kansas45

This is accurate. I disagree. Sure some deviate into tangents but each of those tangents can add a part that is essential to the overall equation. This potential suspension of the season is one that needs to be clearly thought out. There are three options right now. 1. full speed ahead; 2. caution; 3. cancellation; People say to use the science or let science guide you. That's nice but it takes fallible human beings who are prone to error to have to interpret the data. If it were up to the medical people, they would have cancelled; but it is the college presidents who are waiting hoping that someone else pulls the trigger. But this opinion sheds some light: https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/sports/lsu/article_5c42f554-cdd0-11ea-9915-87d378cacbad.html And even if coronavirus cases are moderately high, Burke said at some point there's a moral issue: Asymptomatic athletes getting routine tests are adding to the total, and labs have to choose which patients get their test results back first. "So you're going to test a 20-year-old, asymptomatic player to make sure he can play," Burke said. "In the meantime, here's a 70-year-old who really needs to have a test, because they're high risk. What's more important? When you get right down to basic human rights, what's more important? Finding out if that 20-year-old can run out on the field, or finding out if that 70-year-old, if there's anything about that test that would maybe necessitate additional treatment that they need to get sooner than later? It gets even more interesting. https://www.pennlive.com/pennstatefootball/2020/07/wed-all-dearly-miss-a-fall-without-college-football-but-spare-me-crocodile-tears-for-big-ten-lost-revenue-jones.html But considering what’s ahead for everyone in this country, it might be time for all in big-time college athletics to accept a haircut and endeavor to make do with less. Maybe figure out a creative loan arrangement to bridge the gap and keep everyone employed, even if not for what they’ve been making. To me, this is an indication that the media outrage machine is starting to gear up.

My apologies if I misread that or failed to interpret it properly. But this is a very dicey conversation to have because it has so many moving parts with each having an impact on the ultimate decision of whether there will be a season this fall or not. A lot of things are being exposed and we, as humans, like to have some boogieman to blame for our problems or our failure to achieve. Anyone remember back in 1995 when the Huskers were going to play Florida? Everyone was saying "grass will be the key factor" as Nebraska does not play on grass and Florida did. Well, when that argument fell flat, they blamed it on Osborne playing Phillips. It would have been a butt-kicking no matter what because the defense played so well and the offensive line was over-powering and Florida could not tackle anyone. It is one thing to talk about how we lost to Ohio State and discussing all those intricacies, it is another to blame the loss on some new world order conspiracy. I mean, I could link every Nebraska loss to George Soros and the failure of our govt to disclose what happened at Roswell and the formation of the Majestic 12 as well as add the dimension of intersectionalism and critical race theory.

I disagree. This covid conversation is not political; it is clinical medicine and has a direct association with student-athlete performance. AND will be taken into account on the ability to answer the question of "will there be a season?" This has everything to do with student-athlete performance and their short-term and long-term health. IF, and I say IF, we are to be concerned with student-athletes health and safety, this is a factor that needs to be considered. Quarantine and isolation is a short-term measure. It does not take into account long-term health for those that may be affected. Right now, most of us understand this as: 1. get a swab shoved up your nose until it hits the brain; 2. get the results back after a few days; 3. you are either negative or positive; 4. if you are positive, go isolate for 14 days; 5. if you are a negative, wear a mask; 6. if you are near the person who has been tested as positive; see you in 14 days. 7. after 14 days, let's play. But this goes deeper than that. Let's put it this way. What if Clemson's Trevor Lawrence gets the virus? Simply have him sit out for 14 days? Sounds reasonable or cancel the game and have him ready for the next game after 14 days. But let us say that he develops myocarditis as a result of contracting the virus? There went his first round status but worse yet, his whole career and worse than that, his quality of life and ability at what we call "activities of daily living." This talk of "they are young and healthy" means absolutely nothing in my view. Folks, I could list off a ton of peer-reviewed medical information on this alone that would scare you out of your mind. Failure to understand what happens to a person who does test positive is not the same as getting a cancer diagnosis BUT it can potentially have a profound effect on one's health.

Yes, this is like one big game of Clue. I think it is Colonel Mustard, with the candlestick, in the kitchen. And really, what ELSE are we going to talk about? It's like listening to Chris Schmidt and he is talking about how improved the offense will be this season and how the defense needs to step it up. Well, that's all fine and dandy but you are still ignoring the elephant in the room. All of that is meaningless until there is an actual season or a game played. At this time, none of us know. Why waste energy on that?

