Wisconsin Game Cancelled

[J-MAGIC]

1 hour ago, teachercd said:

Stem it how???

 

THEY HAD RULES IN PLACE AND THEY BROKE THEM.  But now, by giving them a week off to "stay inside" they are going to follow the rules?  That is dense.  

 

I am mad but not dense.  I know why they are doing it, it isn't because they are scared it is because they think it benefits them...it benefits them at the expense of others that HAVE followed the rules.

 

 

This isn't about breaking or following the rules. You can follow the rules perfectly and still have an incredibly infectious disease get in anyway. That's the reality of how pandemics work! With COVID's long incubation period they clearly feel the spread is bad enough on their team that the only solution right now is stop gathering in large groups until they can get a handle on whom they need to isolate and whom they don't. I wish this didn't happen either because I think we could have beaten them at full strength, but I'd also much rather miss a game now than get our team exposed to them and miss three.

[Loebarth]

I'm curious to see what the national pundits will say when Wisky actually takes the field next week against purdue. Will anyone of them have the courage to ask the question "you chose not to play Nebraska but decided to request approval to play Purdue", why and do you not see how this can be interrupted as A. disrespecting nebraska and B. a cowardness on the wisconsin program?

 

[teachercd]

2 minutes ago, J-MAGIC said:

This isn't about breaking or following the rules. You can follow the rules perfectly and still have an incredibly infectious disease get in anyway. That's the reality of how pandemics work! With COVID's long incubation period they clearly feel the spread is bad enough on their team that the only solution right now is stop gathering in large groups until they can get a handle on whom they need to isolate and whom they don't. I wish this didn't happen either because I think we could have beaten them at full strength, but I'd also much rather miss a game now than get our team exposed to them and miss three.

So the players with it...DON'T come to practice or play.

 

This is simple.  

[Huskers93-97]

6 minutes ago, Loebarth said:

I'm curious to see what the national pundits will say when Wisky actually takes the field next week against purdue. Will anyone of them have the courage to ask the question "you chose not to play Nebraska but decided to request approval to play Purdue", why and do you not see how this can be interrupted as A. disrespecting nebraska and B. a cowardness on the wisconsin program?

 

Question. 

 

The big ten had to vote if it was acceptable for Nebraska to play a replacement game. 

 

Why did the big ten not "VOTE" if it was acceptable for Wisconsin to voluntarily cancel the game on their own accord. Even though the big ten rules agreed upon were still in compliance for a game to take place. 

 

So you have to vote to add a game, but you dont have to vote to cancel a game? I guess it depends on who is looking to add a game or cancel one?

[RedDenver]

2 minutes ago, teachercd said:

So the players with it...DON'T come to practice or play.

 

This is simple.  

No test is 100% accurate, so it's not at all simple. The more players that have it, the greater the chance that another player also has it but testing was inaccurate. And because it's extremely infectious, it can spread quickly from just a player or two to dozens.

[Husker in WI]

4 minutes ago, J-MAGIC said:

This isn't about breaking or following the rules. You can follow the rules perfectly and still have an incredibly infectious disease get in anyway. That's the reality of how pandemics work! With COVID's long incubation period they clearly feel the spread is bad enough on their team that the only solution right now is stop gathering in large groups until they can get a handle on whom they need to isolate and whom they don't. I wish this didn't happen either because I think we could have beaten them at full strength, but I'd also much rather miss a game now than get our team exposed to them and miss three.

 

I'm with you if the reports of Mertz testing positive or being symptomatic prior to the game are false. It sounds like they followed the testing rules, which as far as I know are the only rules established. We can't make kids not go places, the idea is we test often enough to hold them out if necessary. But if there were indications he might have it prior to the last game, that's bad. There's a big difference between the infectious disease doing it's thing and it just happened vs knowing it happened and getting a game in anyway.

[Huskers93-97]

6 minutes ago, teachercd said:

 

 

This is simple.  

Unfortunately for some folks it isn't 

[Husker in WI]

2 minutes ago, Huskers93-97 said:

Question. 

 

The big ten had to vote if it was acceptable for Nebraska to play a replacement game. 

 

Why did the big ten not "VOTE" if it was acceptable for Wisconsin to voluntarily cancel the game on their own accord. Even though the big ten rules agreed upon were still in compliance for a game to take place. 

 

So you have to vote to add a game, but you dont have to vote to cancel a game? I guess it depends on who is looking to add a game or cancel one?

 

Cancelling a game can only limit the spread, so there's no reason other schools would need to vote. Adding a game does expand the 'bubble,' although I know it's not a real bubble. Seems like an idiotic decision from the vote if UTC did test negative, but the idea of voting for adding a game in general and not voting for cancelling isn't crazy to me. 

