Will There Be a 2020 Football Season?

[307husker]

My point is that there is increased risk from playing football and we most likely won't have a season because of it. 

We cannot say this for certain given the multitude of variables in play.

We have to compare Option A, "playing football" to Option B, "something other than playing football".  

We know that Option A would include extensive testing and symptom monitoring, a heavily controlled environment,  heavily structured and controlled lifestyle and living conditions.  It would also include high exertion respiration in close contact to a large number of other people.

What we don't know is much about Option B, but would have to make some assumptions that it would be "normal college kid stuff".  I don't think anybody really thinks Option B is staying home in a relatively safe/sterile environment.  If option B is spending time at house parties or in the bars, then Option A may be much safer (assuming that team rules would prohibit such activities).

This is why we can't say that Option A "playing football" is less safe than Option B "something other than playing football" in terms of Covid transmission.

If all variables listed above were constant between Option A and Option B, then not playing a contact sport would very likely be safer, but that's not realistic.

 

 

[kansas45]

We cannot say this for certain given the multitude of variables in play.

I have a question for all of you:

Background: you have just been named as an official person based on your intensive and extensive knowledge, research and study on this issue and you represent a university that has college football namely a P5 school. But for simplicity sake, let's say that you are appointed by the University of Nebraska, as a voting member, to vote in tomorrow's NCAA BOG meeting tomorrow and the only thing on the agenda is:

1. Do we or do we not cancel the fall 2020 championships?

How do you vote? Do not weasel out of this one and say "I don't have all the information like they do." I believe you do. You can read a scoreboard just as good as the next person.  

Addition: do NOT say "table the motion" or "wait til the next meeting." How do you vote NOW?

 

[Branno]

We cannot say this for certain given the multitude of variables in play.

I know I fail at this sometimes and let myself get carried away, but I do try to avoid dealing in certainties. In this case, however, I'm going to take the CDC and NCAA high risk assessments for contact sports as pretty close to certain. 

What is the only known way this virus spreads? From inhaling droplets exhaled from an infected person. 

What is the only known way to combat the spread of the virus? Wearing a mask while keeping at least 6ft away from other people. This is something that is not possible in football, and thus there is an increased risk from playing football.

You are conflating two things here:

• an increase in risk due to the nature of the sports
  
• possible reductions in risk due to mitigating measures
  

It is entirely possible we find a way to mitigate the risk, but that doesn't mean the risk isn't there.

So, until there is even a shred of evidence to suggest there is no increased risk from playing football we absolutely can say this is as close to certain as it gets.

We have to compare Option A, "playing football" to Option B, "something other than playing football".  

We know that Option A would include extensive testing and symptom monitoring, a heavily controlled environment,  heavily structured and controlled lifestyle and living conditions.  It would also include high exertion respiration in close contact to a large number of other people.

I'll agree with most of this except for your claim that the NCAA can control players lifestyles. That's a laughably false claim.

What we don't know is much about Option B, but would have to make some assumptions that it would be "normal college kid stuff".  I don't think anybody really thinks Option B is staying home in a relatively safe/sterile environment.  If option B is spending time at house parties or in the bars, then Option A may be much safer (assuming that team rules would prohibit such activities).

I hate to repeat myself, but Option A doesn't preclude spending time at house parties or being at bars.

I said this months ago, but I don't think campuses will be open in the fall (maybe Nebraska will be, but there are going to be some/many that won't be). It's going to be hard for a college kid to do normal college kid stuff in town with no college kids in it. 

Regardless, let's assume campuses are open and football is cancelled. If a player gets sick because they're out partying, there is no increased risk to their teammates, coaches, and opponents. It would just be normal community spread.

This is why we can't say that Option A "playing football" is less safe than Option B "something other than playing football" in terms of Covid transmission.

If all variables listed above were constant between Option A and Option B, then not playing a contact sport would very likely be safer, but that's not realistic.

For all the reasons I stated above, I respectfully disagree with your assessment. 

 

[Branno]

I have a question for all of you:

Background: you have just been named as an official person based on your intensive and extensive knowledge, research and study on this issue and you represent a university that has college football namely a P5 school. But for simplicity sake, let's say that you are appointed by the University of Nebraska, as a voting member, to vote in tomorrow's NCAA BOG meeting tomorrow and the only thing on the agenda is:

1. Do we or do we not cancel the fall 2020 championships?

How do you vote? Do not weasel out of this one and say "I don't have all the information like they do." I believe you do. You can read a scoreboard just as good as the next person.  

