kansas45

Not to be a downer here, but we do not even know if there is even going to be an actual season yet. If we do not know this, what makes anyone think there is going to be a bowl? It appears we are using conventional wisdom in all this "planning" and "forecasting" and "predicting" when such wisdom is really out the door. We have been so conditioned to think in a certain way that we have failed to think about how all this has changed the entire landscape of college football. There are too many questions still out there and what we think is A = B then B = C is really this: 5x - pi + inverse square root of standard deviation of y coupled by the integer of 9 cos x cosine of tangent B/hypotenuse, then factor your mortgage payments plus your alimony and child support payments less your average net income from 10 years ago and predicted income rate of return on a margin call during a bull market minus all the loose change in your sofa then factor in the Warren Commission findings. And if you said "what?" this is exactly how you have to approach this season. It is said that some conferences have up to 20 contingency plans. In fact my math is much clearer than the current word salads being put out by "officials." The point is this: there are way too many variables out there that have yet to be solved. We could have a record of 2-0 before the season is called and the fourth game, when we are playing Doane, may be called at halftime because someone sneezed in section 20 and the hazmat unit had to be called in and declared a federal disaster area.

I like Lou Holtz and have admired him for a long time. But I think his argument with reference to Normandy and WW2 would have been more effective if he used the cancelling of college football due to WW2 (a national crisis to defeat an enemy) instead of the risk equation. In my view, when soldiers left the Higgins landing craft to storm Utah and Omaha beaches, they were leaving their safe space which calls out the snowflake generation who like their bully proof windows and troll safe doors. I think a more effective analogy would have been "life is a series of risks" or "reality carries with it risks that are unknown". But what do I know. I am just an anonymous internet critic who enjoys Husker football.

Thank you for the kind words. 1. This is part of the process that I have not thought through yet. But there are a couple of potentialities here. a. if we are using the model of "student-athlete" and the season is cancelled, then this is no different than that of a regular student who missed doing their senior recital and getting an extra year to just perform that feat. Or the band member who is on scholarship to play in the band, are they granted an extra year of eligibility to play in the band? b. we do know that scholarships are one year renewable. c. we do know that there is the Academic Progress Report in which students must be making progress toward a degree. For those student-athletes that depend on Financial Aid, there is the concept of the PACE Rule. This rule states: The US Department of Education requires students to complete at least 67 percent of all courses attempted for all colleges attempted to maintain eligibility for federal financial aid. PACE is calculated by dividing the earned credits by the attempted credits. Now some of you (and rightfully so) will argue that this has absolutely nothing to do with athletics. Correct. But think about those students who are walk-ons. But just think about this for a moment. IF, and I say IF, the colleges have to drop the # of scholarships or the scholarship award is less than what the university can afford, the ability of students to have to carry some of the financial load, let's say 20% or something like that, could be realized. Thus, while everyone is making sure that student-athletes are academically cleared to play, they also have to perform throughout their academic career as well. I know we are digging in the weeds here but the digging in the weeds is probably what the universities are thinking right now and have not discussed this with the typical fan because they know that it would totally confuse them. I do know that this gets away from your original question about the seniors but this does potentially answer your question about scholarship limits. Because when the cuts happen, it will be in areas such as academic support and other things that are budgeted. Instead of fully-funding 85 full rides, they may have to drop it down to 65 with FCS going to 48 in an effort to cut back expenses. I believe they will have to honor the scholarship but not the eligibility. This is because the school is in the education business not the athletics business as per their mission. And the premise that a student-athlete cannot receive a benefit that other students cannot receive plays a part into this. Remember the academic scandal at UNC? But of course, student-athletes have the "training table" and the "study halls" monitored by their academic skills people. However, I see this as another cost cutting expense. A lot of issues to contend with I agree and some are bordering on or blatant hypocrisy. But I see this is as one of those smaller details that we tend to forget that will probably be reset. This I believe will be part of the future equation of athletic department cost containment. If universities are true to their mission of academics, then I do not see how you can keep students on and extend eligibility along with the academic progress rules toward degree achievement. But let me throw this prediction in here: not only are academic progress reporting going to be key, but attainment of gainful employment rules. Thus, simply getting a degree will not suffice it anymore but that schools are going to have to track and use such things as gainful employment among their student-athletes. This whole thing is really going to make college athletics get back to their original mission of education. Again, I could be totally off my rocker here but the more I think about it I see this is one of those issues that will come to the forefront along with other things in an effort to cut back expenses while maintaining the illusion of the academic enterprise. Addition edit: my only thinking is that to preserve you eligibility is to not officially enroll. Once you enroll, your eligibility clock begins. And this is what scares a lot of college administrators about the regular student population and these students forgoing the semester and preserving their financial aid to get that college experience they were told they would get. Anyone see any advertisements for going to college saying "our dedicated faculty are up-to-date on all the features of Zoom in order for you to get the attention you need while taking rigorous courses that will prepare you for a lifetime of learning"? Anyone seen any webpages of on student congregating with others on Zoom or social media getting their education? Anyone? No, we see pictures and images of students roaming a campus with smiles indicating the "X difference". College prez's are not just worried about football, they are worried about the entire campus.