[Huskers93-97]

2 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

No test is 100% accurate, so it's not at all simple. The more players that have it, the greater the chance that another player also has it but testing was inaccurate. And because it's extremely infectious, it can spread quickly from just a player or two to dozens.

Sorry but the Big Ten agreed to play the season and follow the protocols set forth. Which was to test and trust the testing. Now we cant trust the testing? You cant change the rules midway through.

[Huskers93-97]

2 minutes ago, Husker in WI said:

 

Cancelling a game can only limit the spread, so there's no reason other schools would need to vote. Adding a game does expand the 'bubble,' although I know it's not a real bubble. Seems like an idiotic decision from the vote if UTC did test negative, but the idea of voting for adding a game in general and not voting for cancelling isn't crazy to me. 

If you are going to cancel when you are still in compliance with the big ten rules set forth for this season it should be voted on. Sorry but this does not only impact wisconsin. Their decision impacts another school. 

[RedDenver]

Just now, Huskers93-97 said:

Sorry but the Big Ten agreed to play the season and follow the protocols set forth. Which was to test and trust the testing. Now we cant trust the testing? You cant change the rules midway through.

What? I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

 

teach and I are discussing whether it's "simple" to simply remove the players with covid from practice.

 

Separate from that are the B1G rules for this season. For better or worse, the rules allow Wisconsin to opt in or opt out when they have testing numbers in orange/orange or orange/red.

[teachercd]

3 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

No test is 100% accurate, so it's not at all simple. The more players that have it, the greater the chance that another player also has it but testing was inaccurate. And because it's extremely infectious, it can spread quickly from just a player or two to dozens.

Well, it is that simple.  Because the regulations the conference have in place have made it that simple.  

 

We know the testing is not 100% accurate and they have accounted for that by saying that if you have X number of positives, you can't play.

 

Wisconsin does not have X number of positives but they are still quitting.  Fine, no problem BUT if they are worried about more players having it and possibly bad testing...they need to cancel all their games now.  It can't magically be better in 10 days.

 

Secondly, what do you think the players are going to do for the next 7 days.  Sit in their rooms, alone?  They are not.

[Loebarth]

1 minute ago, teachercd said:

Secondly, what do you think the players are going to do for the next 7 days.  Sit in their rooms, alone?  They are not.

 

Actually, Alvarez said last night that wisconsin has placed all the team members in a hotel in individual rooms. So.. yeah, they are heavily restricting them. Likely allowing them to workout but even that will be in very small groups I'd assume.

[JJ Husker]

9 minutes ago, J-MAGIC said:

This isn't about breaking or following the rules. You can follow the rules perfectly and still have an incredibly infectious disease get in anyway. That's the reality of how pandemics work! With COVID's long incubation period they clearly feel the spread is bad enough on their team that the only solution right now is stop gathering in large groups until they can get a handle on whom they need to isolate and whom they don't. I wish this didn't happen either because I think we could have beaten them at full strength, but I'd also much rather miss a game now than get our team exposed to them and miss three.

You may be well served to look at this in a fresh light.

According to the rules, Wisconsin could have chosen to cancel their Illinois game but didn’t. I think it is fair to speculate that they didn’t because A) it was Illinois and B) their head coach and top 2 quarterbacks (allegedly) were available to play in the Illinois game. Fast forward one week and the same Covid conditions exist for Wisconsin. The conference rules didn’t cancel the game, Wisconsin did. The only difference between these two games and their decision making is opponent, location and available personnel.

 

You can blather on about safety and pandemics all you want, nobody is arguing those points.  But if you do that, then please be consistent and apply the same rationale to their decision to go forward with the Illinois game. That may help you get on right page in this discussion.

[Huskers93-97]

3 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

What? I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

 

teach and I are discussing whether it's "simple" to simply remove the players with covid from practice.

 

Separate from that are the B1G rules for this season. For better or worse, the rules allow Wisconsin to opt in or opt out when they have testing numbers in orange/orange or orange/red.

I think it is simple to remove the players who have it. Continue to test the rest of the players on the team leading up to the game. The NFL isolates players who test positive. In some cases they delay the game from sunday to monday/tuesday. 

 

Why can't the Big Ten look at doing that? Move our game with Wisconsin to Sunday or Monday? If you play on Sunday we hold the game the following Saturday. If we move Wisconsin to monday you play purdue next week on sunday. Then back to Saturday the following week. Like Frost said- if you want to play you can figure out a way. We dont have to ONLY play on Saturday. 

 

So next week when Wisconsin starts prep for Purdue and they are still in Orange/Red how is that acceptable? Trust their judgement?