Jump to content

Will There Be a 2020 Football Season?


Chances of a 2020 season?   

58 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

They could, yes.  That seems extremely unlikely.  So I'm not really sure that's a "fair" argument to make.

I guess my point is they are given that option. Will we honor scholarship for players who decide they don't want to play given the risks? Because if we don't, then they don't have an option if football is played, they have an ultimatum. Pretty big difference.

 

And more importantly, the second half of my post. What about every other student activity? Why does football get special treatment? 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post

  • Replies 5.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Question: B1G, are you going to play football this fall?   B1G:

The original goal was to “flatten the curve” or so we were told. Somewhere we shifted to cancel everything until it is gone or a vaccine is found. 

Posted Images

Also I have to ask, what abou normal every day people? We are going to test football players daily for COVID with instant results while people can hardly get tested and have to wait 10 days to get results when they do? Seem like priorities are in all the wrong places to me 

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

I guess my point is they are given that option. Will we honor scholarship for players who decide they don't want to play given the risks? Because if we don't, then they don't have an option if football is played, they have an ultimatum. Pretty big difference.

 

And more importantly, the second half of my post. What about every other student activity? Why does football get special treatment? 

They should be given a choice to play and keep their scholarships. Same with other sports. It could be viewed as a medical redshirt. That said, most kids will want to play since they probably won't even notice if they get COVID. They will just be disappointed that they have to sit out for two weeks. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, nic said:

They should be given a choice to play and keep their scholarships. Same with other sports. It could be viewed as a medical redshirt. That said, most kids will want to play since they probably won't even notice if they get COVID. They will just be disappointed that they have to sit out for two weeks. :D

They should, but are they? Is that actually going to be the case? And are all other sports and activities going to get the same treatment? I'd say the answer to my first 2 questions is a maybe, I could see that happening. Don't see the 3rd one being a yes though. We all know football gets special treatment. I wish people would stop pretending like its about the kids for them because if it was we would be putting the same effort into every activity. Because the kids are more safe with the structure and testing is what I've been told.

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

The logical fallacy is you assuming their risk of getting COVID goes down significantly if they don't play football....

 

Making an argument you disagree with isn't a logical fallacy. Regardless, I've backed up my statements with links to the CDC, I'd love to see any source you might have that there is no increased risk from contact sports.

 

19 minutes ago, Mavric said:

But please, continue to lecture me about logical fallacies.

 

I think I kind of have to, since it's obvious you don't know what logical fallacies are. For reference: https://www.logicalfallacies.org

 

19 minutes ago, Mavric said:

You lecture me about bad arguments, logical fallacies and talking nonsense and then complain that I'm attacking you.  That's nice.

 

Correctly pointing out a logical fallacy isn't an attack, which you seem to be suggesting here. It's something that happens in debates, which this is supposed to be.

 

Let me quote you again:

Quote

you have to resort to being dismissive and making stuff up.

 

That is the definition of an ad hominem attack. 

 

19 minutes ago, Mavric said:

I never said that. 

 

Then what are you saying here:

Quote

If a player follows social distancing guidelines, wears masks, takes online classes, and DOES NOT PLAY FOOTBALL they are significantly less likely to contract COVID-19. I don't understand how this concept is so hard to understand.

Quote

It's hard to understand because at best it's a huge assumption and at worst it's completely false.  

 

What are you saying here:

19 minutes ago, Mavric said:

The logical fallacy is you assuming their risk of getting COVID goes down significantly if they don't play football....

 

You seem to be indicating that there is no increased risk in playing football.

 

19 minutes ago, Mavric said:

There was a "you might be fine with having players risk their health so we can watch football but I'm not" type post that I was responding to.  The condescending tone of that post struck me as hollow since players are always assuming risk to play. 

 

So you decide to make a condescending response that brings no value to the discussion at hand?

 

What is your point in bringing up the inherent risks of football in the context of COVID-19. It's not relevant.

 

I believe we all agree there are inherent risks in all sports, but especially so in a sport like football. It's a given. What does it bring to this thread? How does it change the increased risk from COVID-19? What value did your post have?

 

19 minutes ago, Mavric said:

But, like I said, you're making stuff up that I didn't say so that you can have something to argue against.

 

What am I making up?

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Also I have to ask, what abou normal every day people? We are going to test football players daily for COVID with instant results while people can hardly get tested and have to wait 10 days to get results when they do? Seem like priorities are in all the wrong places to me

 

I believe this issue will come to the forefront tomorrow at the NCAA BOG. Why use up vital resources for 13,000 student-athletes as opposed to those that need the resources now? 