Agreed. Folks, let me tell you something. I have visited some other boards from other fan bases. The discussion that they have about this topic is nothing. THIS board and this TOPIC has got to be the most in-depth, most well-rounded, most intriguing discussion of any of them. This topic on whether there will be a season or not cannot simply be based on a "yes" or "no" response. Too many moving parts. No matter what answer your choose you will get the response of "are you out of your mind?"

Trending, but not quite there yet. I believe the NCAA will be fighting that tooth and nail as well as college administrators. The whole entire model, at this time, is based on the amateur model. This is my thought: if the NCAA and P5 football was smart, they would take this season and cancel it and take the loss and use that loss to argue that "we have no money to pay college athletes." They could argue that due to the cancellation of the season, it will take us 10 years to recover. I would play the long game on this one. I still believe that there will be major rumblings among student-athletes if they are playing and there are no other students on campus. The optics are not good on this one and will expose the NCAA and P5 which they cannot easily justify and rationalize. We have seen the rumblings among student-athletes in the PAC 12. And given the nature of student activism of recent note, I could easily see this as the next major protest that could shake college athletics to its core.

https://covidcfb.com/ TRACKING DATA AND POLICY RELATED TO COVID-19'S IMPACT ON NCAA D-I FOOTBALL If you look at this data, you can go to the college town. Here is Nebraska. School(s): Nebraska Cases Per 100K: 793.0 Daily rate of new cases, last 14 days: 1.81% Projected new cases, next 14 days: 712

Here is another article that I think encapsulates the question of "will we have a season?" Just posted by Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/karenweaver/2020/07/25/no-you-cannot-put-college-football-in-a-bubble/#38815c73b9f6 If you click on the green picture, you will see the daily snapshot for the FBS conferences. Jedlicka gives each school’s community a grade for how well they are managing Covid-19. Despite both universities deciding to shut down their programs, Michigan State (B) and Rutgers (A) were in regions that were doing well. And guess who shut down their practices? Michigan State and Rutgers and they were getting grades of B and A. Let’s just accept the obvious—there is no way to put a college football team in a bubble or on the field this fall. They are part of a campus and community ecosystem. The sooner conference commissioners and presidents accept this, the sooner they can move on to facing reality.

This is the fear that college administrators have i.e. bringing students on campus and having it i.e. campus become an epicenter. If a small college town, the use of resources such as testing could overwhelm a local health system. While I have heard the argument that it is safer to bring students on campus it will be impossible to control behavior. I still believe that the optics of having no students on campus while there is a football team or other student-athletes in other sports on campus while other students are not on campus is a bad look for colleges and will not further the argument that the NCAA has of the amateur-academic model. This, I believe, is a dangerous game that the athletic departments are playing. However, I see why they are playing the delay game but no one has said "at what point on the chart" presented by Emmert of the NCAA of the wrong direction of the virus outbreak is considered "acceptable"? I have also seen schools like Oklahoma and Kansas reschedule games for August 29. People tend to think that this is "set in stone." I understand why they are doing this to attempt to hedge their bet; but I do wonder what the clauses are in the contract? But this "damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead" philosophy can appear to be conducting business as usual without really any concern being expressed.

I would think that a school administrator is going to have a PR nightmare with the first outbreak on campus away from the student-athletes. Contact tracing will go into over-drive. Washington State moved to full remote for fall 2020. https://komonews.com/news/local/washington-state-university-announces-full-remote-classes-for-fall-2020-semester But you see how they worded it? In a letter to Washington State University students, the institution said all undergraduate courses at WSU Pullman will be completed remotely, "with extremely limited exceptions for inperson instruction." University-owned residence halls will open Aug. 15, but only for students who have a demonstrated institutional need and are approved to live on campus. This way they can justify football players but no other students. The optics on this are not good. Not safe for students but only safe for student-athletes?

Back to the original topic. Michigan St is in quarantine. Now.... https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/29537758/rutgers-quarantines-football-team-six-more-positive-tests-coronavirus The Rutgers Scarlet Knights have stopped all in-person team activities and quarantined the entire football program after six additional positive tests for COVID-19 were announced Saturday. The program has had 10 total positive tests since returning to campus on June 15. Next?