Let's think about this for a moment. 1. I personally think moving football to spring is a dumb move; but let me explain why it is. a. it looks and feels like a desperate move to save something; b. if we do a 12 game schedule starting in Feb with practices starting in January, you could theoretically end up in April. c. THEN you have fall practices starting in August. That is only a four month turn-around time. d. within a period of one calendar year, a player could play in upwards of 24 games; that would be double what is seen now. e. even if you would play a shortened season, you are still competing with BB and other sports that are typically in the spring. f. we think these 18-23 year old as professionals but we still have to take into consideration chronological and maturational age of development and the potential adverse effects. g. and who is to say that the virus will be gone by then? h. let's think of the games in the north during the winter time at the beginning. i. everyone talks about the NFL draft; that could be another factor as to how many of those upper-classmen are going to play in a shortened season? we have already seen several forego a bowl game to prepare for the draft. Of course, this is only a small group and not the entire team but one has to wonder about that. j. this is all dependent on if students can safely return to campus for full face-to-face classes in January. Again, if it is not safe for the regular student body, then it is not safe for the student-athletes. The NCAA has too major issues to contend with here. 1. they hitched their wagon to the paradigm of "ultimate safety of the student-athlete"; 2. if they play, in any form, that does not resemble the academic mission, then they will forever lose their image of the amateur status image they have used for so long; this alone could be an area that the NCAA does not want to go into as athletics at a university becomes part of the entertainment industry and not part of their academic mission of the "well-rounded student." The whole student-athlete model falls a part in which an athlete is recruited to play the sport similar to semi-pro without the need for academics. There would be no need for an athlete to take classes. Why? They are employees now. This would then trickle down to where the sport, like football, will keep ALL the money and only be associated with the university in which the athletic department would simply lease the name and become a profit sharing venture; this would mean that athletes would not be students but merely employees of the university; this would cause the university to suspend all the non-revenue sports because they would be seen as "club sports." Whether I am right or wrong is not the issue; the point is that the whole model of college athletics gets turned upside down. If this is incoherent, so be it. But you had better start seeing the bigger picture with the potential details instead of just looking at a detail singularly.

How many days?

I believe such will become a "big deal" if it is a starter and that 14 day isolation could mean the difference in missing in upwards of 2 games. And it becomes a bigger deal if the contact tracing indicates that more of the team was exposed to the virus thus necessitating the need to isolate those the student-athlete came into contact with. It will become a bigger deal not because of the high chances of recovery but the one athlete that does become in need of hospitalization. It is that 1% chance that I believe is worrying a number of people. And what about the effect of the 14 day isolation on conditioning, nutrition, practice preparation, etc? If it is not a big deal, why did schools put a halt to all voluntary workouts?

Does this helmet come with the extra oxygen tank? I mean its not bad, but can you imagine the lack of air that can be breathed with that? I would think performance would go down based on the lack of continuous oxygen exposure; and in the event of a early season practice/competition the extra heat generated with the addition of the such a shield.

TOE: Where is the NCAA in this whole mess? You would have thought that they would have established universal testing protocols for ALL teams. But it appears that they have not because it looks like it was "every man for himself" and "you take care of it." Any thoughts on this?

Very good point. If this is "best practices", then wouldn't all schools adopt these? This, I would think, would play into a legal expert's argument. If the Big 10 has strict protocols that ALL are following, how is it that Maryland and OhioSt had these cases? Bowling Green does not have the ability to follow the protocols? Bowling Green's medical staff is less competent than OhioSt's? They argue that the protocols will be followed but what of the travel? This league goes all the way from Lincoln to NJ. And they can insure that no one on the travel roster will contract the virus? The article that TOE linked to was very good. I especially liked: none of this is legal advice. While I am a lawyer in real life, I am also an idiot internet commenter. But as pointed out by TOE: force majeure clauses only apply if the game is literally unplayable.I’ll point out here that all of this reasoning goes out the window if and when the power conferences call off the entire season. Which is probably going to happen. I still contend this is just to lower us down slowly instead of pulling the rug out real fast like the Ivy League and traumatizing everyone. By the time the lawsuits get filed, the season will be cancelled thus negating the court action and being dismissed.

