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


  • 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

1 minute ago, Nebfanatic said:

Wonder what tests they are using. False results are a problem both ways but I've read the different tests vary on which is more prevalent. 

Now, here in NY state they are bulk testing to save $ - they say - by taking test swabs from groups of people and then putting all the samples together and then testing the combined swabs as one sample.   The ‘idea’ is that if the result is negative, they call it 1 negative test and dont bother with individual test result reporting.  

Of course, if the sample shows positive, then they assume all are positive until they get a second and third individual negative result.  This created double or even triple testing of many people and lots of stress for those who have to temp self quarantine and return for repeat testing.   

Yet another example of govt action at work!   Seems like more (not less) but blame it on the ‘scientists’.  

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

Now, here in NY state they are bulk testing to save $ - they say - by taking test swabs from groups of people and then putting all the samples together and then testing the combined swabs as one sample.   The ‘idea’ is that if the result is negative, they call it 1 negative test and dont bother with individual test result reporting.  

Of course, if the sample shows positive, then they assume all are positive until they get a second and third individual negative result.  This created double or even triple testing of many people and lots of stress for those who have to temp self quarantine and return for repeat testing.   

Yet another example of govt action at work!   Seems like more (not less) but blame it on the ‘scientists’.  

I haven't seen anything regarding this. Is there any resources you could point me in the direction of that speak more on this bulk testing process? 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, suh_fan93 said:

 

 

I have a hard time seeing the non-P5 conferences making it work in the fall. Wondering if they would look at spring, and if things are more under control whether P5 teams could be allowed to incorporate 1 or 2 games against a non P5 opponent instead of/in addition to a spring game. Big assumptions on things being under control then and people deciding a Spring 2021 season could work with Fall 2021 season, but a thought anyway. G5 could play full conference schedules and grab a marquee game or two, P5 schools get extra competition in the spring. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

Now, here in NY state they are bulk testing to save $ - they say - by taking test swabs from groups of people and then putting all the samples together and then testing the combined swabs as one sample.   The ‘idea’ is that if the result is negative, they call it 1 negative test and dont bother with individual test result reporting.  

Of course, if the sample shows positive, then they assume all are positive until they get a second and third individual negative result.  This created double or even triple testing of many people and lots of stress for those who have to temp self quarantine and return for repeat testing.   

Yet another example of govt action at work!   Seems like more (not less) but blame it on the ‘scientists’.  

This sound really dumb, and recipe for bad stats.

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

Now, here in NY state they are bulk testing to save $ - they say - by taking test swabs from groups of people and then putting all the samples together and then testing the combined swabs as one sample.   The ‘idea’ is that if the result is negative, they call it 1 negative test and dont bother with individual test result reporting.  

Of course, if the sample shows positive, then they assume all are positive until they get a second and third individual negative result.  This created double or even triple testing of many people and lots of stress for those who have to temp self quarantine and return for repeat testing.   

Yet another example of govt action at work!   Seems like more (not less) but blame it on the ‘scientists’.  

 

Ya unless you can source this, there is no way this is true.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, WyoHusker56 said:

 

Ya unless you can source this, there is no way this is true.

I tried saying it nicer than you did, but as far as I can tell that is a completely baseless claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, nic said:

This sound really dumb, and recipe for bad stats.

That is a major problem with all the data out there.  Inconsistent methods, reporting, etc etc.  Duplicate results.  False positives, false negatives, mass use of unreliable test kits, test methods not comparable, etc etc.  States are not following same protocols.  

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Nebfanatic said:

I tried saying it nicer than you did, but as far as I can tell that is a completely baseless claim.

 

Haha ya I saw that and didn't want to be nice. This is the type of crap that gets thrown around on the internet and people pick it up and run with it as some truth when it's total garbage. There is no way the medical community would sign off on this.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, WyoHusker56 said:

 

Ya unless you can source this, there is no way this is true.

Just reported on local news - Saratoga Springs, NY started this new scheme.  I am quite sure it is accurate. This is NOT some internet source.  

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

Now, here in NY state they are bulk testing to save $ - they say - by taking test swabs from groups of people and then putting all the samples together and then testing the combined swabs as one sample.   The ‘idea’ is that if the result is negative, they call it 1 negative test and dont bother with individual test result reporting.  

Of course, if the sample shows positive, then they assume all are positive until they get a second and third individual negative result.  This created double or even triple testing of many people and lots of stress for those who have to temp self quarantine and return for repeat testing.   

Yet another example of govt action at work!   Seems like more (not less) but blame it on the ‘scientists’.  

Do you have a link to how this testing is being performed?

 

"Bulk" testing has been done for decades, but it usually involves testing parts of each sample in different combinations of groupings, which make it possible to isolate which tests were positive and negative.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, WyoHusker56 said:

 

Haha ya I saw that and didn't want to be nice. This is the type of crap that gets thrown around on the internet and people pick it up and run with it as some truth when it's total garbage. There is no way the medical community would sign off on this.

 

4 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Do you have a link to how this testing is being performed?

 

"Bulk" testing has been done for decades, but it usually involves testing parts of each sample in different combinations of groupings, which make it possible to isolate which tests were positive and negative.

https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Saratoga-Hospital-batch-testing-gains-spotlight-15465172.php 

 

Found it.

 

And it all ties back. 

 

"The approach was first reported in Germany and the University of Nebraska this spring."

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, RedDenver said:

Do you have a link to how this testing is being performed?

 

"Bulk" testing has been done for decades, but it usually involves testing parts of each sample in different combinations of groupings, which make it possible to isolate which tests were positive and negative.

This is not what they describe in this report.  I get your point but they described exactly what I said. I have no reason to doubt it. They interviewed a health dpt official on it.  

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, 84HuskerLaw said:

Just reported on local news - Saratoga Springs, NY started this new scheme.  

 

Ok since you didn't find a source I did and guess what this was actually proven to work by UNL: https://www.news10.com/news/local-news/saratoga-hospital-proves-pooled-covid-19-testing-works/

 

It also doesn't work the way you're presenting it. They are only doing this for patients before they are admitted to the hospital for procedures. If you're not aware, everyone who has a procedure has to be tested anyway. So, they can pool patients together to test them and save resources.

 

This is NOT being used in general population testing, it's one hospital using it on patients who would be tested regardless and aren't being forced to quarantine anymore than they would anyway for procedures.

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1

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...