 

I still go back to the premise of the ideal that the NCAA has been pushing all along that these are students who happen to play football and should be no different than the rest of the student body. Remember, these people on the BOG are mainly academics. Yes, they are a politicians but they still have, at their core, their academic mission that they can all point to. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Also I have to ask, what abou normal every day people? We are going to test football players daily for COVID with instant results while people can hardly get tested and have to wait 10 days to get results when they do? Seem like priorities are in all the wrong places to me 

 

There are always going to be allowances made for the things that benefit more people. Sports & athletes give us entertainment, which is something we crave, which is why they get more resources.  That's basic supply & demand.

 

90,000 people aren't filling a stadium to watch me make dinner, but they will to watch the football team. 

 

What stinks is the band may not perform, the cheer/yell/dance squads may not be on the field, and their fans/parents aren't any less passionate about them than the football crowds.

 

2 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

They should, but are they? Is that actually going to be the case? And are all other sports and activities going to get the same treatment? I'd say the answer to my first 2 questions is a maybe, I could see that happening. Don't see the 3rd one being a yes though. We all know football gets special treatment. I wish people would stop pretending like its about the kids for them because if it was we would be putting the same effort into every activity. Because the kids are more safe with the structure and testing is what I've been told.

 

I believe the Big Ten has stated that players who don't want to play due to COVID are going to have their scholarships honored, in all sports. I believe cheer/dance/band and all those guys will, too. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
47 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Do they though? How many people are really trying to get here from say Denmark or Germany? Canada? Ok we have better opportunities than Mexico but I hate to break it to you, being better than Mexico hardly means we are the best 

Don't let the door hit you in the a$$

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, kansas45 said:

 

I believe this issue will come to the forefront tomorrow at the NCAA BOG. Why use up vital resources for 13,000 student-athletes as opposed to those that need the resources now? 

 

I still go back to the premise of the ideal that the NCAA has been pushing all along that these are students who happen to play football and should be no different than the rest of the student body. Remember, these people on the BOG are mainly academics. Yes, they are a politicians but they still have, at their core, their academic mission that they can all point to. 

 

To be fair, the number of tests being used for sports pales in comparison to the number of tests we are performing and even more so than that to the number of tests we should be doing.

 

Also, in my experience it wasn't that hard to get a test done. My son needed surgery and we were able to get a test scheduled same day.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Hilltop said:

Don't let the door hit you in the a$$

 

Good lord this is so not necessary. 

  • Plus1 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, knapplc said:

 

There are always going to be allowances made for the things that benefit more people. Sports & athletes give us entertainment, which is something we crave, which is why they get more resources.  That's basic supply & demand.

 

90,000 people aren't filling a stadium to watch me make dinner, but they will to watch the football team.  

While this is true, there seems to be a bigger demand for using these tests for people who actually need it and not wasting them so we can be entertained. I think we should be giving these instant tests to people who need to get back to work to feed their families rather than athletes. People are waiting 10 days for results currently in many situations. These people need answers to feed their families.

 

 

 

I believe the Big Ten has stated that players who don't want to play due to COVID are going to have their scholarships honored, in all sports. I believe cheer/dance/band and all those guys will, too. 

Good.

 

3 minutes ago, Hilltop said:

Don't let the door hit you in the a$$

being honest about the fact that we arent the best country in the world is just that, being honest. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, knapplc said:

 

Good lord this is so not necessary. 

 

I'm starting to wonder if there is any correlation between those that downplay COVID-19 risks and extreme American Exceptionalism. 

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post

I get so old people complaining and complaining about our country and saying so many other countries are so much better for this or that.  I do think it's necessary to call it out.  Door is always open to leave.

Share this post


Link to post
52 minutes ago, Mavric said:

The logical fallacy is you assuming their risk of getting COVID goes down significantly if they don't play football.  That taking kids out of a very structured situation where everyone they are around is being monitored and tested and they are receiving guidance about what to do is somehow significantly more risky than having those things removed from them. 

 

This does not take into account the added risk of hundreds of people traveling to several other states, staying in hotels, getting in busses and airplanes, interacting with hundreds more outside of their own quasi bubble.

 

 

 

 

42 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

Not in our response to this virus.

 

 

Or our education system.

 

Or our healthcare.

 

Or our gun violence.

 

Or our median standard of living.

 

Or the corruption and opaque nature of our political system.

 

But the military and the economy tho

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Hilltop said:

I get so old people complaining and complaining about our country and saying so many other countries are so much better for this or that.  I do think it's necessary to call it out.  Door is always open to leave.

 

It's hard to make something great if you can't discuss how it needs to improve. You realize you can both love something and be disappointed in its failings, right?

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...