This should scare them. https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/29447724/maryland-halts-football-workouts-nine-positive-tests-several-teams-staff From the article: Maryland has suspended voluntary workouts for its football program after nine individuals -- not necessarily all football players -- tested positive for the coronavirus, the school announced Saturday.The nine people who tested positive were notified and are currently in self-isolation while university health officials monitor them. Contact tracing is ongoing through the Prince George's County Health Department, and anyone who is identified during that process will follow a mandated 14-day self-observation period, also under the supervision of university health officials.The report indicated an uptick in cases since returning to campus last month, as nobody had tested positive in a previous testing of 105 individuals in June. This is not good news right after the announcement from the Big 10 and their rationale.

I have to revise my comment of "Ireland in fall 2021 as an opener." 1. I do not think we should schedule any over-seas games for the foreseeable future; 2. why? we need home games to re-boot the local economy; we need to pump money back into our local economies and not try to be goodwill ambassadors to the world. 3. thus, our next game needs to be a home game; 4. whether that happens is unknown. 5. an out-of-conference home game would be my choice; let's get back on track with an opponent that will give us some hope for the future and see how much of a year off from football affected everyone; who knows, this one year delay (and that's what I predict it will be) may be the great equalizer and thus coaching and preparation will be key in this regard; this will be the key to the talent issue; will games be decided on pure talent alone or preparation? 6. and a fully packed stadium; hopefully the issue of face masks and temp checks will be a thing of the past; this thing has to end someday, hopefully that day will be next year. 7. but I fear that most fans will be happy to see/hear (even with an hour delay in transmission of signal) a game played on Mars and hearing Greg Sharpe call the game from a spacesuit. If Bill Moos is true to his words as was reported by Clark Grell in the Lincoln JS and concerned about the local economy, it would be right to try to recoup as much lost revenue as possible.

Yes, in fall 2021. Who the team will be is TBA.

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?

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.

I am not trolling anyone. It is a perfect pictorial analogy. And I did respond to the person who asked the question. If I hit the wrong button, my apologies, but I included the quote that asked the question "thoughts?" Did you mean respond with text? Ok, square peg in a round hole to your plan. Or you are attempting to put a conventional wisdom idea into a totally different view. You are using typical hope and potential delusion into a totally different problem with too many different variables. Is this satisfactory?

I am curious to know why November is such a hard date to follow. I am under the impression that a virus does not know state lines, avoids international law, and cannot conform to a calendar. We are in summer and in the south we are seeing a higher number of cases in which we were informed that summer is when the virus would likely die out. This virus is quite resilient. I mean, if you HAVE to scrub your hands for at least 20 seconds (not 19 seconds mind you but 20 seconds), this thing knows no boundaries, no timelines, no laws, and could care precious little about football season. The plans set up by campuses to start later and end at Thanksgiving is TENTATIVE which means the whole thing can be called off at a moment's notice. I am stressing this and will stress this again: if a campus is opened up for face-to-face classes and if there is ONE case of covid, and I mean ONLY ONE case of covid, the WHOLE thing shuts down. This is no different than the scene in Caddyshack where there was a Baby Ruth candy in the pool. For those that do not remember it, here is a clip. Universities are NOT front loading semesters in order to shut down to end before some "second wave"; a second wave could come in early October for all we know; they are hoping to gain as much tuition revenue as possible in order to stay afloat. They are attempting to avoid losing students who may elect to sit out a semester. This whole thing of "flattening the curve" was the stupidest idea ever devised; because if you flatten the curve you still have cases floating around which can re-appear later; what you wanted to do was eliminate it. But you cannot really eliminate it but you could do a lot to decrease the spread of the contagion. Also, you can test all the live long day and people think "that will solve the problem." It does not. What it does is let you know that you were not infected AT THAT TIME. And since the results come back later, in the meantime, you could be exposed to it. If this is incoherent, so be it. It is probably incoherent not due to length but because people do not want to have to confront the cold hard reality. The Ivy League realized it and pulled the trigger. Other smaller conferences realize this as well and pulled the trigger; the dominoes are falling as we speak and this false philosophical premise "too big to fail" is going to come as an awful big surprise to a lot of folks. But a lot of folks are like this:

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?

