knapplc Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 I think this is SUPER unlikely to happen. But I think that if it wasn't a possibility, they wouldn't keep talking about it. First Frost, now Green. There's smoke here. Definitely smoke. 1 Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted August 11, 2020 Author Share Posted August 11, 2020 Good point by Derek, as usual. 1 Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted August 11, 2020 Author Share Posted August 11, 2020 So you're saying there's a chance... 1 Quote Link to comment
Cdog923 Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 Not gonna happen. 2 1 Quote Link to comment
ColoradoHusk Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 If NU is able to play some games this fall, it will either look very smart (with no or few COVID cases) or look very dumb (with a COVID outbreak and mass illnesses). Quote Link to comment
gorp512 Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 25 minutes ago, knapplc said: I think this is SUPER unlikely to happen. But I think that if it wasn't a possibility, they wouldn't keep talking about it. First Frost, now Green. There's smoke here. Definitely smoke. Can the program not support the players without playing games? 3 Quote Link to comment
krc1995 Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 Will we continue to practice? I want to keep the guys we got on campus. 1 Quote Link to comment
bugeater17 Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 18 minutes ago, ColoradoHusk said: If NU is able to play some games this fall, it will either look very smart (with no or few COVID cases) or look very dumb (with a COVID outbreak and mass illnesses). Yeah - but a mass outbreak isn't going to be started or caused by playing football. It will be related to players catching while doing non-football related activities, so I think it will be a bit misleading or dishonest to say football is causing an outbreak. Also, testing of players twice a week (or at all) will likely stop and not resume until January so an accurate comparison is unlikely. 3 1 Quote Link to comment
ColoradoHusk Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 1 minute ago, bugeater17 said: Yeah - but a mass outbreak isn't going to be started or caused by playing football. It will be related to players catching while doing non-football related activities, so I think it will be a bit misleading or dishonest to say football is causing an outbreak. Also, testing of players twice a week (or at all) will likely stop and not resume until January so an accurate comparison is unlikely. Good point about players more likely contacting it in non-football activities. Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted August 11, 2020 Author Share Posted August 11, 2020 2 minutes ago, bugeater17 said: Yeah - but a mass outbreak isn't going to be started or caused by playing football. It will be related to players catching while doing non-football related activities, so I think it will be a bit misleading or dishonest to say football is causing an outbreak. Also, testing of players twice a week (or at all) will likely stop and not resume until January so an accurate comparison is unlikely. A big concern is sending a team who isn't testing positive to another campus, only to have infected players cause an outbreak there. There's no good test right now. Too many false positives/negatives to be sure. That's where the liability comes from. 1 Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted August 11, 2020 Author Share Posted August 11, 2020 Well. Maybe not. The Big Ten would have to give any team permission to play outside the structure of the conference. 1 Quote Link to comment
bugeater17 Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 23 minutes ago, knapplc said: A big concern is sending a team who isn't testing positive to another campus, only to have infected players cause an outbreak there. There's no good test right now. Too many false positives/negatives to be sure. That's where the liability comes from. Student-athlete travel isn't going to be confined or stop just because there is no fall season. Instead, many student-athletes will likely visit friends at other campuses during this break. Similarly, many student-athletes will travel home, go to bars, go to parties, and engage in 'spreading' activities they would have otherwise avoided or not participated in if a fall season was in place. Canceling football isn't going to prevent or mitigate the spread of this illness. 1 2 1 Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted August 11, 2020 Author Share Posted August 11, 2020 2 minutes ago, bugeater17 said: Student-athlete travel isn't going to be confined or stop just because there is no fall season. Instead, many student-athletes will likely visit friends at other campuses during this break. Similarly, many student-athletes will travel home, go to bars, go to parties, and engage in 'spreading' activities they would have otherwise avoided or not participated in if a fall season was in place. Canceling football isn't going to prevent or mitigate the spread of this illness. Canceling football means universities won't be responsible for that travel. It means they won't be liable. This whole thing is liability mitigation. 7 Quote Link to comment
Husker in WI Posted August 11, 2020 Share Posted August 11, 2020 8 minutes ago, knapplc said: Well. Maybe not. The Big Ten would have to give any team permission to play outside the structure of the conference. Seems like our lawyers either disagree with the interpretation, are stringing Frost/Moos along, or Frost was just bluffing to try and save the Big Ten season. Also how does non-conference work under that interpretation? We play 3 games a year outside of the conference, so if the Big Ten cancels this season can we keep those 3? Or are the non-conference games individually approved and the Big Ten would deny them? Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.