and practicing together; that will actually cut the potential exposure by greater number;  look at Ohio State and UNC; they weren't playing anyone and they got exposed and these were individual workouts. So, playing another team is only going to increase the probability of likelihood. 

You all are trying too hard to justify having a season to get your football fix. Look, I love my football too, but I am also a realist. No one can justify "why" this is a better move to decrease exposure when teams that are having  numbers among themselves. This makes no sense. 

And let's say your theory holds true and as you say "and the potential exposure they bring with them"), guess what, if but one of these guys are exposed, THEY ARE ALL EXPOSED!!!! and will have to go into either isolation or quarantine (which I do not see much of a difference of). But suffice it to say, and I keep reiterating this: if there is but one case among a team, the whole thing collapses. 

Sorry folks but this whole thing is just simply delaying the inevitable. Like things are going to be better in two weeks? We said that two weeks ago!!!! and two weeks before that!!! and guess what, we keep moving the ultimate decision down the road every two weeks. 

As well, other smaller division conferences are calling it quits; what makes P5 so much more special? Only the money. And thus, you find the real reason for this; it is not about their lip service of "protecting student-athletes health and safety." If that were true, they would have followed the Ivy League. But they will when they can no longer delude themselves any further. 

 
kansas45 said:
And if you really want to decrease the number of cases and cut the potential exposure by orders of magnitude; do not have players on campus and practicing together; that will actually cut the potential exposure by greater number;  look at Ohio State and UNC; they weren't playing anyone and they got exposed and these were individual workouts. So, playing another team is only going to increase the probability of likelihood. 
Click to expand...


Eh, you're making a lot of assumptions about what they would be doing if they aren't playing football.

You all are trying too hard to justify having a season to get your football fix. Look, I love my football too, but I am also a realist. No one can justify "why" this is a better move to decrease exposure when teams that are having  numbers among themselves. This makes no sense. 
Click to expand...


Well, I'm glad you have the clairvoyance to read my mind.  Can you pass along lottery numbers while you're at it?

And let's say your theory holds true and as you say "and the potential exposure they bring with them"), guess what, if but one of these guys are exposed, THEY ARE ALL EXPOSED!!!! and will have to go into either isolation or quarantine (which I do not see much of a difference of). But suffice it to say, and I keep reiterating this: if there is but one case among a team, the whole thing collapses. 
Click to expand...


You may keep reiterating it, but that doesn't make it true.  You obviously have not been paying any attention to what the protocols are.

As well, other smaller division conferences are calling it quits; what makes P5 so much more special? Only the money. And thus, you find the real reason for this; it is not about their lip service of "protecting student-athletes health and safety." If that were true, they would have followed the Ivy League. But they will when they can no longer delude themselves any further. 
Click to expand...


Again, you're making a lot of assumptions.  But at least you have a good view from the ivory tower.

 
JJ Husker said:
Yep, that’s how I’m approaching it from now on.

A month ago I thought the chances were looking pretty good but now, it’s obvious they are just struggling to face reality. It’s just wishful thinking, sorta like holding out hope that ten game parlay will hit.
Click to expand...
That is NOT wishful thinking!  You d!(k!

 
Mavric said:
1. Eh, you're making a lot of assumptions about what they would be doing if they aren't playing football.

2. Well, I'm glad you have the clairvoyance to read my mind.  Can you pass along lottery numbers while you're at it?

3. You may keep reiterating it, but that doesn't make it true.  You obviously have not been paying any attention to what the protocols are.

4. Again, you're making a lot of assumptions.  But at least you have a good view from the ivory tower.
Click to expand...


I am going to take your points individually.

1. No assumptions at all; the biggest assumption is thinking that you can keep student-athletes safe and healthy by playing football when the evidence to date is showing that teams all around are reporting cases and shutting down individual workouts. As if bringing them to campus and keeping them in a supposed bubble is going to keep them safe when the individual workouts demonstrated that it is not that easy? Again, if you cannot have a student in a class then it is unsafe to have anyone on campus. 

2. Not reading your mind; just answering your points. But it appears that you and others are trying so hard to justify this move to play football by coming up with rationales that simply defy logic. 

3. But how do you explain how just a few cases caused UNC and OhioSt to shut down their individual workouts? And I suppose if you were in charge you would say "nothing to see here, just a few cases here but we will continue on with season preparations"? And didn't these schools follow the protocols? Weren't they following the protocols? And tell us, what is your expert opinion, based on your experience on testing and observation of student-athletes, are the proper protocols to be followed in order to have a full slate of games this season? I am just in an ivory tower, I want to hear what you say from your expertise on being on the ground in the protocol and public health background. 

4. No assumptions at all; just stating fact; what makes P5 better than the other schools? And do you agree that the ultimate priority is the health, wellness and safety of all students including athletes? If you say yes, how is that an assumption? And if you were in the position of AD and/or college prez, what would you do? I want to hear your expert opinion on this since you are obviously more experienced in such matters. Or should we simply just defer to your wisdom on all things?

B918.gif


 
JJ Husker said:
Heard it likely would be 2nd game against tOSU......

:B)
Click to expand...
:cowbell:  Bring it on. 
 

I asked this question hoping to deflect the depressing COVID discussion back to football. It lasted 2 posts before digressing. Let’s try again fellas and pretend the glass is half full for a change.  :cheers
 

Who do you want to see?  I want UofM vs NU early in the season.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top