Here are some more opinions as to if a season can be achieved this fall. https://www.si.com/college/2020/07/25/michigan-state-football-quarantine-coronavirus-contact-tracing As written extensively in SI on Tuesday, the biggest obstacle for holding a college football season this fall isn’t the actual positive tests. It isn’t travel. It isn’t testing availability or delayed turnaround times (though those are real concerns). And it isn’t even the return in mid-August of thousands of students on campus (but that’s pretty significant, too). It is contact tracing, resulting in the potential shutdown of large swaths of a football team—or in Michigan State’s case, the entire team. “That’s a good example of what can happen,” a group of 5 athletic directors said Friday when told the news. And while a 14-day quarantine is conservative, doctors say, it does follow along with CDC guidelines. Even with an early negative test, the virus can emerge on Day 13 or Day 14. It’s a safe and not sorry approach. https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/columnist/dan-wolken/2020/07/25/college-football-programs-fighting-another-foe-mental-health/5505241002/ It would also help if schools went ahead and made a decision about the season rather than leaving weeks and weeks of uncertainty and pushing the start of the season back in increments. In other words, if ultimately the football season didn't happen this fall, it would likely be better from a mental health standpoint for players to have some certainty rather than continually having hope pulled away from them. “I think all of us are looking for some control in this situation and it’s a situation we don’t have any control over,” Auerbach said. “The research would say people would be better off knowing so they can plan for it and adjust and adapt rather than dragging it out and drawing on people’s heartstrings and stress and anxiety. So it’s a situation of acute stress finding out right way and dealing with the stress of probably very high magnitude versus having this chronic stress and not being sure what it means. Most people would be better with it being an acute issue than adjusting and pivoting and a lot of college athletics staffs would pivot around it too if they knew right away.

And how does one distinguish one from the other?

I thought it was only the USA that was only seeing a rise in cases while every European country "did it right." Am I missing something here?

How so? I personally think it is a short term fix for a season that, in my estimation, will not be played. But I can see where you think it is a square peg being rounded off to fit in round hole but would enjoy your rationale.

The P5 overlords have spoken and this committee did their bidding.

Back to the original topic of this thread. https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/29531742/entire-michigan-state-football-team-quarantine Michigan State's entire football team will quarantine or self-isolate for 14 days after a second staff member and one athlete tested positive for COVID-19, the team announced Friday. https://www.foxnews.com/us/11-cities-aggressive-coronavirus-birx-cases During a phone call Wednesday with hundreds of state and city officials, Birx explained that Baltimore, Cleveland, Columbus, Indianapolis, Las Vegas, Miami, Minneapolis, Nashville, New Orleans, Pittsburgh and St. Louis were not doing enough to combat outbreaks in their cities. Aren't a few of these places where P5 schools are located or considered very close to? I have moved to 7.8 on my scale (10=covid apocalypse, 0=new world order takeover).

I don't know, I was not around in 2019 or before. But I think we are all waiting to see what the news will be from the NCAA BOG vote today. Then this place is going to get on track.

A lot of people think teaching is just a job; it is an "art" and it is no different than that of being a pastor of a church in that it is a "calling." The best demonstration of teaching that should show, once and for all, why the face-to-face encounter in teaching is the superior mode.