Here is an interesting article: https://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/2020/07/big-ten-is-just-delaying-the-inevitable-forget-a-2020-rutgers-football-season.html From the article: What would the “circumstances” have to look like for the conference to give the green light on its 2020 season? And this, in my opinion, is where the decision to cancel the season will come down to; From the article: If it’s not safe for a Rutgers freshman to sit in an Econ 101 lecture, it takes an NCAA championship level of mental gymnastics to explain how it makes sense to have that same teenager going through contact drills so he can play Ohio State in a few weeks. Because if we are to take the adage that "the health and safety of our student-athletes are of paramount importance", seriously, the decision to pull the plug would have been done. When this realization occurs is when the decision will be made. Another article by the same author: https://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/2020/06/brace-yourselves-rutgers-fans-the-prospect-of-a-college-football-season-is-looking-grim-politi.html From the article: Get ready for a new statistic if college football games are played this fall: Alabama is third in the nation in passing offense, eighth in team defense and an impressive 13th in positive COVID tests!

Thank you for the welcome. I believe you are correct in this in that most individuals wish to just read a "drive-by" and get all up in arms; but a lengthy post tends to make sure one covers the opinion with evidence and a sufficient rationale. It must be that "incoherent" is really "I don't want to read this" and "do not want to have to think and explain my views."

If I am "incoherent", my apologies. I just write what is on my mind and I may go a little deep but that is how my mind works and are just my opinions from my worldview based on experience and educational attainment coupled with my current employment position. From what I have read from HuskerLaw, he/she does come across as quite well-informed. I fail to appreciate any incoherent thought processes emanating from his writings. But suffice it to say that I am totally new here and have not been here before under any other name. Again, thank you for the warm and friendly welcome. I look forward to more stimulating dialogue and robust debate as well as friendly discourse along with genial discussion about college football and Nebraska football.

Thank you for the welcome. But what is incoherent about my posts? I would like to know. Again, thank you for the welcome as a new friend. Been a lifelong Husker fan when I grew up in rural Nebraska and religiously read the Omaha World-Herald sports section.

Testing is not the only thing here; it is part of the plan. But no one can really stop a virus, you can only slow it down until it eventually dies out on its own. You can test on Thursday and still be exposed to it and develop the signs and symptoms with a test result coming back negative. This is why they will be doing daily temperature checks and symptom logs. I am quite sure that Ohio St and UNC and other schools had plans in place to make sure all their players were tested and isolated as much as possible. But guess what happened? So, their safety and testing protocols failed? Well, everyone is using the same protocols. This whole thing is going to be a total disaster.

Question: However, what if the Big Ten decides in a few weeks that they are canceling the season? Answer: then we go visit our diehard friends as they are put in an insane asylum after being whisked away in a rubber truck when the news does come; or put them on suicide watch and encourage them to seek counseling but we are supportive but find out if the psychologist is any good before you schedule an appointment yourself; make sure that you do not go to a psychologists office that has any Husker memorabilia in it so as to not have a nervous breakdown in the office; take away all and any things that can remind you of football; find a hobby like fly fishing to occupy your time on Saturdays; many things that one can do. Maybe like seeing if one's ex-wife will let them use the bass boat you bought a long time ago that the new boyfriend is using. Question: Will they allow singular schools to make their own decisions regarding football games and finding opponents? Answer: No. If it is not safe for competition among the conference schools, then it is not safe to schedule an opponent. No AD or Prez is going to go against the conference; you would have nothing but total anarchy if such did occur; now, a school can cancel their season but if the conference cancels the season, they will not "go it alone." The media scrutiny will be too intense to handle and if such was stated, it will quickly be retracted. That would be liking sticking a hot poker in the eye of the conference essentially stating "we know better than you" in this case; however, they can use the "we know better than you if you are individually cancelling your season" as some smaller schools have done. Question: The State of Nebraska is in decent shape regarding COVID-19, and NU has been diligent in testing. Will the Big Ten allow Nebraska to schedule a few games on their own if Nebraska thinks it's safe to do so? Answer: No. Who are they going to schedule? Wyoming, who is in decent shape regarding C19? Idaho State? They have low numbers of cases. As long as there are "cases", it's a no go. Decent numbers still indicates numbers of cases. The only way that it can happen if there are ZERO cases and that is highly unlikely. NO school wants to be the epicenter of an outbreak or what I call "the Typhoid Mary" of college football. All it takes is ONE case for it to come all crashing down. Testing does not confer immunity. Testing is only a test at that time but one can be exposed at any time. And if they are really serious about "student-athlete health", then they will not schedule a game or two just to satisfy the rabid thirst of fans for football.