Addition: do NOT say "table the motion" or "wait til the next meeting." How do you vote NOW?

The only acceptable answer is yes or no? As it stands now, I vote no. 

Infections and deaths are rising nationwide, but specifically in states that were thought to have the virus under control with no reasonable expectation that things will change before the season is scheduled to start. The increased risk of player health issues and death is a major liability issue for the university.

 

[307husker]

I'll agree with most of this except for your claim that the NCAA can control players lifestyles. That's a laughably false claim.

Where did I claim the NCAA can control player lifestyle?  

It's the university, the coaches, and teammates where things CAN be controlled to a certain extent.  
 

 

[Loe Doesnt Know]

The selfish side of me wants to vote "no".

However, the reasonable side says to measure the risk(s). The risk isn't only to the athlete but an extension of the athletes circle. (Teammates, Friends, Parents, Relatives, Teammate's Circle and Friend's Circle) Therefore, in weighing the risks, as the scorecard currently reads, I'd vote "Yes, we cancel".

 

[Nebfanatic]

Where did I claim the NCAA can control player lifestyle?  

It's the university, the coaches, and teammates where things CAN be controlled to a certain extent.  
 

On every team though? It's not just the Husker players we have to worry about sticking to the rules

 

[307husker]

On every team though? It's not just the Husker players we have to worry about sticking to the rules

Valid point, though hopefully rapid testing may help to mitigate this risk on game days...

 

[Nebfanatic]

Valid point, though hopefully rapid testing may help to mitigate this risk on game days...

While I think there will be cases missed rapid testing should help. That said that wouldn't be my primary concern. If a team gets an outbreak is the game cancelled? How many times can that happen before the season is no longer viable? We will see what happens but my thing is this isn't only a health and safety issue. It's a logistical nightmare. 

 

[Branno]

Where did I claim the NCAA can control player lifestyle?  

Sigh... here we go again.

It's the university, the coaches, and teammates

You certainly didn't claim that in the post I quoted.

where things CAN be controlled to a certain extent.  
 

Again not something you claimed in the post I quoted.

So here's what you actually said:

We know that Option A would include extensive testing and symptom monitoring, a heavily controlled environment,  heavily structured and controlled lifestyle

Is it a heavily controlled environment? Or is it controlled to a certain extent? Can't be both.

Regardless, this distraction doesn't change the effectiveness of your argument. I still respectfully disagree with your conclusion that it's safer to play football than not play football.

 

[quesadilla]

Yes, colleges can require masks - it's actually pretty straightforward, at least on campus: just add them to the student handbook or honor code for students and employment contracts for faculty and staff.

The only issue I've seen is in Georgia where the Governor has been trying to override all political subdivisions of the state (including colleges) from requiring masks. There's been a semi-revolt at Georgia Tech over that...

Of course, what students due on on their own time or off campus is another story.

Edit: there was supposed to be a quote from an earlier question - not sure why it didn't show up.

 

[307husker]

Is it a heavily controlled environment? Or is it controlled to a certain extent? Can't be both.

It's an environment which can be controlled much more than the average student.  The rest is semantics.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

But I anticipate that all colleges and universities will go completely online for the fall semester as all plans I have seen are based on the term "tentative."

Some colleges are going to try in-person learning. They will also have an online-learning option. Some colleges aren't even trying. My friend's daughter's college, University of Seattle, finally gave up this week. Online only. If the dominoes start toppling, others may yet join them. 

But "completely online" is a recipe for a different disaster. Imagine paying $30,000 to $60,000 for your kid to sit in their bedroom taking classes on Zoom. Imagine every class and vocation that requires physical tools and interaction. How much value do you put on the college experience itself? Many colleges have to raise tuition because they are bleeding cash all over the place. My daughter and her friends are all planning gap years and hiatuses, and both private and public universities may not survive the exodus. 

 

[307husker]

Sigh... here we go again.

You certainly didn't claim that in the post I quoted.

Again not something you claimed in the post I quoted.

So here's what you actually said:

Is it a heavily controlled environment? Or is it controlled to a certain extent? Can't be both.

Straw man fallacy, that would be your most common fault.

 

[Branno]

It's an environment which can be controlled much more than the average student.  The rest is semantics.

This environment which is controlled much more than the average student couldn't prevent football players from sexually assaulting multiple female students. It's not going to prevent them from going to parties or bars. And in my opinion is certainly not going to magically prevent the spread of COVID-19.

There is a reason professional sports are putting their teams in bubbles, it's the only real way to mitigate the risks to the point where it is safe to play. This is something that by definition is not possible with a student athlete.