There is a lot more to it than just the consensus of agreement argument. There are other factors: 1. faculty are resistant to going totally online in that would go against the need for instructors on what is known as the tenure-track; 2. online was seen as a cannibalization of their specialty courses in which there were factors as quality control, accreditation, standards, competencies and so forth that were controlled by the full time faculty; online has, was, and is seen as a direct threat to this model; for example, it would be cheaper to just hire a bunch of adjunct faculty to teach all the courses and this would cause the "shared governance" model (which I believe is fast becoming a myth) to totally collapse. 3. schools also realized that if there were no students on campus, a university would just be a few buildings downtown with just a couple of administrators running the show; without active students the flavor and rich traditions that accompany the college experience were greatly dampened. With online education, you do not need that. Why spend money on a dorm if you are not going to go to a class on a campus and interact physically? Learn at the same level in nearly every subject? Ok, let's learn to do IV's online? How about taping an ankle? Hmmm...how about learning how to do mix chemicals in a lab? Ok, watch this video, get some of these chemicals like in the lab video demonstration, make sure you keep your goggles on, and we are not responsible for any mushroom clouds that occur in your neighborhood, write up your results. Let's see you demonstrate your teaching abilities in a classroom setting? Watch this video of how it is done and replicate that in an online presentation but just imagine you have a bunch of elementary school children in your presentation who are acting up and not paying attention but remember, come across like you are keeping them on task. How about actually hands-on experiences working with those who have disabilities? There are a lot more things that can be done kinesthetically or require the domain of the psychomotor skills than one realizes. Sure, a religion class, a humanities class, sure, those are your main ones but there are a lot of others. We use the tech as a tool to supplement the learning NOT as THE learning. You noted: [It’s not the instructor or institutions job to make sure every student learns, participates, and passes class.] I will respond "yes" and "no". Yes meaning that students have to take responsibility. No in that there are outcomes that have to be measured. I can guarantee you that if a class gets all A's it will be seen as less rigorous and that learning is not occurring and if 1/2 the class get's D's or F's it is too rigorous and there is no learning. You noted: [I don’t see why you’re balking at answering a question, outside of attempting to control a narrative.] What question did you ask? I was under the assumption that I lacked experience and/or had a negative experience, thus my answer(s) to any questions would be seen as invalid. But if you wish for me to answer this question: [What’s the difference between the student who sits in the back of class and doesn’t say a word all term and passes vs connected learning?] I can quickly engage with a student in the back of the class because I can theoretically observe the behaviors of students when in front of a class or a group. Let me see, can you see the expressions of all students on a Zoom when your "share screen" feature is on and there is a pdf or ppt on the screen? Look, I have given conference presentations and people in the front of the room are texting just as the people in the back. Look at the heads, they are all looking down at their crotches. However, on a Zoom, I can put up a background screen and hide or move the computer screen to block off my face and just show my eyes. Don't get me started on textbooks.

If we built this into a scale. 10 being your on every roof screaming how dangerous this is with 0 being you are a science denier and this whole thing is a hoax or some conspiracy and nothing to worry about. I would say that I am at a 7.5 on this scale. When this whole thing started back in January or the rumblings were starting to occur when it was first reported in China, I was at a 1. Even in March I was at a 2 on this scale. I want to know more about it but will err on the side of caution because if you become somewhat lax in your assessment, it is those things that can come back and bite you on the rear end. Therefore, it is better to examine the entirety of the situation and play devils advocate, even against your own biases. It is the "what-ifs" that you have to fully examine.

Not to discount you, but do you have a source? I would like to read their petition.

That's good that you do what is necessary to maintain the objectiveness. However, most of the time, it does not take long to get a hint on what the professor wants to hear in their echo chamber. If the professor is a Marxist, oh you bet my papers are going to come across as if I were Marx himself. So if the professor has a slant, you will do better to go with that slant because there a bunch of professors out there that want to indoctrinate calling that education. Let me give you an example from experience. I was in a first year English class in college and had to write a narrative about the movie Shane and explain the characters and their interactions. My roommate was going to write about the sexual tension between the characters and the pre-gunfight sex scene that should have been shown. I told him he was crazy to do that. He told me, "no, just watch what I get on the paper." I wrote about the morality and the sadness of the characters....ended up with a C. My roommate.......well, it was poorly written, tons of typos.......gets an A.

Lack of experience or negative experience? You have no idea from which my opinion derives from. Face to face classes have their strength's and weaknesses. However, if online was such a superior mode of educational delivery, we would have switched it to years ago. But we didn't. The "sage on the stage" is still the most common and most desired form of instructional delivery and it is advertised by practically all colleges. "get the experience of small classes, interact with your professors for real world experiences." Yeah, 10 people in a Zoom and told to watch a YouTube video is really the height of the educational experience advertised. I just simply shake my head in disbelief by those people who sit in front of a class telling others that the days of the sage on the stage are over and informing people of a better way to do things electronically. But did anyone note the irony that people are congregated in front of computers in one room while the person in front of the group is essentially the "sage on the stage"? Why didn't this person just host this electronically and I could sit in my office watching it and then doing the activities that were assigned? But no, we are subjected to the same method that they advocate not to use. And do not get me started on those clowns that come in one day saying "hey, here is a new technology app that you can use, it is great!!" and then in a month they have a new one to share that is even better all the while I haven't even seen the full potential of the one they so strongly advocated in the first place. I call these people "app-hoppers." You ask the question: [What’s the difference between the student who sits in the back of class and doesn’t say a word all term and passes vs connected learning?] My response is: tell me. Since it is claimed that I have either a lack of experience or a negative experience.