Jump to content


2020 Season Is B1G Only


Recommended Posts

On 7/10/2020 at 2:48 PM, Toe said:

 

If only the mortality rate were that low. And even if it were, people really need to stop thinking of this as some black and white thing, where either you die or you're perfectly fine, or that it's something that only affects old people. Unless you think it's totally normal and OK for 30-somethings who were never hospitalized to be having strokes, or 20-somethings with Kawasaki disease-like symptoms.

Yes, people, yourself included, have a very diffcult time emotionally grappling with probabilities. No it isnt all old people but it is mostly.  Likewise your examples of young people are anecdoatal outliers.

  • Plus1 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment

21 minutes ago, Hilltop said:

And the conspiracy crowd says...  Regardless of your stance, the mid West is living like nothing is happening.  And seems to be doing ok.  Why?

 

 

Largely rural with inherent social distancing. I also think mid west people are adhering to things more than they'd admit while saying how they think it's dumb. Same thing in Montana and Wyoming from what I see. 

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 1
  • Fire 1
Link to comment
47 minutes ago, WyoHusker56 said:

I also think mid west people are adhering to things more than they'd admit while saying how they think it's dumb. Same thing in Montana and Wyoming from what I see. 

 

 

There's absolutely a shame/guilt/pride factor unique in the midwest that helps with people following along so as not to look bad. 

 

But yeah, there's a hell of a lot of space and not that many people.

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment

I think the studies are showing that indoor gatherings are the most pervasive cause of the spread as it is an airborne virus. In the Midwest the most likely places to contract are at work, restaurant/bar or church. Hopefully the businesses and churches will continue to implement social distancing and mask wearing. The restaurant/bar is tough but continued social distancing and reduced capacity should help.  

  • Plus1 1
  • Fire 1
Link to comment
13 hours ago, onlyHskrfaninIL said:

Uh yeah....that was kind of the point - if one doesnt exist neither does the other.  Your post only shows that you dont understand....reading

um.. its NOT what you said and since you removed the post Im assuming you know it as well...  let me refresh your memory  " 

  On 7/10/2020 at 2:15 PM, onlyHskrfaninIL said:

"the mumps vaccine is consdered one of, if not the fastest, vaccine ever created - it took 4 years.

 

you'll hear "experts" on this forum say there is no herd immunity.  if there isnt there is likely no vaccine and we are wearing masks forever.

 

i agree just social distance for all time"...   -   You CAN have a vaccine without "herd immunity"...You CAN NOT have any sort of "herd immunity" without a vaccine.  so, in conclusion (just so you got it right)  we can have a vaccine without herd immunity and not have to wear masks "forever"...

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, twofittyonred said:

um.. its NOT what you said and since you removed the post Im assuming you know it as well...  let me refresh your memory  " 

  On 7/10/2020 at 2:15 PM, onlyHskrfaninIL said:

"the mumps vaccine is consdered one of, if not the fastest, vaccine ever created - it took 4 years.

 

you'll hear "experts" on this forum say there is no herd immunity.  if there isnt there is likely no vaccine and we are wearing masks forever.

 

i agree just social distance for all time"...   -   You CAN have a vaccine without "herd immunity"...You CAN NOT have any sort of "herd immunity" without a vaccine.  so, in conclusion (just so you got it right)  we can have a vaccine without herd immunity and not have to wear masks "forever"...

 

didnt delete anything not sure what you're looking at.

 

there won't be a vaccine without a strong immune response.  At least not one that lasts for more than a few months.  i'm not counting on a vaccine but i guess we'll see.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

Google Mayoclinc and read their in depth article discussing herd immunity and Covid 19.   

 

Clearly states you can get herd immunity with either a vaccine or by natural infection/recovery thru immunity developed by your body.

It is better, faster, safer IF you get both methods of course.  

But if no vaccine is found, then the only hope is via the latter.  

This means most (70 to 90%) of the population has to get it and recover.  And in the process develop some natural immunity defense thereby.  The evidence of how many and how long this individual immune response lasts is limited and variable at best.  

We do know for certain that 98% of those who have tested positive have recovered within a few weeks and with few, if any, lasting negative effects.  A small # of reported reinfections have shown a second recovery as well.  

 

Absent a really effective vaccine within weeks or few months, the virus will spread wildly and widely until most of the population has had it.  We still dont know how many have today, but certainly atleast 20 million.  And likely atleast another 20 million have recovered atleast once.  Expert estimates are as high as 70 million already.  

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment

2 hours ago, twofittyonred said:

 -   You CAN have a vaccine without "herd immunity"...You CAN NOT have any sort of "herd immunity" without a vaccine.  so, in conclusion (just so you got it right)  we can have a vaccine without herd immunity and not have to wear masks "forever"...

 

 

I am not sure why you declare this as fact. You absolutely CAN have herd immunity without a vaccine, you just risk a lot more illness and death going about it that way. Virology 101

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
14 hours ago, Toe said:

@onlyHskrfaninIL One death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic, amirite?

 

I'll comment on this from a high level. Just a general comment on this.

 

We have to remember that the seriousness of a thing really is subjective. There aren't objective answers as to how serious something is. If we create a 'On a scale of 1-10' type of poll as to how serious COVID and its implications are and we ask 10 people, we might actually get 10 completely different answers.

That's kind of just the nature of reality.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

I've been trying to figure out why conferences are going to conference only schedules.  At first, it didn't make sense.  Why would a non-con game be unsafe to play but a conference game would be safe.  And, I don't think that had anything to do with the decision.

 

This way, if a conference wants to cancel its season or play later in the year or in the spring, they can and it doesn't affect the other conferences.  

 

Maybe I'm late to this realization.  But, it just occurred to me when I saw another conference not playing in the fall.

  • Plus1 4
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

I've been trying to figure out why conferences are going to conference only schedules.  At first, it didn't make sense.  Why would a non-con game be unsafe to play but a conference game would be safe.  And, I don't think that had anything to do with the decision.

 

Agreed, it doesn't make sense. And as to the bold, it isn't. Spot on.

I think this is all about just buying some more time until a group-think mentality slowly kicks in with everyone saying "We just don't feel it's safe to play any football this year."

 

I think I said this in another thread: Think about how the coaching staff are state employees. They get paid whether any of the games are played or not. The athletes? They don't get paid a dime. They do get free tuition - but that doesn't get taken away by not playing the games, either.

 

Translation: When rubber meets the road, the people directly involved in playing the games don't really have extremely tangible reasons to actually have to do it. So, they won't.

 

But, imagine a scenario where they're more like the rest of the country, where not "producing your product" means you don't get paid. Would their tune change? Drastically, yes.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Undone said:

 

Agreed, it doesn't make sense. And as to the bold, it isn't. Spot on.

I think this is all about just buying some more time until a group-think mentality slowly kicks in with everyone saying "We just don't feel it's safe to play any football this year."

 

I think I said this in another thread: Think about how the coaching staff are state employees. They get paid whether any of the games are played or not. The athletes? They don't get paid a dime. They do get free tuition - but that doesn't get taken away by not playing the games, either.

 

Translation: When rubber meets the road, the people directly involved in playing the games don't really have extremely tangible reasons to actually have to do it. So, they won't.

 

But, imagine a scenario where they're more like the rest of the country, where not "producing your product" means you don't get paid. Would their tune change? Drastically, yes.

Except the players and coaches aren't the decision makers. The AD's and university presidents are going to be the ones to make these decisions, and they have budgets that will weight very heavily on their decisions.

Link to comment

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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...